EPA 430/9-77-004
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS PROGRAM
REQUIREMENTS
MUNICIPAL SLUDGE MANAGEMENT:
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
OCTOBER 1977
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF WATER PROGRAM OPERATIONS
MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION DIVISION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
MCD-28
-------
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword
Chapter I - Introduction
Chapter II - Land Application of Sludge
2-1 General
2-2
2-2.1
2-2.2
2-2.3
2-3
2-3.1
2-3.2
2-3.3
2-3.4
2-3.5
2-3.6
2-3.7
2-3.8
2-3.9
2-3.10
2-3.11
2-4
2-4.1
2-4.2
2-4.3
2-4.4
2-4.5
Information for Project Evaluation
Sludge Characteristics
Site Soils
Groundwater
General Requirements for Land Application
of Sludges
Stabilization
Additional Pathogen Reduction
Crops Suitable for Sludge Application
Public Access
Groundwater Protection
Controlling Surface Water Runoff
Sludge Application Methods
Application Rates
System Operation
Monitoring
Surveillance of Operation and
Monitoring
Additional Requirements for Sludge Appli-
cation to Agricultural Lands
Research, Development and Demonstration
Projects
Protection of Food Products and
Agricultural Lands
Project Review
Additional Monitoring Requirements
Technical Assistance and Use of Other
Sludges
Page
1-5
1-4
5-24
5
6-7
6
7
7
7-15
7
9
9
10
11
11
11
12
14
14
15
15-24
16
17
22
23
23
-------
CONTENTS (cont)
Page
Chapter III - Sludge Disposal Methods
3-1 Sanitary Landfill
3-1.1 General
3-1.2 Landfill Procedures
3-1.3 Odor Control
3-1.4 Precautions for Protection of Public
Health
3-1.5 Groundwater Protection
3-1.6 Operation
3-1.7 Monitoring
3-2 Incineration
3-2.1 General
3-2.2 Industrial Wastewaters
3-2.3 Air Quality
3-2.4 Specific Emissions
3-2.5 Monitoring
3-3 Ocean Disposal
3-3.1 General
3-3.2 Permits
3-3.3 Dumping Sites
25-31
25-26
25
25
25
25
26
26
26
27-30
27
28
28
28
29
30-31
30
30
31
-------
APPENDICES
Appendix I
Appendix II
Appendix III
Appendix IV
Appendix V
Appendix VI
Appendix VII
Appendix VIII
Appendix IX
Appendix X
"Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements" 40 CFR 6
Groundwater Extract from "Alternative Waste Management
Techniques for Best Practicable Waste Treatment" EPA-
430/9-75-013, October 1975. Supplement (February 11, 1976)
Guidelines for the Land Disposal of Solid Wastes 40 CFR 241
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources;
Subpart 0 - Standards of Performance for Sewage Treatment
Plants, 40 CFR 61.150 and proposed amendment
"National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollu-
tants;" Subpart E - National Emission Standard for
Mercury, 40 CFR 61.50
Subchapter H - Ocean Dumping, 40 CFR 220-229 (42 FR 2462-
2490) January 11, 1977
Sludge Characteristics
Considerations for Applying Sludge on Agricultural Land
FDA Recommendations
Sources of Data and Technical Assistance
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
MUNICIPAL SLUDGE MANAGEMENT:
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
FOREWORD
This Technical Bulletin has been prepared to assist Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Regional Administrators in evaluating grant
applications for construction of publicly owned treatment works under
Section 203(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended.
It also provides designers, municipal engineers and others with information
on sludge management options.
The Bulletin was developed from the outputs of an Agency workgroup
that attempted to prepare an Agency policy statement and guidelines on
sludge management. These efforts were undertaken with substantial
assistance provided by individuals from the Council on Environmental
Quality, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration,
and the Department of the Army.
The relative risks, benefits and costs of various sludge management
practices should be thoroughly considered when evaluating potential
alternatives for specific projects. While some degree of risk is
inherent in any sludge management option, trade-offs among risks,
benefits and costs should help direct projects toward the selection of
both an environmentally and economically viable utilization or disposal
alternative.
-------
The Bulletin addresses only factors important to the environmental
acceptability of particular sludge management options and does so in a
general manner to allow a maximum flexibility in its interpretation to
meet varying Regional needs and site specific factors. It was not
written as a regulatory document or design manual. An environmental
assessment/environmental impact statement procedure is used to determine
the acceptability at a specific site. This procedure is described in
EPA's regulations for "Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements"
(40 CFR 6, Appendix I).
The cost-effectiveness of a proposed sludge management option is of
great importance. Information on the EPA cost-effectiveness program is
contained in Appendix I. Detailed information on pretreatment guide-
lines and regulations, sample collection/preservation/analysis pro-
cedures, as well as in-depth reviews of the somewhat controversial
potential environmental impacts of land application are or will be
covered in additional supporting documents.
While the main body of the Bulletin includes considerable detailed
information on land application alternatives, it is not intended to
indicate a preference for this or any other sludge management option.
The Bulletin emphasizes land application alternatives since no EPA
guidance has been issued on this subject in the past. It incorporates
existing Agency guidance (and regulations where applicable) on the other
major options - incineration, landfill and ocean disposal - mainly by
means of references and appendices. It is important that all of the
available options must be considered, including incineration and land-
filling as well as land application, to assure that the best alternative,
in terms of environmental acceptability, cost-effectiveness and benefit,
is selected.
-------
The requirements of the Act for higher levels of wastewater
treatment will result in a substantial increase in the quantity of
sludge produced at publicly owned treatment works. Disposition of these
sludges is not simple. Methods used in the past are now restricted by
specific laws or regulations, or are subject to other constraints in
view of new information of environmental significance.
EPA, continuing the work of its predecessor agencies, has been
developing environmentally acceptable methods for the management of
municipal sludge since the enactment of the first Federal water pollution
control laws. The initial phases of the research program were concerned
with the characteristics and dewatering properties of primary and
secondary sludge because of the need to dewater sludge before its
ultimate disposal. The current program emphasis has shifted toward
development of improved technology for returning the sludges to the
environment in an acceptable manner. Also, the Agency is requiring new
measures, such as source control and pretreatment, which should reduce
the heavy metals problem associated with sewage sludges.
The Agency has been aware of the growing sludge disposal problem
and the need to verify and expand the technology that is now being
utilized. For example, a long-term land application project has been
directed at determining the beneficial uses of sludge for strip mine
reclamation and for soil enrichment in crop production. These studies
have carefully monitored the heavy metals uptake in various forage and
grain crops.
A large increase in the amount of sludge generated has occurred
with the use of chemical precipitants for nutrient control and the
upgrading of secondary treatment facilities. The Agency has been actively
developing new technology for solving the problem, including recovery
3
-------
and reuse of the chemical additives.
EPA will continue its broad based research program for municipal
wastewater sludge management. Depending on the availability of resources,
we will concentrate on demonstration of new technologies which will
recycle or reuse resources, reduce energy requirements, or recover
residuals contained in sludges.
For example, new technologies are being examined to determine if
there are cost-effective methods for producing or recovering marketable
products in the processing of sludge. These products may include: metals
recovery, simple organic acids, fertilizer bases, soil conditioners, the
recovery of process heat, fuels for energy production, and activated
carbon.
Health effects research will include investigation into land
application, disinfection, composting, and airborne contaminants from
incineration. The improved technology for reducing or eliminating
pollutant emissions to the environment will be evaluated from a health
and ecological effects standpoint. It is also EPA's intent to continue
cooperative agreements with local, State and other Federal agencies.
The Technical Bulletin is based on current knowledge. It will be
modified from time to time as additional information becomes available
from current and future research, development, and demonstration projects
as outlined above. New research, development, and demonstration projects
which offer potential for reducing costs or improving technology are
encouraged; this includes projects that do not meet the specific recom-
mendations of the bulletin, if there is reason to believe that they will
eventually be acceptable. This Bulletin will also be supplemented by a
series of detailed technical reports on topics of major concern. The
first: "Application of Sewage Sludge to Cropland: Appraisal of Potential
-------
Hazards of the Heavy Metals to Plants and Animals" (EPA 430 9/76-013) is
already available. [A copy of this report can be obtained by writing to
the General Services Administration (8 FFS), Centralized Mailing Lists
Services, Bldg. 41, Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225. Please
indicate the title of the publication and MCD-33.]
It is believed that the techniques discussed in this bulletin can
be environmentally acceptable if properly designed, constructed and
managed. It must be well understood that proper operation, maintenance,
and monitoring of any sludge management system are essential. The
operators of such systems must clearly demonstrate the managerial
capability and resources necessary to achieve and maintain the expected
performance on a continuing basis.
The guidance and recommendations in this technical bulletin are
subject to revision based on future experience in the field. All users
are encouraged to submit suggested revisions and information to the
Director of the Municipal Construction Division (WH-547), Office of
Water Program Operations, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C. 20460.
—^fama^
Assistant Administrator
_. ^ __ Water and Hazardous Materials
Dated: OCT261977
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
MUNICIPAL SLUDGE MANAGEMENT:
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
1-1. The treatment of wastewaters for pollutant removal produces
not only relatively clean water for discharge, but also a significant
quantity of residue material. For domestic sewage, treated in publicly
owned plants, this residue is essentially organic in nature, although
measurable quantities of metals, minerals, and other compounds are also
invariably present. The residue may also contain pathogenic organisms
which survive the wastewater treatment process. Where industrial
wastewaters are treated together with domestic sewage, the potential for
additional materials of concern in the resulting sludge is increased.
1-2. Depending upon the composition of the wastewater treatment
plant sludge and the quantity involved, disposal of this residue material
can have a significant impact on the environment. It is essential for
wastewater treatment installations to consider the proper disposal of
treated wastewater, as well as all byproducts and residues such as
sludge. The requirements of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended (P.L. 92-500), emphasize the need for environmentally sound
means for sludge utilization or disposal. The national requirement
under P.L. 92-500 for secondary treatment, for example, will result in
production of greater quantities of sludge.
-------
1-3. The disposition of wastewater treatment plant sludges is a
complex problem. It can affect the quality of air, land, and water, and
requires considerations of human health, animal health, plant growth,
and protection of ground and surface water from pollution. EPA Regional
Administrators must consider all these matters as they evaluate sludge
management systems included in the design of publicly owned treatment
works for which construction grant applications are made. Despite the
still limited information available on the complex issue of sludge
utilization and disposal, the need for definition of a baseline of
acceptable sludge utilization or disposal practice remains. Such a
baseline is planned for development under the authorities of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (P.L. 94-580).
1-4. For the reasons cited above, a description of items to
consider when selecting a specific sludge utilization or disposal
alternative are presented in this document. This technical bulletin
provides general guidance on the factors to be considered in the environ-
mental assessment and to be used in reviewing the facts of a particular
situation. For the utilization and disposal methods discussed no
attempt is made to limit the implementation of innovative technologies
or to imply that any particular method is optimum for sludge utilization
or disposal. The final determination of acceptability should be based
on the environmental assessment and, if necessary, the environmental
impact statement for a specific project.
1-5. The bulletin is divided into two distinct parts. The first
part includes methods in which the sludge is utilized as a resource by
land application. The second part describes those methods where a
-------
beneficial use is not emphasized. Systems involving the recovery and
utilization of energy or residuals contained in sludges are not specifically
covered in this document. Examples of such systems are the production
and utilization of digester gas, incinerator gas or steam; recovery and
reuse of chemical conditioners; recovery and sale of metals. However,
the environmental impacts associated with energy recovery systems would
be similar to those identified for the sludge incineration practices
covered in this bulletin.
1-6. Methods which may have future promise, but which have not
been used in existing facilities, are not included. As these developing
technologies are demonstrated in practical use, and as supporting information
is obtained, they will be added in updates of this bulletin. Because it
is the policy of EPA to encourage and, where possible, assist in the
development of new or advanced wastewater treatment procedures, Federal
grant funds may be awarded for the construction of sludge utilization or
disposal facilities not addressed in the bulletin, provided sufficient
information is presented by the grant applicant to determine that these
facilities would meet applicable statutory and regulatory requirements
and would be environmentally acceptable.
1-7. Proper operation, maintenance, and monitoring of sludge
utilization or disposal practices are essential to ensure that adverse
environmental effects do not result. Grant applicants must demonstrate
that they will have managers, operators, and resources necessary to
achieve and maintain the required performance on a continuing basis.
-------
1-8. Efficient energy utilization, conservation and recovery are
increasingly critical topics. Full consideration of these factors is
necessary in the comparison of alternatives in the selection of a sludge
management method.
-------
Chapter II
LAND APPLICATION OF SLUDGE
2-1. General. In order to contribute to energy and resource
conservation in wastewater treatment facilities, sludge management
technologies which will beneficially recycle or reuse sludges are
actively encouraged. Because land application of sludge provides an
excellent soil conditioner while conserving and recycling organic
matter, nitrogen, phosphorus, and certain essential trace elements, such
utilization is encouraged when it is supported by an environmental
assessment.
Specifically, the use of stabilized sludge by land application for
enhancement of parks and forests and reclamation of poor or damaged
terrain should be considered for the utilization of sludge. Application
of stabilized sludge to agricultural lands may also be regarded as an
environmentally acceptable method of sludge utilization/disposal, but
must be examined closely in terms of protection of human health and
future land productivity. This is due to the present limited knowledge
and uncertainties as to the extent to which this practice could result
in the entry of toxic substances into the human food chain and pose a
health risk.
Regulations, criteria, and guidelines being developed under the
authorities of P.L. 92-500, TSCA, RCRA and other recent environmental
legislation may impact the future acceptance of various land application
practices in various ways. The development of criteria and guidelines
under RCRA will define acceptable levels of pollutants for land appli-
cation of solid wastes. The implementation of the anticipated Agency
pretreatment strategy now under development will substantially reduce
contaminant concentrations of many municipal wastewater treatment plant
-------
sludges (especially cadmium and persistent organics). These efforts
should further enhance the acceptability of sludges for agricultural
uses. By this emphasis on prevention of future problems, we hope to
move toward a goal of waste recovery and recycling.
The environmental concerns associated with the beneficial utili-
zation of sludge by land application practices are discussed at length
in the following paragraphs.
2-2. Information for Project Evaluation.
2-2.1 SIudge Characteristi cs. Sludge from existing plants should
be tested to determine nutrient values, heavy metals, and other constituents
which may be economically recycled or cause environmental damage (Appendix
VII). The type of tests and their scheduling is site specific and
dependent on regulatory requirements, the intended use of the sludge,
the contaminants likely to be present, and the intended use of the crop
if one is grown. For new projects, it will be necessary to estimate the
sludge characteristics; the application rates actually used on a project
should, however, be based upon actual sludge analyses. Some indication
may be available from pilot plant studies, but such studies are rarely
conducted at smaller plants.
When sludges are to be applied to land, for beneficial purposes,
appropriate non-domestic users of municipal wastewater treatment works
should be required to pretreat their wastewaters to minimize the presence
of potentially harmful heavy metals and other sludge contaminants from
industrial sources. Pretreatment requirements should meet Federal
pretreatment standards. (Current pretreatment regulations are covered
in 40 CFR Parts 128 and 403. Also, see "Federal Guidelines: State and
Local Pretreatment Programs," EPA 430/9-76-017a,b,c.). However, quantities'
of these materials also may be present in wastewaters usually considered
of non-industrial origin.
-------
2-2.2 Site Soils. Soils receiving sludge for agricultural purposes,
should be tested for phosphorus, potassium, pH, and heavy metals. There
should also be knowledge of the approximate soil cation exchange capacity.
Soils data and surveys are available through the Soil Conservation
Service. Soil testing also can be arranged through local county agri-
cultural extension agents, State Agricultural Experiment Stations and
private laboratories. The number and extent of these tests may be
minimal for largely domestic sludges where the application rates are low
(paragraphs 2-3.10 and 2-4), or where certain soil survey information
already exists.
2-2.3 Groundwater. A review of existing information and/or an
investigation of groundwater conditions should be made for sites where
sludge is to be applied to the land at greater than crop fertilizer
rates (paragraph 2-3.8). Attention should be paid to the sites' geology
and soil physical properties to avoid areas underlaid by highly porous,
fractured or stratified formations. The extent of the evaluation should
be based on the size of the project and the potential impact on groundwater.
Maintaining the pH of the combined soil and sludge above 6.5 will help
prevent solubilization and migration of most metal ions into the groundwater.
2-3. General Requirements for Land Application of Sludges
2-3.1 Stabilization. Under most circumstances sludge should be
stabilized (by means of chemical, physical, thermal, or biological
treatment processes that result in the significant reduction of odors,
volatile organics and pathogenic organics) before land application to
reduce public health hazards and to prevent nuisance odor conditions.
The stabilization method most frequently used has been anaerobic digestion,
but there are numerous other methods producing comparable results. Discussions
7
-------
involving stabilized sludge in this document are based on a product
equivalent to, or better than anaerobically digested sludge.
Experience shows that consistent and effective control of odors is
a major factor in the public attitudes toward sludge transport, sludge
storage and land application techniques. The odor conditions are closely
related to anaerobic bacterial action on volatile organic matter in both
the liquid and solid portions of the sludge. The degree of volatile
matter reduction achieved by anaerobic digestion may vary greatly,
depending on the basic digester design and the percentage of volatile
solids in the raw sludge. Well designed and carefully operated high rate
anaerobic digesters can digest sludge to control odors and reduce
pathogen concentrations when the sludge is digested for at least 10 days
at 95° F. Such high rate digestion requires close operational control
for successful performance. Smaller plants usually use standard rate
digestion. [Although digestion can reduce the number of influent fecal
coliforms by 97 percent or more, the remaining levels of microorganisms
may still have public health significance.]
Other methods to prepare sludge for land application may be used.
Some examples are: composting of raw as well as digested sludge, aerobic
digestion, chemical treatment (lime treatment, etc.), heat stabilization,
or heat drying. In cases where stabilization is determined to be
necessary, the grant applicant should show that the performance of the
alternative used for preparing the sludge is equivalent to anaerobic
digestion in reducing odor potential and volatile organics.
Chemical treatment of sludges may only provide temporary inhibition
of odors. Incorporation of the sludge into the soil is recommended for
those sludges which have odor potential (paragraph 2-3.7).
8
-------
At some plants, stabilized sludge is spread on drying beds or
temporarily stored in properly designed sludge lagoons. These methods
decrease subsequent odor problems from sludge applied to land since
additional stabilization occurs with time. Caution must be exercised,
however, to ensure that there are no objectionable odors from the
storage site.
2-3.2 Additional Pathogen Reduction. Under certain conditions
(e.g., due to State regulatory requirements controlling public access or
for projects involving hospital wastes), it may be necessary to achieve
additional bacteria, parasite, and/or virus reduction or deactivation
beyond that attained by stabilization. The following methods have been
used:
a. Pasteurization for 30 minutes at 70°C.
b. High pH treatment, typically with lime, at a
pH greater than 12 for 3 hours.
c. Long term storage of liquid digested sludge
for at least 60 days at 20 C or 120 days at 4°C.
d. Complete composting at temperatures above
55 C as a result of oxidative bacterial action
and curing in a stockpile for at least 30 days.
e. Both gamma and high energy electron ionizing radiation
under various application procedures including combi-
nation treatment with thermal conditioning and oxygenation.
2-3.3 Crops Suitable for Sludge Application. Crops vary in their
reaction to sludge enriched soils. Most crops benefit from the nutrients,
such as nitrogen and phosphorus, and organic matter present in the
sludge. However, some crop species may be adversely affected by excess
heavy metals or other contaminants. Additionally, the crop may take up
and accumulate certain of these trace elements, and possibly inhibit
-------
future use of the harvested materials, particularly those in the human
food chain.
The degree of contaminant uptake by different crops and specific
plant tissues is highly variable. For example, vegetative portions of
grasses generally contain higher levels of heavy metals than the grain.
Factors such as soil type, pH, moisture, and organic matter content,
crop species and variety (and for cadmium, the annual and accumulative
application rates) are all important and affect plant uptake rates of
specific contaminants. Vegetables such as lettuce, spinach, and chard,
as well as tobacco are among the highest accumulators of heavy metals
such as cadmium. USDA extension and research offices and State Agri-
cultural Experiment Stations are available for additional guidance on
the selection of crops which can be satisfactorily grown on sludge
enriched soils in specific geographic areas.
Forest sites and reclamation projects offer special opportunities
for beneficial use of sludge to improve soil fertility and increase
plant growth without significant risk to public health. In these cases
it will still be necessary to comply with regulatory requirements
pertaining to impacts on air, surface waters, and groundwaters, in a
manner similar to that described for agricultural uses (paragraph 2-
3.8).
2-3.4 Public access should be controlled in a positive manner
where applications are above rates for agricultural use. In such
instances, posted notices, and/or simple barriers, fences, remoteness of
the site should be adequate.
10
-------
2-3.5 Groundwater Protection. Projects for land application of
sludges will be designed so that the permanent groundwaters (groundwater
which is not removed from the ground by an underdrain system or other
mechanical means) in the zone of saturation (where the water is not held
in the ground by capillary tension) will be protected from pollution.
Consideration should be given to the extent of the project, the quality
of the groundwaters, and the fact that groundwater is typically used for
drinking water supply with little or no additional treatment. Also, in
some areas, groundwater recharge of surface streams may be significant.
Specific groundwater criteria will be developed under P.L. 94-580.
Until such criteria are developed under P.L. 94-580, criteria contained
in the EPA publication, "Alternative Waste Management Techniques for
Best Practicable Waste Treatment," EPA 430/9-75-013 should be followed.
(An extract on groundwater is reproduced as Appendix II to this Bulletin.)
2-3.6 Controlling Surface Water Runoff. Sound engineering practice
requires the control of surface runoff that may leave the site as well
as that which will enter the site from contiguous properties. Controlled
release of runoff from sludge application areas and effective erosion
control methods must be practiced as necessary. Consideration should
also be given to materials which may leach out of the sludge. Surface
water criteria are to be developed under P.L. 94-580.
2-3.7 Sludge Application Methods. Techniques for applying liquid
sludge to the land include: tank truck, plowing, injection, or ridge
and furrow spreading. Dewatered sludge, or composted sludge, may also
be spread upon the land. If desired, the sludge can be incorporated
into the soil by plowing, discing, or other similar methods. The use of
11
-------
incorporation and injection methods is encouraged as a means of improving
public acceptance of sludge application by decreasing possible odor
generation and unsightly deposits on crops.
Sprinkler application of digested sludge to the land is acceptable
when the transport of aerosols beyond the boundaries of the application
area is minimized. The use of low pressure sprinklers, short risers, or
remoteness of application sites is suggested. When sprinkling at low
pressures, it is good engineering practice to screen the sludge or
otherwise prevent nozzle plugging.
2-3.8 Application Rates. The sludge application rate per acre
should be determined in a manner to ensure that environmental require-
ments are met. Nitrogenous substances usually limit annual application
rates. The rate of sludge application to land should be consistent with
the requirement to prevent nitrate pollution of groundwater as previously
defined (paragraph 2-3.5). The information required to establish the
maximum sludge application rate based on plant available nitrogen
includes: (1) total and inorganic nitrogen content of sludge; (2)
nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium requirements of crop proposed; and
(3) soil test for available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. Supple-
mental fertilizer, especially potassium, may be needed if optimization
of crop production is desired.
As a guide, sludge application rates should provide total plant
available nitrogen equivalent to the nitrogen fertilizer requirement of
the crop grown, although some experience in applying 1% to 2 times the
crop's nitrogen fertilizer requirement has not lead to the development
of groundwater problems. Plant available nitrogen includes that mineral-
ized from the soil, the inorganic sludge nitrogen (ammonium and nitrate),
12
-------
plus a mineralization rate of 15 to 20 percent of sludge organic nitrogen
(mineralizable organic nitrogen) for the first growing season following
application, and three percent of the residual sludge organic nitrogen
for three subsequent growing seasons. Volatilization of ammonia from
surface applied sludge should be taken into account; experience has
shown that about 50 percent of this nitrogen may be lost if the material
is not immediately incorporated. Denitrification may also be a factor
accounting for significant nitrogen losses under certain conditions.
Sludge nitrogen mineralization, volatilization, and denitrification
rates may vary considerably for different climatic areas of the Nation.
USDA extension and research offices, and State Agricultural Experiment
Stations should be contacted to obtain specific regional information on
nitrogen transformation rates, plant nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium
requirements and soil test information for the local area.
An excess of certain salts, phosphorus compounds, heavy metals,
persistent organic compounds, radionuclides and other materials in
sludges may also limit application rates. Each prospective land appli-
cation site should be assessed on an individual basis, with adequate
consideration given to sludge characteristics, soil characteristics,
crops to be grown, and other factors such as surface water and groundwater
protection. Control of the total and annual application rates along
with soil pH control and intensive monitoring programs are possible
approaches which can be used to avoid problems with major contaminants
of concern such as cadmium (section 2-4.2). A useful procedure for
calculating the rate of sludge application to the land based on the
nitrogen requirement of the crop grown and the nitrogen and metal content
of the sludge is given in Appendix VIII.
13
-------
Sludge is generated continuously throughout the year, but continuous
field application may not be possible. A mass balance is necessary to
determine the amount of sludge storage required during intervals when
the sludge is not applied to the land.
2-3.9 System Operation. The grant applicant should show the
capability to manage and operate the system. Operational aspects to be
described in the operation and maintenance manual include the monitoring
plan, review of monitoring data, action to be taken when monitoring
indicates a problem, and a commitment to use expert guidance when
required. The operation and maintenance manual should specifically
indicate what actions can be taken to either upgrade the site to acceptable
levels or discontinue its use if it is shown to be in violation of
future requirements developed by Federal or State regulatory agencies.
USDA extension and research programs are also available to help
develop and provide site specific recommendations for the best agricultural
practices for use of municipal sewage sludge by farmers on privately
owned lands. Extracts from such guidance that has been developed for
the North Central and Western states is provided in Appendix VIII.
These recommendations may include suggestions to help minimize or
eliminate some monitoring requirements on the farm while protecting farmland
for future agricultural use, maintaining normal productivity, and
assuring continued farm income.
2-3.10 Monitoring. The grant applicant should develop and implement
a plan for adequate monitoring of each land application site where the
application rate may impose a significant nitrogen loading on receiving
ground or surface waters (paragraph 2-3.8), where greater rates of
metals are applied than indicated in section 2-4.2 or where hazards are
14
-------
expected from other sludge constituents such as pathogens or persistent
organics. Groundwater monitoring generally should not be required where
the application rate is based upon the nitrogen fertilizer needs of the
crop (paragraph 2-3.8).
It will always be necessary to know the characteristics of sludge
(paragraph 2-2.1) to be applied. For new projects, it may be necessary
to monitor more frequently until successful performance is assured.
The monitoring plan should be specifically designed for local
conditions including site and sludge characteristics, proposed rate of
application, crops to be grown, size of the project, etc. Where necessary,
the plan should consider monitoring heavy metals, persistent organics,
and pathogens, as well as nitrates in groundwater, surface water, sludge
and soils. In addition to these recommendations and local or State
requirements, additional monitoring requirements may be developed under
P.L. 94-580.
2-3.11 Surveillance of Operation and Monitoring. The operation
and monitoring data of the system must be periodically reviewed by the
responsible regulatory Agency or agencies to ensure satisfactory performance.
Where there is no local or state program for this purpose, an alternative
independent review should be established. The grant application should
show the arrangements made for surveillance.
Operational and monitoring data must be available to authorized
local, State, EPA and other Federal agency representatives on request.
2-4. Additional Requirements for Sludge Application to Agricultural
Lands. In addition to the foregoing general requirements, the application
of sludge to agricultural lands should be accomplished so as to ensure
15
-------
cropland resources are protected and harmful contaminants are not
accumulated in the human food chain to create a risk to public health.
Review of projects which include application of sludge to agricultural
lands must be based on informed judgment and fully consider the condi-
tions specific to a given site.
2-4.1 Research, Development and Demonstration Projects. As indicated
earlier (paragraph 1-6), it is the policy of EPA to encourage and, where
possible, assist in the development of new or advanced wastewater
treatment procedures, including sludge processing, utilization and
disposal practices. Therefore, proposals involving the demonstration of
new and innovative technologies for sludge management should be encouraged
and expedited.
For such demonstration projects (e.g., reclamation of disturbed
land with sludge), where significant resources and manpower are available
for control and monitoring, the recommendations within this Bulletin may
be exceeded in an effort to investigate new approaches for sludge
management. An environmental assessment should verify that this is the
case for particular projects. Some demonstration projects have the
capability (including in-house effort and consultant assistance) to
intensively monitor and evaluate the project as it develops. Work on
these projects should be closely coordinated with EPA, USDA and FDA, as
well as State and local authorities, to ensure satisfactory results
including acceptable crop quality if crops grown are to be marketed (as
described under section 2-4.2 B). Control criteria for these projects
should be subject to continuing modification as information is developed.
For these research, development and demonstration projects, the Agency
review should assure that adequate resources are made available for the
evaluation of project performance, arrangements are established for
16
-------
surveillance of the project, and review of project data is arranged for
EPA and other interested agencies such as FDA, USDA, State Agriculture
and Health Departments.
2-4.2 Protection of Food Products and Agricultural Lands.
Regulations exist to control the level of mercury and persistent
organic chemicals, such as pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCB's), in certain components of the human food chain. However, similar
regulations have not been established for all contaminants in foods.
When other regulations are implemented, those sludge land application
projects involving the production of crops in the human food chain will
have to produce crops that conform to these regulations. Contaminants
of particular concern in municipal sludge as related to the production
of human food and animal feed crops are cadmium and lead, as well as
mercury, arsenic, selenium, and persistent organics such as pesticides
and PCB's.
A wide variety of site specific conditions and management variables
can affect the level of heavy metals entering crops. These variables
have been and continue to be examined by many groups within FDA, USDA. and
State agencies. It is therefore recommended that projects conform to
limitations for crop quality (human food or animal feed) established by
these agencies.
The available information concerning the benefits and potential
impacts of applying municipal sludge to agricultural land has been
reviewed and summarized elsewhere. This available information indicates
that many municipal sewage sludges can be applied to agricultural land
when good agricultural management practices are employed. Upper limits
on annual heavy metals loadings were suggested by various sources, based
17
-------
upon the currently available data base, with the anticipation that
modifications will be made in time based upon additional research.
As discussed in section 2-1 elsewhere, regulations, criteria and
guidelines being developed under authorities of P.L. 92-500, TSCA, RCRA
and other recent environmental legislation may impact the future acceptance
of various land application practices in various ways. Pretreatment
requirements and solid waste disposal and utilization criteria and
guidelines currently under development will provide numerical limitations
aimed at reducing the levels of pollutants discharged into the environment,
including allowable cadmium additions to agricultural soils through solid
waste (including municipal sludge) application. As a result of progressively
imposing more stringent pretreatment regulations on industrial wastes
discharged into municipal systems, there should be a corresponding
reduction of sludge borne contaminants.
Until regulatory requirements are established, the following
guidance will allow for the application of most sludges to agricultural
land at crop nitrogen fertilizer rates (paragraph 2-3.8).
A. PRIVATFLY OWNED AGRICULTURAL LANDS. The following guidance is
suggested for application of municipal sludge to privately
owned and managed cropland. These recommendations should
protect private farmlands for future agricultural use, maintain
their normal productivity, and assure continued farm income
while minimizing monitoring requirements to those normally
used for assuring good soil management:
(i) Annual cadmium loadings. The maximum annual loading of
cadmium that should not be exceeded when applying sludge
to agricultural land depends upon site conditions and
management practices employed. The annual cadmium
loadings that have been used successfully range from less
than 1 kg/ha up to 2 kg/ha. While lower cadmium application
rates are preferable, in those cases where good site
conditions (i.e., high pH soils) and good management
practices (i.e., soil pH control, monitoring, selecting
crop species and varieties that do not readily take up
heavy metals, etc.) prevail, annual loadings of 2 kg/ha
have been employed. Because of the concern over poten-
tial health effects from increased ingestion of cadmium
in foods, it is the intent of EPA to move toward mini-
mizing cadmium additions to cropland. Movement toward
18
-------
lower cadmium additions will be reflected in the criteria
for land application of solid wastes to be developed and
issued under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
of 1976 (P.L. 94-580).
(ii) Soil/sludge pH control. The pH of the soil/sludge mixture
should be controlled to limit heavy metal uptake by
plants. A pH of 6.5 or greater will minimize uptake of
most heavy metals by most crops. As soil pH drops, heavy
metal solubility in soil and availability to crops is
increased. Under some site specific conditions (as in
many strip-mined areas), availability of metals present
in the soil before sludge application can actually be
reduced by the application of sludge, because sludge
addition in itself may tend to raise soil pH of a highly
acid soil and because binding of the heavy metals into
organic complexes may occur. But it is rare that the
final pH will be 6.5 or greater. Therefore, consideration
should be given to including supplemental liming. Additional
guidance on tailoring soil/sludge pH to specific cropping
systems may be gained from local agricultural extension
agents, State Agricultural Experiment Stations, USDA,
etc. The pH level maintained should be designed to meet
the intent of limiting heavy metal solubility in soil and
possible movement of heavy metals into groundwater or
into crops by uptake.
(iii) Total cumulative metal loadings. It has been demonstrated
that the following total cumulative metal loadings from
applying municipal sludge to agricultural land have not
led to observed problems (when soil pH is controlled):
Metal
Soi
0
1
Cation
5
Exchange
5 - 15
Capacity
>15
(meq/100g)*
Amount of Metal (kg/ha)
Pb
Zn
Cu
Ni
Cd
500
250
125
50
5
1000
500
250
100
10
2000
1000
500
200
20
* Cation exchange capacity (CEC) determined on soil prior
to sludge application by pH 7 ammonium acetate procedure.
NOTE: It is recognized that soil CEC is not the only
factor important in setting levels of metal additions to
soil. While its use as an index is recommended (providing
that soil pH is also controlled) other factors such as
soil colloidal, organic and sesquioxide contents may
be equally or more important in limiting metal availability.
19
-------
(iv) Calculating sludge application rates. A useful
procedure for calculating the rate of sludge appli-
cations to the land (paragraph 2-3.8) based on the
nitrogen and metal content of the sludge is given in
Appendix VIII.
In addition to the above, the following measures are also
suggested as possible means to overcome problems of dealing
with highly contaminated sludges:
(v) Ratio of cadmium to zinc in sludges. It is suggested
that in naturally acid soils the ratio of cadmium to
zinc in sludge should be considered in addition to
total annual rates of application. An important
premise of this concept is that with poor management
(e.g., improper crop selection and low soil pH),
high enough zinc concentrations in soil to kill
plants would result before cadmium could accumulate
to levels in foods considered hazardous to animals
and humans. The preferred practice suggested by USDA
and some researchers is to apply sludges (to naturally
acid soils) with a Cd/Zn ^0.015 to these privately
owned croplands.
(vi) Pretreatment programs. Implementation of a local
pretreatment program aimed at reducing metals
discharged into the municipal system may help
overcome the problems that must be faced when
considering the application of highly contaminated
sludges to cropland.
(vii) Other technology. Use of other technology or management
aimed at minimizing impact upon soil, groundwater
and surface water, crops and/or the human food chain
such as the use of selective crop species and varieties
that minimize contaminant uptake or application of
sludge at less than crop nitrogen needs. In any
case, an expanded monitoring program should be
implemented to assure control of pollutant migration
and quality assurance of the project. The monitoring
plan should be capable of noting trends in crop
productivity decline, contaminant uptake in final
marketed products, groundwater and surface water
quality.
B. PUBLICLY CONTROLLED AGRICULTURAL LANDS. When municipal sludge
is applied to publicly controlled (owned or leased) land
and crops are grown and harvested, higher rates of application
may be used if: (1) the use of these rates is acceptable to
the responsible regulatory agency(s), and (2) a detailed moni-
toring program is established to assure acceptable crop quality
and to provide close surveillance of groundwater, surface
water and soils. If metal additions exceed those recommended
in (A) above, priority consideration should be given to growing
crops that are not directly consumed by humans.
20
-------
If human foods or animal feeds are grown and harvested,
higher rates of sludge application may be acceptable if resulting
levels of cadmium in the crops or meats marketed are compar-
able to those levels present in similar crops or meats pro-
duced locally or as established by FDA or other responsible
regulatory agencies. For example, strip mined land which has
been reclaimed through high rate sludge application may be
used for producing animal feeds; however, organs (e.g., kidneys
and livers) which may accumulate cadmium in animals fed such
feeds should not be sold for human consumption unless their
cadmium levels are comparable to those found in animals pro-
duced locally.
C. SITES PREVIOUSLY DEDICATED FOR DISPOSAL. The dedication of
publicly controlled or owned land for high rate application
(including trenching) to allow maximum utilization of the
"dedicated site" for the disposal of municipal sludge has been
practiced. This is a particularly useful practice for sludges
with high contamination levels or where very high loadings of
sludge are desired. Project monitoring is generally established
to assure close surveillance of groundwater and surface water
as discussed under monitoring of landfills (paragraph 3-1.7).
In cases where crops are grown following the disposal of
municipal sludge to such "dedicated sites," the crops are
generally not harvested for use as human foods or animal
feeds. However, if human foods or animal feed crops are grown
and harvested for further use, the marketing of crops and
meats produced should be handled as in (B) above.
In all cases where the application of municipal sludge to agricultural
lands and production of human foods or animal feeds is proposed (whether
on private land, publicly controlled land, or "dedicated sites"), the
project should be coordinated at the State and local levels to include
the approval of appropriate regulatory agencies.
Experience has shown that under special conditions specific organisms
may survive in the soil for extended periods of time. Therefore, unless
pathogen reduction by methods such as those listed in 2-3.3, or other
suitable measures have been employed to minimize human exposure to such
organisms in sludge, additional precautions should be taken to assure
that the impact of pathogenic bacteria, parasites and viruses in sludge
used for certain agricultural purposes, will be minimal. Measures that
21
-------
have been used include the following:
(a) Sludge-treated land should not be used for growing human food
crops to be eaten raw if the edible portion of the plant is in
direct contact with the sludge or soils receiving sludges until one
year after final sludge application or longer if there are positive
indications of viable Ascaris ova. The available data base indicates
that Ascaris ova may remain viable in soil for three years or
longer.
(b) Use of application methods to prevent direct contact of the
sludge with the portion of the crop to be consumed.
(c) Application to pasture land should be done in a manner that
avoids contact between the freshly applied sludge and grazing
animals raised mainly for milk. Forage and pasture crops should
not be consumed by these animals when physically contaminated by
freshly applied sludge. Particular attention should be given to
avoiding problems with lead, cadmium, and PCB's contaminating the milk
through direct ingestion of contaminated sludge.
Although crop quality standards have not been established to date
for many contaminants, efforts are underway by FDA to develop such limi-
tations. FDA has, however, provided their recommendations to limit the
applications of sludge to land used to grow human or animal foods
(Appendix IX).
2-4.3 Project Review. When the project includes application to
agricultural land, especially if it involves high application rates
(paragraph 2-3.8), or sludges with a high concentration of contaminants
(paragraphs 2-2.1 and 2-4.2 and Appendix VII), it may be necessary for
*
the Regional Administrator to consult with USDA and FDA as part of the
review process. This is especially true for large agricultural projects.
22
-------
The review must ensure that all applicable State and Federal regulatory
requirements are met. Technical assistance during preparation of the
grant application and facility plan development is available from these
same agencies as well as the appropriate State offices.
2-4.4. Additional Monitoring Requirements. In addition to the
monitoring requirements presented in 2-3.10, baseline sludge analysis
should be conducted to serve as a sound basis for setting of application
rates, selection of crops and determining other monitoring requirements.
Sludges should be characterized in terms of the range of their contaminant
concentration including heavy metals (such as cadmium, zinc, molybdenum,
copper, nickel, lead, mercury, arsenic and selenium) and persistent
organic compounds (such as chlorinated pesticides and RGB's). The
sludges should also be analyzed for parameters (such as pH, nitrogen,
phosphorus, potassium, and organic content, and possibly calcium and
magnesium).
Where products are grown for human consumption on soils, especially
to which greater levels of metals or organics have been applied than in
this suggested guidance, crop monitoring may be necessary for suspected
problem metals, organics, as well as pathogens and parasites.
Records including analyses should be kept by the sludge generating
municipality that include sludge quality, locations receiving sludge,
annual and total sludge application rates, crops grown and soil pH.
The monitoring plan should be specifically designed for local site
conditions and take into account applicable local, State and Federal
regulatory requirements by including consideration of sludges, soils,
crops, surface water and groundwater quality.
2-4.5. Technical Assistance and Use of Other Sludges. In recognition
of the fact that the guidance in the preceding paragraphs is based on
23
-------
limited information, technical assistance for planning and designing
land application projects is available from several sources. These
include EPA Headquarters and National Environmental Research Centers
(especially the Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory in Cincinnati,
Ohio), FDA, USDA extension and research elements, State Agricultural
Experiment Stations, and other sources (Appendix X).
In addition to municipal sludge, other sludges (e.g., sludges
produced by treatment of food processing and brewery wastes) may also be
acceptable for land application under carefully defined and controlled
practices. Because of the potential benefits to agriculture from sludge
application carried out under sound agricultural management conditions,
full exploration of this and other beneficial use options is encouraged.
24
-------
Chapter III
SLUDGE DISPOSAL METHODS
3-1. Sanitary Landfill.
3-1.1. General. Sanitary landfill of sludge, either separately or
along with municipal solid waste, is acceptable when supported by an
environmental assessment.
3-1.2. Landfill Procedures. A sanitary landfill accepting sludge
should be designed and operated in accordance with EPA Guidelines for
Land Disposal of Solid Wastes (40 CFR 241 Appendix III). Although it
does not directly address landfilling of sewage sludge, specific guidance
for the proper design and operation of a sanitary landfill are included
in EPA's publication, "Sanitary Landfill Design and Operation" (SW-
65ts). Each site should also comply with appropriate criteria and
guidelines being developed under P.L. 94-580 for landfilling of sewage
sludge. Proposals involving research, development and demonstration of
new and innovative landfill technologies should be encouraged and
expedited (as discussed for land application technologies in paragraph
2-4.1).
3-1.3 Odor Control. The sanitary landfill must be operated so as
to prevent nuisance odors. Normally, the sludge must be stabilized as
described for land application (paragraph 2-3.1).
3-1.4 Precautions for Protection of Public Health. Sludge stabili-
zation and the daily soil cover are generally adequate protection from
direct health hazards. Additional precautions may be necessary if the
public has unrestricted access to the landfill site.
25
-------
3-1.5. Groundwater Protection. The groundwater underlying the
sanitary landfill accepting sludge must be protected and the sanitary
landfill must meet applicable State groundwater protection requirements,
A geo-hydrologic assessment should be undertaken to determine the
adequacy of the site prior to use as a sludge landfill.
3-1.6 Operation. If a sanitary landfill accepting sludge is not
operated by the wastewater treatment authority, a binding agreement
should be required between the wastewater treatment authority and the
operator of the sanitary landfill. Such a binding agreement should
include necessary assurances of compliance with the requirements and
recommendations of the EPA guidelines (40 CFR 241 Appendix III) and
criteria being developed under P.L. 94-580.
3-1.7 Monitoring. A plan should be developed and implemented to
provide for adequate monitoring for each sanitary landfill accepting
sludge. This plan should be specifically designed to protect ground-
water and to ensure protection of surface waters, in the following
manner:
a. Groundwater observation wells tested for heavy
metals, persistent organics, pathogens, and nitrates;
b. Where the surface water could be affected by direct
runoff or leachate from the landfill receiving sludge, surface
water monitoring tested for indicators (such as chemical oxygen
demands and total dissolved solids). Additional testing may be
necessary if it is determined that a poor quality leachate is
entering surface waters.
26
-------
3-2. Incineration.
3-2.1 General. Sludge incineration and disposal of the resulting
ash is an environmentally acceptable method for the disposal of sludge
when the environmental assessment shows it to be appropriate. Incin-
eration alone is a volume reduction method rather than ultimate disposal.
Volume reduction, however, can be an important consideration where land
availability is a problem. After incineration, ash, either dry or in
scrubber water, remains to be disposed of to the land. Ash disposal
must be designed to protect groundwater, to minimize dust production.,
and to ensure protection of surface waters. Each site should comply
with the criteria being developed under P.L. 94-580. Proposals involving
research, development and demonstration of new and innovative incineration
technologies should be encouraged and expedited (as discussed for land
application technologies in paragraph 2-4.1).
Due to the increasing costs and limited availability of energy
resources, acceptability and viability of incineration processes is
dependent on the ability to recover or reclaim energy from the process.
Data available to date indicate that fuel requirements of incineration
processes can be reduced by available energy recovery technologies.
In some cases, energy recovery can possibly even offset a substantial
portion of the energy requirements for the entire wastewater treatment
plant. While the basic concepts of energy recovery from incineration of
wastes are not new, the application of these concepts to wastewater
treatment and sludge management facilities generally require special
design considerations. New facilities can be designed from the outset
to incorporate the necessary equipment to utilize energy recovered from
incineration processes. In existing plants, retrofitting of equipment
capable of using recovered energy will be necessary and could be considered
27
-------
to facilitate incineration where cost-effecitve. When energy aspects
are addressed in incineration system designs, they should evaluate
future as well as current energy conservation and recovery considerations.
3-2.2 Industrial Wastewaters. When introduced into a municipal
wastewater treatment works that practices sludge incineration, industrial
wastewaters should be pretreated to reduce to a minimum the amounts of
mercury, persistent organics, and radioactive materials. In developing
pretreatment programs, special attention must be given to the disposal
of sludge created or materials removed during the pretreatment process.
Disposal of these materials must be in an environmentally sound manner.
3-2.3 Air Quality. The emissions from the sludge incinerator must
not result in violation of ambient air quality standards and must meet
the EPA air pollution emission standards of performance contained in the
New Source Performance Standards for Sludge Incinerators (40 CFR 60.15,
Appendix IV). Sewage sludge incinerator discharges into the atmosphere
are not to exceed particulate matter at a rate in excess of 0.65 g/kg
dry sludge input (1.30 Ib/ton dry sludge input) and gases are not to
exhibit 20 percent opacity or greater (except where the presence of
uncombined water is the only reason for failure to meet the opacity
requirement). These emission limits are based on a venturi scrubber,
but any similar equipment which meets the standard is acceptable.
Sludge incineration is known to vaporize any mercury present in the
incoming sludge. EPA has published Amendments to National Emission
Standards which do limit mercury emissions from the incineration and
drying of wastewater treatment plant sludges to a maximum of 3200 grams
per 24 hour period (40 CFR 61.52, included as Appendix V of this document)
3-2.4 Specific Emissions. Tests have shown that sludge incinerator
emissions can contain volatilized mercury as well as persistent organic
28
-------
compounds, such as polychlorinated biphenyls, and particulates containing
trace amounts of metals such as lead and cadmium. The effect of these
compounds which are emitted from the incinerator must be assessed and
the sludge should be tested to determine the quantities of compounds
present. If the PCB's exceed 25 mg/kg dry sludge, then special measures
should be taken to ensure at least 95 percent destruction of persistent
organic compounds in incineration. This could consist of testing the
performance of an incinerator design to verify satisfactory performance
or making allowances in the design. Increased temperature and residence
time increase the assurance of destruction.
Regulations being developed under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(P.I. 94-469) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (P.I. 94-
580) should be consulted regarding current standards for disposal of PCB
containing substances. Proposed rules on PCB's disposal under TSCA
(P.L. 94-469) were published in the FEDERAL REGISTER on May 24, 1977.
Incineration conditions specified therein for materials (PCB mixtures,
waste materials, and sludges) that contain 500 ppm or greater of PCB
chemical substances (on a dry weight basis) are 1200 C ( 100 C) for a
two second dwell time. While municipal sewage sludges seldom have
contamination levels over 500 ppm, final rules promulgated under P.L.
94-469 and those being developed under P.L. 94-580 should be consulted
regarding the disposal of PCB containing municipal sewage sludge.
3-2.5 Monitoring. A plan must be developed and implemented to
provide for adequate monitoring of each sludge incinerator. The stack
gas emissions from sludge incinerators must be monitored to ensure
compliance with 40 CFR 60.15 (Appendix IV). In addition, mercury,
either in the sludge or in stack gas emissions, must be periodically
tested to demonstrate compliance with 40 CFR 61.5 (Appendix V). Waste-
water from industrial users must be monitored if it is determined that
29
-------
such users will be a significant source of mercury in the municipal
sludge. Additional monitoring for organic pesticides, PCB's or heavy
metals other than mercury, may be necessary for specific projects.
3-3. Ocean Disposal.
3-3.1 General. Although approximately 15 percent of the current
sludge volume produced in municipal treatment plants is now disposed of
into the oceans; the practice of ocean dumping is now being done only
under interim ocean dumping permits, because the sludges do not meet
existing ocean dumping criteria. Sludge dumping is scheduled to be
phased out by the end of 1981.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended (PL 92-500), and
the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (PL 92-532)
have established a Federal program of marine pollution abatement and
control. EPA has issued regulations and criteria (40 CFR 220-227,
Appendix VI) to govern the disposal of wastes to the marine environment.
EPA controls such disposal by a system of permits for the discharge,
transportation, and dumping of all waste materials into the marine
environment, except,for dredged material which is controlled by the
Corps of Engineers, subject to EPA Criteria. Ocean discharge of sludge
through outfalls is regulated by EPA under the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).
3-3.2 Permits. Information available to EPA from permit applications
to date indicates that those sludges currently being dumped exceed the
criteria and are therefore being dumped under interim permits. One of
the conditions of these interim permits is the requirement for an
implementation plan to either reduce the toxicity of the materials to
meet the criteria or find an alternative method of disposal. Interim
permits are granted for one year only and the issuance of new interim
30
-------
APPENDIX I
Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements
40 CFR 6
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§5.8
PART e—PREPARATION OF ENVIRON-
MENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS
Subpart A—General
See.
6.100 Purpose and policy.
6 102 Def.nltlons.
0104 Summary of procedures for Imple-
menting NEPA.
6 108 Applicability.
6 108 Completion of NEPA procedures be-
fore start of administrative action.
6.110 Responsibilities.
Subpart B—Procedure*
6 200 Criteria for determining when to pre-
pare an environmental Impact state-
ment.
6202 Environmental assessment.
6 204 Environmental review.
6.20e Notice of intent.
6.208 Draft environmental Impact state-
ments.
6.210 Final environmental impact state-
ments.
6.212 Negative declarations and environ-
mental Impact appraisals.
6.214 Additional procedures.
6.216 Availability of documents.
Subpart C—Content of Environmental Impact
Statements
6.300 Cover sheet.
6.302 Summary sheet.
6.304 Body of statement.
6.306 Documentation.
Subpart D—EPA Public Hearings on Impact
Statements
6.400 General.
6.402 Public hearing process.
Subpart E—Guidelines for Compliance With
NEPA In the Title II Wastewater Treatment
Works Construction Grants Program and the
Areawlde Waste Treatment Management Plan-
ning Program
6.600 Purpose.
6.502 Definitions.
6.504 Applicability.
6.506 Completion of NEPA procedures be-
fore start of administrative actions.
8.510 Criteria for preparation of environ-
mental Impact statements.
6.512 Procedures for implementing NEPA.
8.514 Content of environmental Impact
statements.
Subpart F—Guidelines for Compliance With NEPA
In Research and Development Programs and
ActlvItU*
6.600 Purpose.
6.602 Definitions.
6.604 .Applicability.
6,608 Criteria for determining when to pre-
pare environmental Impact state-
ments.
6.610 Procedures for compliance with NEPA.
Subpart G—Guidelines for Compliance With NEPA
In Solid Waste Management Activities
6.700 Purpose.
6.702 Criteria for the preparation of envi-
ronmental assessments and EIS's.
6.704 Procedures for compliance with NEPA.
Subpart H—Guidelines for Compliance With
NEPA In Construction of Special Purpoi* Fa-
cilities and Facility Renovations
6.800
6.802
6.804
6.808
Purpose.
Definitions.
Applicability.
Criteria for the preparation of envi-
ronmental assessments and EIS's.
6.810 Procedures for compliance with NEPA.
EXHIBITS
1, (Page 1.) Notice of Intent Transmlttal
Memorandum Suggested Format.
(Page 2.) Notice of Intent Suggested
Format.
2. Public Notice and News Release Suggested
Format.
-------
§ 6.100
Title 40—Protection of Environment
3. Negative Declaration Suggested Format.
4. Environmental Impact Appraisal Sug-
gested Format.
5. Cover Sheet Format for Environmental
Impact Statements.
8. Summary Sheet Format for Environmental
Impact Statements.
7. Flowchart for Solid Waste Management
Program Operations.
Appendix A—Checklist for Environmental
Reviews.
Appendix B—Responsibilities.
Appendix C—Availability and Distribution
of Documents.
Authority: Sees. 102, 103 of 83 Stat. 854
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
SOURCE: 40 FR 16815, Apr. 14, 1975, unless
otherwise noted.
Subpart A—General
§ 6.100 Purpose and policy.
(at The National Environmental Pol-
icy Act (NEPA) of 1969, implemented by
Executive Order 11514 and the Council
•on Environmental Quality's (CEQ's)
Guidelines of August 1, 1973 (38 FR
20550), requires that all agencies of the
Federal Government prepare detailed en-
vironmental impact statements on pro-
posals for legislation and other major
Federal actions significantly affecting
the quality of the human environment.
NEPA requires that agencies include in
the decision-making process appropriate
and careful consideration of all environ-
mental effects of proposed actions, ex-
plain potential environmental effects of
proposed actions and their aternatives
for public understanding, avoid or mini-
mize adverse effects of proposed actions
and restore or enhance environmental
quality as much as possible.
(b) This part establishes Environmen-
tal Protection Agency (EPA) policy and
procedures for the identification and
analysis of the environmental impacts of
EPA nonregulatory actions and the prep-
aration and processing of environmental
impact statements (EIS's) when signifi-
cant impacts on the environment are
anticipated.
§ 6.102 Definitions
fa) "Environmental assessment" is a
written analysis submitted to EPA by its
grantees or contractors describing the
environmental impacts of proposed ac-
tions undertaken with the financial sup-
port of EPA. For facilities or section 208
plans as defined in 5 6.102 (j) and (k),
the assessment must be an Integral,
though identifiable, part of the plan sub-
mitted to EPA for review.
(b) "Environmental review" is a for-
mal evaluation undertaken by EPA to
determine whether a proposed EPA ac-
tion may have a significant impact on
the environment. The environmental as-
sessment is one of the major sources of
information used in this review.
(c) "Notice of intent" is a memoran-
dum, prepared after the environmental
review, announcing to Federal, regional,
State, and local agencies, and to inter-
ested persons, that a draft EIS will be
prepared.
(d) "Environmental Impact state-
ment" is a report) prepared by EPA,
which identifies and analyzes In detail
the environmental impacts of a proposed
EPA action and feasible alternatives.
(e) "Negative declaration" is a written
announcement, prepared after the en-
vironmental review, which states that
EPA has decided not to prepare an EIS
and summarizes the environmental im-
pact appraisal.
.(f) "Environmental impact appraisal"
is based on an environmental review and
supports a negative declaration. It de-
scribes a proposed EPA action, its ex-
pected environmental impact, and the
basis for the conclusion that no signifi-
cant impact is anticipated.
(g) "NEPA-associated documents"
are any one or combination of: notices
of intent, negative declarations, exemp-
tion certifications, environmental impact
appraisals, news releases, EIS's, and en-
vironmental assessments.
(h) "Responsible official" is an Assist-
ant Administrator, Deputy Assistant Ad-
ministartor. Regional Administrator or
their designee.
(i) "Interested persons" are indi-
viduals, citizen groups, conservation or-
ganizations, corporations, or other non-
governmental units, including applicants
for EPA contracts or grants, who may
be interested in, affected by, or techni-
cally competent to comment on the en-
vironmental impacts of the proposed
EPA action.
(j) "Section 208 plan" is an areawide
waste treatment management plan pre-
pared under section 208 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA).
as amended, under 40 CFR Part 126 and
40 CFR Part 35, Subpart F.
(k) "Facilities plan" is a preliminary
plan prepared as the basis for construc-
tion of publicly owned waste treatment
works under Title II of .FWPCA, as
amended, under § 35.917 of this chapter.
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§ 6.106
(1) "Intramural project" is an in-
house project undertaken by EPA
personnel.
Environmental review. Environ-
mental reviews shall be made of pro-
posed ar.d certain ongoing EPA actions
as required in ?6.106(c). This process
shall consist of a. study of the action to
identify and evaluate the environmental
impacts of the action. Types of grants,
contracts and other actions requiring
study are listed in the subuarts followinz
Subpart D of this part. The process shall
include a review of any environmen-
tal assessment received to determine
whether any significant impacts are an-
ticipated, whether any changes can be
made in the proposed action to eliminate
significant adverse impacts, and whether
an EIS is required. EPA has overall re-
sponsibility for this review, although Its
grantees and contractors will contribute
to the review through their environmen-
tal assessments.
Notice of intent and EIS's. When
an environmental review indicates that
a significant environmental impact may
occur and the significant adverse impacts
cannot be e.'iminated by making changes
in the projnct. a notice of Intent shall be
published, and a draft EIS shall be pre-
pared and distributed. After external co-
ordination and evaluation of the com-
ments received, a final EIS shall be pre-
pared and distributed. EIS's should be
prepared first on those proposed actions
with the most adverse effects which are
scheduled for earliest .implementation
and on other proposed actions according
to priorities assigned by the responsible
official.
(e) Negative declaration and environ-
mental impact appraisal. When the en-
vironmental review indicates no signi-
ficant impacts are anticipated or when
the project is changed to eliminate the
significant adverse impacts, a negative
declaration shall be issued. For the cases
in Subparts E, F, G, and H of this part,
an environmental impact appraisal shall
be prepared which summaries the im-
pacts, alternatives and reasons an EIS
was not prepared. It shall remain on file
and be available for public inspection.
§ 6.106 Applicability.
(a) Administrative actions covered.
This part applies to the administrative
actions listed below. The subpart refer-
enced with each action lists the detailed
NEPA procedures associated with the ac-
tion. Administrative actions are:
(1) Development of EPA legislative
proposals;
(2) Development of favorable reports
on legislation initiated elsewhere and not
accompanied by an EIS, when they relate
to or affect matters within EPA's pri-
mary areas of responsibility;
(3) For the programs under Title II of
FWPCA, as amended, those administra-
tive actions in § 6.504;
(4) For the Office of Research and De-
velopment, those administrative actions
in 5 6.604;
(5) For the Office of Solid Waste Man-
agement Programs, those administrative
actions in § 6.702:
(6) For construction of special pur-
pose facilities and facility renovations,
those administrative actions in | 6.804;
and
(7) Development of an EPA project in
conjunction with or located near a proj-
ect or complex of projects started by one
or more Federal agencies when the
cumulative effects of all the projects will
be major allocations of resources or fore-
closures of future land use options.
(b) Administrative actions excluded.
The requirements of this part do not ap-
ply to environmentally protective regu-
latory activities undertaken by EPA, nor
to projects exempted in § 6.504, § 6.604,
and 5 6.702.
(c) Application to ongoing actions.
This regulation shall apply to uncom-
pleted and continuing EPA actions ini-
tiated before the promulgation of these
procedures when modifications of or al-
ternatives to the EPA action are still
-------
§6.103
Title 40—Protection of Environment
availr.blo, except for the Title II con-
struction grants program. Specific appli-
cation for the construction Brants pro-
gram is in 56.504(c). An EIS shall be
prepared for each project found to have
significant environmental effects as de-
scribed in 5 6.200.
(d) Application to legislative propos-
als. (1) As noted in paragraphs (a) (1)
and (2) of this section, EIS's or negative
declarations shall be prepared for legis-
lati pe proposals or favorable reports re-
lating to legislation which may signifi-
cantly affect the environment. Because
of the nature of the legislative process,
EIS's for legislation must be prepared
and reviewed according to the proce-
dures followed in the development and
review of the legislative matter. These
procedures are described in Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Circu-
lar No. A-19.'
(2) A working draft EIS shall be pre-
pared by the EPA office responsible for
preparing the legislative proposal or re-
port on legislation. It shall be prepared
concurrently with the development of
the legislative proposal or report and
shall contain the information required
in 8 0.304. The EIS shall be circulated for
internal EPA review with the legislative
proposal or report and other supporting
documentation. The working draft EIS
shall be modified to correspond with
changes made in the proposal or report
during the internal review. All major al-
ternatives developed during the formu-
lation and review of the proposal or re-
port should be retained in the working
draft EIS.
(1) The working draft EIS shall ac-
company the legislative proposal or re-
port to OMB. EPA shall revise the work-
Ing draft EIS to respond to comments
from OMB and other Federal agencies.
(ii) Upon transmlttal of the legisla-
tive proposal or report to Congress, the
working draft EIS will be forwarded to
CEQ and the Congress as a formal leg-
islative EIS. Copies will be distributed
according to procedures described in Ap-
pendix C.
(ill) Comments received by EPA on
the legislative EIS shall be forwarded to
the appropriate Congressional Commit-
tees. EPA also may respond to specific
comments and forward Its responses with
the comments. Because legislation under-
goes continuous changes In Congress be-
yond the control of EPA, no final EIS
need be prepared by EPA.
§ 6.108 Completion of NEPA procedures
before starting administrative action.
(a) No administrative action shall be
taken until the environmental review
process, resulting in an EIS or a nega-
tive declaration with environmental ap-
praisal, has been completed.
(b) When an EIS will be prepared.
Except when requested by the respon-
sible official in writing and approved by
CEQ, no administrative action shall be
taken sooner than ninety (90) calendar
days after a draft EIS has been distrib-
uted or sooner than thirty (30) calendar
days after the final EIS has been made
public. If the final text of an EIS Is filed
within ninety (90) days after a draft EIS
has been circulated for comment, fur-
nished to CEQ and made public, the
minimum thirty (30) day period and the
ninety (90) day period may run con-
currently if they overlap. The minimum
periods for review and advance avail-
ability of EIS's shall begin on the date
CEQ publishes the notice of receipt of
the EIS in the FEDERAL REGISTER. In ad-
dition, the proposed action should be
modified to conform with any changes
EPA considers necessary before the final
EIS is published.
(c) When an EIS will not be prepared.
If EPA decides not to prepare an EIS
on any action listed in this part for
which a negative declaration with en-
vironmental appraisal has been prepared,
no administrative action shall be taken
for at least fifteen (15) working days
after the negative declaration Is issued to
allow public review of the decision. If
significant environmental Issues are
raised during the review period, the deci-
sion may be changed and a new environ-
mental appraisal or an EIS may be pre-
pared.
§ 6.110 Responsibilities.
See Appendix B for responsibilities of
this part.
Subpart B—Procedures
§ 6,200 Criteria for determining when
to prepare an EIS,
The following general criteria shall be
used when reviewing a proposed EPA
action to determine if it will have a
significant impact on the environment
and therefore require an EIS:
(a) Significant environmental effects.
(1) An action with both, beneficial and
detrimental effects should be classified
as having significant effects on the en-
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§ 6.206
vironment, even if EPA believes that
(.lie net effect will be beneficial. However,
preference should be given to preparing
EIS'u on proposed actions which, on bal-
ance, have adverse effects.
(2 > When determining the signifi-
cance of a proposed action's impacts,
the responsible official shall consider
both its short term and long term effects
as well as its primary and secondary
effects as defined in § 6.304(c). Particu-
lar attention should be given to changes
in land use patterns; changes in energy
supply and demand; increased develop-
ment in floodplains; significant changes
in ambient air and water quality or noise
levels; potential violations of air quality,
water quality and noise level standards;
significant changes in surface or ground-
water quality or Quantity; and encroach-
ments on wetlands, coatstal zones, or fish
and wildlife habitat, especially when
threatened or endangered species may be
affected.
(3) Minor actions which may set a
precedent for future major actions with
significant adverse impacts or a number
of actions with Individually insignificant
but cumulatively significant adverse Im-
pacts ,«hall be classified as having sig-
nificant environmental impacts. If EPA
is taking a number of minor, environ-
mentally insignificant actions that are
similar in execution and purpose, during
a limited time span and in the same
general geographic area, the cumulative
environmental impact of all of these
actions shall be evaluated.
(4) In determining the significance of
a proposed action's impact, the unique
characteristics of the project area should
be carefully considered. For example,
proximity to historic sites, parklands or
wild and scenic rivers may make the
impact significant. A project discharging
into a drinking water aqulfier may make
the impact significant.
(fi > A proposed EPA action which will
have direct and significant adverse ef-
fects on a property listed in or eligible
for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places or will cause irreparable
Joss or destruction of significant scien-
tific, prehistoric, historic or archaeolog-
ical data shall be classified as having
significant environmental impacts.
(b) Controversial actions. An EIS
shall be prepared when the environ-
mental impact of a proposed EPA action
is likely to be highly controversial.
(c) Additional criteria for specific
programs. Additional criteria for vari-
ous EPA programs are in Subpart E
(Title II Waste water Treatment Works
Construction Grants Program), Subpart
P (Research and Development Pro-
grams) . Subpart G (Solid Waste Man-
agement Programs) and Subpart H
(Construction of Special Facilities and
Facility Renovations).
§ 6.202 Environmental assessment.
Environmental assessments must be
submitted to EPA by its grantees and
contractors as required in Subparts E,
F, G, and H of this part. The assessment
is to ensure that the applicant considers
the environmental impacts of the pro-
posed action at the earliest possible point
in his planning process. The assessment
and other relevant information are used
by EPA to decide if an EIS is required.
While EPA is responsible for ensuring
that EIS's are factual and comprehen-
sive, it expects assessments and other
data submitted by grantees and contrac-
tors to be accurate and complete. The
responsible official may request addi-
tional data and analyses from grantees
or other sources any time he determines
they are needed to comply adequately
with NEPA.
§ 6.204 Environmental review.
Proposed EPA actions, as well as on-
going EPA actions listed in f 6.108(c),
shall be subjected to an environmental
review. This review shall be a continu-
ing one, starting at the earliest possible
point in the development of the project.
It shall consist of a study of the -pro-
posed action, including a review of any
environmental assessments received, to
identify and evaluate the environmental
impacts of the proposed action and feas-
ible alternatives. The review will deter-
mine whether significant Impacts are
anticipated from the proposed action,
whether any feasible alternatives can
be adopted or changes can be made in
project design to eliminate significant
adverse impacts, and whether an
EIS or a negative declaration is re-
quired. The responsible official shall de-
termine the proper scope of the environ-
mental review. The responsible official
may delay approval of related projects
until the proposals can be reviewed to-
gether to allow EPA to properly evaluate
their cumulative impacts.
§ 6.206 Notice of intent.
(a) General. (1) When an environ-
mental review indicates a significant im-
-------
§ 6.208
Title 40—Protection of Environment
pact may occur and significant adverse
impacts cannot be eliminated by making
changes in the project,'a notice of intent,
announcing the preparation of a draft
EIS, shall be issued by the responsible
official. The notice shall briefly describe
the EPA action, its location, and the is-
sues involved (Exhibit 1).
(2) The purpose of a notice of intent
is to involve other government agencies
and interested persons as early as possi-
ble in the planning and evaluation of
EPA actions which may have significant
environmental impacts. This notice
should encourage agency and public in-
put to a draft EIS and assure that en-
vironmental values will be identified and
weighed from the outset rather than
accommodated by adjustments at the
end of the decision-making process.
(b) Specific actions. The specific ac-
tions to be taken by the responsible offi-
cial on notices of intent are:
c 1) When the review process Indicates
a significant impact may occur and sig-
nificant adverse impacts cannot be elim-
inated by making changes in the project,
prepare a notice of intent immediately
after the environmental review.
(2) Distribute copies of the notice of
intent as required in Appendix C.
(3) Publish in a local newspaper, with
adequate circulation to cover the area
affected by the project, a brief public
notice stating that an EIS will be pre-
pared on a particular project, and the
public may participate in preparing the
EIS (Exhibit 2). News releases also may
be submitted to other media.
(c) Regional office assistance to pro-
gram offices. Regional offices will provide
assistance to program offices in taking
these specific actions when the EIS orig-
inates in a program office.
§ 6.208 Draft EIS's.
'a) General. (1) The responsible offi-
cial shall assure that a draft EIS is pre-
pared as soon as possible after the release
of the notice of intent. Before releasing
the draft EIS to CEQ, a preliminary ver-
sion may be circulated for review to other
offices within EPA with interest in or
technical expertise related to the action.
Then the draft EIS shall be sent to CEQ
and circulated to Federal, State, regional
and local agencies with special expertise
or jurisdiction by law, and tc interested
persons. If the responsible official deter-
mines that a public hearing on the pro-
posed action is warranted, the hearing
will be held after the draft EIS is pre-
pared, according to the requirements of
§ 6.402.
<2) Draft EIS's should be prepared at
the earliest possible point in the project
development. If the project involves a
grant applicant or potential contractor,
he must submit any data EPA requests
for preparing the ElS. Where a plan or
program has been developed by EPA or
submitted to EPA for approval, the re-
lationship between the plan . and the
later projects encompassed by its shall
be evaluated to determine the best time
to prepare an EIS. Whenever possible,
an EIS will be drafted for the total pro-
gram at the initial planning stage. Then
later component projects included in the
plan will not require individual EIS's un-
less they differ substantially from the
plan, or unless the overall plan did not
provide enough detail to fully assess
significant impacts of individual projects.
Plans shall be reevaluated by the re-
sponsible official to monitor the cumula-
tive impact of the component projects
and to preclude the plans' obsolescence.
(b) Specific actions. The specific ac-
tions to be taken by the responsible of-
ficial on draft EIS's are:
(1) Distribute the draft EIS accord-
ing to the procedures in Appendix C.
(2) Inform the agencies to reply
directly to the originating EPA office.
Commenting agencies shall have at least
forty-five (45) calendar days to reply,
starting from the date of publication in
the FEDERAL REGISTER of lists of state-
ments received by CEQ. If no comments
are received during the reply period and
no time extension has been requested, it
shall be presumed that the agency has
no comment to make. EPA may grant
extensions of fifteen (15) or more calen-
dar days. The time limits for review and
extensions for State and local agencies;
State, regional, and metropolitan clear-
inghouses; and interested persons shall
be the same as those available to Federal
agencies.
(3) Publish a notice in local news-
papers stating that the draft EIS, is
available for comment and listing where
copies may be obtained (Exhibit 2), and
submit news releases to other media.
(4) Include in the draft EIS a notice
stating that only those Federal, State,
regional, and local agencies and inter-
ested persons who make substantive com-
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§6.214
ments on the draft EIS or request a copy
of the final EIS will be sent a copy.
(c) Regional office assistance to pro-
gram office. If requested, regional offices
will provide assistance to program offices
In taking these specific actions when .the
EIS originates in a program office.
§6.210 Final EIS's.
(a) Final EIS's shall respond to all
substantive comments raised through
the review of the draft EIS. Special care
should be taken to respond fully to com-
ments disagreeing with EPA's position.
(See also g 6.304 (g).)
(b) Distribution and other specific
actions are described in Appendix C. If
there is an applicant, he shall be sent a
copy. When the number of comments on
the draft EIS is so large that distribution
of the final EIS to all commenting en-
titles appears impractical, the program
or regional office preparing the EIS
shall consult with OPA, which will con-
sult with CEQ about alternative arrange-
ments for distribution of the EIS.
§ 6,212 Negative declaration and envi-
ronmental impact appraisals.
(a) General. When an environmental
review indicates there will be no signifi-
cant impact or significant adverse im-
pacts have been eliminated by making
changes in the project, the responsible
official shall prepare a negative declara-
tion to allow public review of his decision
before it becomes final. The negative
declaration and news release must state
that interested persons disagreeing with
the decision may submit comments for
consideration by EPA. EPA shall not
take administrative action on the proj-
ect for at least fifteen (15) working-days
after release of the negative declaration
and may allow more time for response.
The responsible official shall have an
environmental impact appraisal sup-
porting the negative declaration avail-
able for public review when the negative
declaration is released for those cases
given in Subparts E, P, O, and H.
fb) Specific actions. The responsible
official shall take the following specific
actions on those projects for which both
a negative declaration and an impact
appraisal will be prepared:
(1) Negative declaration. (1) Prepare
a negative declaration immediately after
the environmental review. This docu-
ment shall briefly summarize the purpose
of the project, its location, the nature
and extent of the land use changes re-
lated to the project, and the major pri-
mary and secondary impacts of the
project. It shall describe how the more
detailed environmental impact appraisal
may be obtained at cost. (See Exhibit 3.)
(11) Distribute the negative declaration
according to procedures in Appendix C.
In addition, submit to local newspapers
and other appropriate media a brief news
release with a negative declaration at-
tached, informing the public that a de-
cision not to prepare an EIS has been
made and a negative declaration and en-
vironmental impact appraisal are avail-
able for public review and comment (Ex-
hibit 2).
(2) Environmental impact appraisal.
(i) Prepare an environmental impact
appraisal concurrently with the negative
declaration. This document .shall briefly
describe the proposed action and feasible
alternatives, environmental Impacts of
the proposed action, unavoidable adverse
impacts of the proposed action, the re-
lationship between short term uses of
man's environment and the maintenance
and enhancement of long term produc-
tivity, steps to minimize harm to the en-
vironment, irreversible and irretrievable
commitments of resources to implement
the action, comments and consultations
on the project, and reasons for conclud-
ing there will be no significant impacts.
(See Exhibit 4.)
(ii) Distribute' the environmental im-
pact appraisal according to procedures
in Appendix C.
§ 6.214 Additional procedures.
(a) Historical and archaeological sites.
EPA is subject to the requirements of sec-
tion 106 of the National Historic Preser-
vation Act of 1966, 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.,
Executive Order 11593, the Archaeologi-
cal and Historic Preservation Act of 1974,
16 U.S.C. 469 et seq., and the regulations
promulgated under this legislation. These
statutes and regulations establish en-
vironmental review procedures which are
independent of NEPA requirements.
(1) If an EPA action may affect prop-
erties with historic, architectural,
archaeological or cultural value which
are listed in the National Register of His-
toric Places (published in the FEDERAL
REGISTER each February with supple-
-------
§6.214
Title 40—Protection of Environment
ments on the first Tuesday of each
month), the responsible official shall
comply with the procedures of the Ad-
visory Council on Historic Preservation
(38 CFR Part 800), Including determin-
ing the need for a Memorandum of
Agreement among EPA, the State His-
toric Preservation Officer and the Ad-
visory Council. If a Memorandum of
Agreement is executed, it shall be in-
cluded in an EIS whenever one Is pre-
pared on a proposed action. See § 6.512
(c) of this part for additional procedures
for the construction grants program un-
der Title H of the FWPCA, as amended.
(2) If an EPA action may cause ir-
reparable loss or destruction of signifi-
cant scientific, prehistoric, historic or
archaeological data, the responsible offi-
cial shall consult with the State Historic
Preservation Officer in compliance with
the Archaeological and Historic Preser-
vation Act (P.L. 93-291).
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§6.304
prepare an EIS on a project and wet-
l;mds, floodplalna, coastal zones, wild
,-ind scenic rivers, flsh or wildlife may
be affected, the required consultation
may be deferred until the preparation of
the draft EIS.
§ 6.216 Availability of documents.
(a) EPA will print copies of draft and
final EIS's for agency and public dis-
tribution. A nominal fee may be charged
for copies requested by the public.
(b) When EPA no longer has copies
of an EIS to distribute, copies shall be
made available for public Inspection at
regional and headquarters Offices of
Public Affairs. Interested persons also
should be advised of the availability (at
cost) of the EIS from the Environmental
Law Institute, 1356 Connecticut Avenue
NW., Washington, D.C. 20036.
(c) Lists of EIS's prepared or under
preparation and lists of negative decla-
rations prepared will be available at both
the regional and headquarters Offices
of Public Affairs.
Subpart C—Content of Environmental
Impact Statements
§6.301 Cover sheet.
The cover sheet shall indicate the
type 01' EIS (draft or final), the official
project name and number, the respon-
sible EPA office, the date, and the sig-
nature of the responsible official. The
format Is shown in Exhibit 5.
§ 6.302 Summary sheet.
The summary sheet shall conform to
the format in Exhibit 6, based on Ap-
pendix I of the August 1, 1973, CEQ
Guidelines, or the latest revision of the
CEQ Guidelines.
§ 6.304 Body of EIS.
The body of the EIS shall identify, de-
velop, and analyze the pertinent Issues
discussed in the seven sections below;
each section need not be a separate
chapter. This analysis should Include,
but not be limited to, consideration of
the Impacts of the proposed project on
the environmental areas listed in Ap-
pendix A which are relevant to the proj-
ect. The EIS shall serve as a means for
the responsible official and the public to
assess the environmental Impacts of a
proposed EPA action, rather than as a
Justification for decisions already made.
It shall be prepared using a systematic,
interdisciplinary approach and shall in-
corporate all relevant analytical dis-
ciplines to provide meaningful and fac-
tual data, information, and analyses.
The presentation of data should be clear
and concise, yet include all facts nec-
essary to permit independent evaluation
and appraisal of the beneficial and ad-
verse environmental effects of alterna-
tive actions. The amount of detail pro-
vided should be commensurate with the
extent and expected impact of the ac-
tion and the amount of information re-
quired at the particular level of decision
making. To the extent possible, an EIS
shall not be drafted In a style which re-
quires extensive scientific or technical
expertise to comprehend and evaluate
the environmental Impact of a proposed
EPA action.
(a) Background and description of the
proposed action. The EIS shall describe
the recommended or proposed action, Its
purpose, whers It Is located and its time
setting. When a decision has been made
not to favor an alternative until public
comments on a proposed action have
been received, the draft EIS may treat
all feasible alternatives at similar levels
of detail; the final EIS should focus on
the alternative the draft EIS and pub-
lic comments indicate is the best. The
relationship of the proposed action to
other projects and proposals directly af-
fected by or stemming from it shall be
discussed, including not only other EPA
activities, but also those of other govern-
mental and private organizations. Land
use patterns and population trends in
the project area and the assumptions on
which they are based also shall be In-
cluded. Available maps, photos, and art-
ists' sketches should be Incorporated
when they help depict the environmen-
tal setting.
(b) Alternatives to the proposed ac-
tion. The EIS shall develop, describe,
and objectively weigh feasible alterna-
tives to any proposed action, including
the options of taking no action or post-
poning action. The analysis should be
detailed enough to show EPA's compara-
tive evaluation of the environmental Im-
pacts, commitments of resources, costs,
and risks of the proposed action and
each feasible alternative. For projects
-------
§ 6.304
TiHe 40—Protection of Environment
involving construction, alternative sites
must be analyzed in enough detail for
reviewers independently to judge the rel-
ative desirability of each site. For alter-
natives involving regionalization, the
effects of varying degrees of regionaliza-
tion should be addressed. If a cost-bene-
fit analysis is prepared, it should be ap-
pended to the EIS and referenced in the
body of the EIS. In addition, the reasons
•why the proposed action is believed by
EPA to be the best course of action shall
be explained.
(c) Environmental impacts of the pro-
posed action. (1) The positive and nega-
tive effects of the proposed action as it
affects both the national and interna-
tional environment should be assessed.
The attention given to different environ-
mental factors will vary according to
the nature, scale, and location of pro-
posed actions. Primary attention should
be given to those factors most evidently
affected by the proposed action. The fac-
tors shall include, where appropriate, the
proposed action's effects on the resource
base, including land, water quality and
quantity, air quality, public services and
energy supply. The EIS shall describe
primary and secondary environmental
impacts, both beneficial and adverse, an-
ticipated from the action. The descrip-
tion shall include short term and long
term impacts on both the natural and
human environments.
(2) Primary impacts are those that
can be attributed directly to the pro-
posed action. If the action is a field ex-
periment, materials introduced into the
environment which might damage cer-
tain plant communities or wildlife species
would be a primary impact. If the action
involves construction of a facility, such
as a sewage treatment works, an office
building or a laboratory, the primary im-
pacts of the action would include the
environmental impacts related to con-
struction and operation of the facility
and land use changes at the facility site.
(3) Secondary impacts are indirect or
induced changes. If the action involves
construction of a facility, the secondary
impacts would include the environmental
impacts related to:
(i) induced changes in the pattern
of land use, population density and re-
lct=d effects on air and water quality
or other natural resources;
(ii) increased growth at a faster rate
than planned for or above the total level
planned by the existing community.
(4) A discussion of how socioeconomio
activities and land use changes related
to the proposed action conform or con-
flict with the goals and objectives of ap-
proved or proposed Federal, regional.
State and local land use plans, policies
and controls for the project area should
be included in the EIS. If a conflict ap-
pears to be unresolved in the EIS, EPA
should explain why it has decided to
proceed without full reconciliation.
(d) Adverse impacts which cannot be
avoided should the proposal be imple-
mented and steps to minimize harm to
the environment. The EIS shall describe
the kinds and magnitudes of adverse
impacts which cannot be reduced in se-
verity or which can be reduced to an ac-
ceptable level but not eliminated. These
may include water or air pollution, un-
desirable land use patterns, damage to
fish and wildlife habitats, urban con-
gestion, threats to human health or other
consequences adverse to the environ-
mental goals in section 101 (b) of KEPA.
Protective and mitigative measures to
be taken as part of the proposed action
shall be identified. These measures to
reduce or compensate for any environ-
mentally detrimental aspect of the pro-
posed action may include those of EPA,
its contractors and grantees and others
involved in the action.
(e) Relationship betwen local short
term uses of man's environment and the
maintenance and enhancement of long
term productivity. The EIS shall de-
scribe the extent to which the proposed
action involves tradeoffs between short
term environmental gains at the expense
of long term gains or vice-versa and the
extent to which the proposed action fore-
closes future options. Special attention
shall be given to effects which narrow
the range of future uses of land and
water resources or pose long term risks
to health or safety. Consideration should
be given to windfall gains or significant
decreases in current property values
from implementing the proposed action.
In addition, the reasons the proposed
action is believed by EPA to be Justified
now, rather than reserving a long term
option for other alternatives, including
no action, shall be explained.
10
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§ 6.402
-------
§ 6.500
Title 40—Protection of Environment
Subpart E—Guidelines for Compliance
With NEPA in the Title II Wastewater
Treatment Works Construction Grants
Program and the Areawide Waste Treat-
ment Management Planning Program
§ 6.500 Purpose.
This sub'part amplifies the general EPA
policies and procedures described in Sub-
parts A through D with detailed proce-
• dures for compliance with NEPA in the
wastewater treatment works construction
grants program and the areawide waste
treatment management planning pro-
gram.
§ 6.502 Definitions.
(a) "Step 1 grant." A grant for prepa-
ration of a facilities plan as described in
§ 35.930-1 of this chapter,
(b) "Step 2 grant." A grant for prepa-
ration of construction drawings and
specifications as described in 5 35.930-1
of this chapter.
(c) "Step 3 grant." A grant for fabri-
cation and building of a publicly owned
treatment works as described In I 35.-
930-1 of this chapter.
§ 6.504 Applicability.
(a) Administrative actions covered.
This subpart applies to the administra-
tive actions listed below:
(1) Approval of all section 208 plans
according to procedures In 8 35.1067-2
of this chapter;
(2) Approval of all facilities plans ex-
cept those listed in paragraph (a) (5) of
this section;
(3) Award of step 2 and step 3 grants,
if an approved facilities plan was not re-
quired;
14) Award of a step 2 or step 3 grant
when either the project or its impact has
changed significantly from that described
in the approved facilities plan, except
when the situation in paragraph (a) (5)
of this section exists;
(5) Consultation during the NEPA re-
view process. When there are overriding
considerations of cost or Impaired pro-
gram effectiveness, the Regional Admin-
istrator may award a step 2 or a step 3
prant for a discrete segment of the proj-
ect plo.ns or construction before the
NEPA review is completed if this project
segment is noncontroverslal. The remain-
ins portion of the project shall be evalu-
ated to determine if an EIS is required. In
applying the criteria for this determina-
tion, the entire project shall be con-
sidered, including those parts permitted
to proceed. In no case may these types of
step 2 or step 3 grants be awarded unless
both the Office of Federal Activities and
CEQ have been consulted, a negative
declaration has been issued on the seg-
ments permitted to proceed, and the
grant award contains a specific agree-
ment prohibiting action on the segment
of planning or construction for which the
NEPA review is not complete. Examples
of consultation during the NEPA review
process are: 4award of a step 2 grant for
preparation of plans and specifications
for a large treatment plant, when the
only unresolved NEPA issue is where to
locate the sludge disposal site; or award
of a step 3 grant for site clearance lor a
large treatment plant, when the unre-
solved NEPA issue is whether sludge from
the plant should be incinerated at the
site or disposed of elsewhere by other
means.
(b) Administrative actions excluded.
The actions listed below are not subject
to the requirements of this part:
(1) Approval of State priority lists;
(2) Award of a step 1 grant;
(3) Award of a section 208 planning
grant;
(4) Award of a step 2 or step 3 grant
when no significant changes in the facil-
ities plan have occurred;
(5) Approval of issuing an Invitation
for bid or awarding a construction con-
tract;
(6) Actual physical commencement of
building or fabrication;
(7) Award of a section 206 grant for re-
imbursement;
(8) Award of grant increases when-
ever § 6.504(a) (4) does not apply;
(9) Awards of training assistance un-
der PWPCA, as amended, section 109(b),
(c> Retroactive application. The new
criteria in § 6.510 of this subpart do not
apply to step 2 or step 3 grants awarded
before July 1,1975. However, the Region-
al Administrator may apply the new cri-
teria of this subpart when he considers it
appropriate. Any negative declarations
Issued before the effective date of this
regulation shall remain in effect.
§ 6.506 Completion of NEPA procedures
before start of administrative actiona.
See § 6.108 and § 6.504.
12
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§6.512
§ 6.510 Criteria for preparation of en-
vironmental impact statements.
In addition to considering the criteria
in § 6.200, the Regional Administrator
shall assure that an EIS will be prepared
on a treatment works facilities plan, 208
plan or other appropriate water quality
management plan when:
(a) The treatment works or plan will
Induce significant changes (either abso-
lute changes or increases in the rate of
change) in industrial, commercial, agri-
cultural, or residential land use concen-
trations or distributions. Factors that
should be considered in determining if
these changes are significant include but
are not limited to: the vacant land sub-
ject to increased development pressure
as a result of the treatment works; the
increases in population which may be
induced; the faster rate of change of
population; changes in population den-
sity; the potential for overloading sew-
age treatment works; the extent to which
landowners may benefit from the areas
subject to increased development; the
nature of land use regulations in the af-
fected area and their potential effects
on development; and deleterious changes
in the availability or demand for energy.
(b) Any major part of the treatment
works will be located on productive wet-
lands or will have significant adverse
effects on wetlands, including secondary
effects.
(c) Any major part of the treatment
works will be located on or significantly
affect the habitat of wildlife on the De-
partment of Interior's threatened and
endangered species lists,
(d) Implementation of the treatment
works or plan may directly cause or in-
duce changes that significantly:
(1) Displace population;
(2) Deface an existing residential
area; or
<3) Adversely affect significant
amounts of prime agricultural land or
agricultural operations on this land.
(e) The treatment works or plan will
have (••Ignificant adverse effects on park-
lands, other public lands or areas of rec-
ognized scenic, recreational, archaeo-
losi:al or historic value.
(f) The works or plan may directly or
through induced development have a
significant adverse effect upon local am-
bient air quality, local ambient noise
levels, surface or groundwater quantity
or quality, fish, wildlife, and their natu-
ral habitats.
fg) The treated effluent is being dis-
charged into a body of water where the
present classification is too lenient or is
being challenged as too low to protect
present or recent uses, and the effluent
will not be of sufficient quality to meet
the requirements of these uses.
§ 6.512 Procedures for implementing
NEPA.
(a) Environmental assessment. An
adequate environmental assessment must
be an integral, though identifiable, part
of any facilities or section 208 plan sub-
mitted to EPA. (See § 6.202 for a general
description.) The information in the fa-
cilities plan, particularly the environ-
mental assessment, will provide the sub-
stance of an EIS and shall be submitted
by the applicant. The analyses that con-
stitute an adequate environmental as-
sessment shall include:
(1) Description of the existing envi-
ronment without the project. This shall
include for the delineated planning area
a description of the present environmen-
tal conditions relevant to the analysis of
alternatives or determinations of the
environmental impacts of the proposed
action. The description shall include, but
not be limited to, discussions of which-
ever areas are applicable to a particular
study: surface and groundwater qual-
ity; water supply and use; general hy-
drology; air quality; noise levels, energy
production and consumption; land use
trends; population projections, wetlands,
floodplains, coastal zones and other en-
vironmentally sensitive areas; historic
and archaeological sites; other related
Federal or State projects in the area; and
plant and animal communities which
may be affected, especially those contain-
ing threatened or endangered species.
(2) Description of the future environ-
ment without the project. The future
environmental conditions with the no
project alternative shall be forecast, cov-
ering the same areas listed in § 6.512
(a)(l).
(3) Documentation, Sources of infor-
mation used to describe the existing en-
vironment and to assess future environ-
mental impacts should be documented.
These sources should include regional,
State and Federal agencies with respon-
sibility or interest in the types of impacts
13
-------
§6.512
Title 40—Protection of Environment
listed in 5 6.512(a) (1). In particular, the
following agencies should be consulted:
(1) Local and regional land use plan-
ning agencies for assessments of land
use trends and population projections,
especially those affecting size, timing,
and location of facilities, and planning
activities funded under section 701 of
the Housing and Community Develop-
ment Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-383);
(ii) The HUD Regional Office if a proj-
ect involves a flood risk area identified
under the Flood Disaster Protection Act
of 1973 (Pub. L. 93-234);
(iii) The State coastal zone manage-
ment agency, if a coastal zone is affected;
(iv) The Secretary of the Interior or
Secretary of Agriculture, if a wild and
scenic river is affected;
(v) The Secretary of the Interior or
Secretary of Commerce, if a threatened
or endangered species is affected;
(vi) The Pish and Wildlife Service
(Department of Interior), the Depart-
ment of Commerce, and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, if a wetland is
affected.
(4) Evaluation of alternatives. This
discussion shall include a comparative
analysis of feasible options and a sys-
tematic development of wastewater
treatment alternatives. The alternatives
shall be screened with respect to capital
and operating costs; significant primary
and secondary environmental effects;
physical, legal or institutional con-
straints; and whether or not they meet
regulatory requirements. Special atten-
tion should be given to long term im-
pacts, irreversible impacts and induced
impacts such as development. The rea-
sons for rejecting any alternatives shall
be presented in addition to any signifi-
cant environmental benefits precluded
by rejection of an alternative. The anal-
ysis should consider, when relevant to
the project:
(1) Flow and waste reduction meas-
ures, including infiltration/Inflow reduc-
tion;
(ii) Alternative locations, capacities,
and construction phasing of facilities;
(ill) Alternative waste management
techniques, includign treatment and dis-
charge, wastewater reuse and land ap-
plication ;
(Iv) Alternative methods for disposal
of sludge and other residual waste, In-
cluding process options and final dis-
posal options;
(v) Improving effluent quality through
more efficient operation and mainte-
nance ;
(vi) For assessments associated with
section 208 plans, the analysis of options
shall include in addition:
(A) Land use and other regulatory
controls, fiscal controls, non-point source
controls, and institutional arrange-
ments; and
(B) Land management practices.
(5) Environmental impacts of the pro-
posed action. Primary and secondary
impacts of the proposed action shall be
described, giving special attention to un-
avoidable impacts, steps to mitigate ad-
verse impacts, any irreversible or irre-
trievable commitments of resources to
the project and the relationship between
local short term uses of the environ-
ment and the maintenance and en-
hancement of long term productivity.
See § 6.304 (c), (d), (e), and (f) for an
explanation of these terms and examples.
The significance of land use impacts
shall be evaluated, based on current
population of the planning area; de-
sign year population for the service area.i
percentage of the service area currently
vacant; and plans for staging facilities.
Special attention should be given to in-
duced changes in population patterns and
growth, particularly if a project involves
some degree of regionalization. In addi-
tion to these items, the Regional Ad-
ministrator ma-' require that other anal-
yses and data, which he determines
are needed to comply with NEPA, be
included with the facilities or section
208 plan. Such requirements should be
discussed during preapplication con-
ferences. The Regional Administrator
also may require submission of supple-
mentary information either before or
after a step 2 grant or before a step
3 grant award if he determines it is
needed for compliance with NEPA. Re-
quests for supplementary Information
shall be made in writing.
(6) Steps to minimize adverse effects.
This section shall describe structural and
nonstructural measures, if any, in the
facilities plan to mitigate or eliminate
significant adverse effects on the human
and natural environments. Structural
provisions include changes in facility de-
sign, size, and location; nonstructural
provisions Include staging facilities as
well as developing and enforcing land
14
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§6.602
use regulations and environmentally
protective regulations.
(b) Public hearing. The applicant shall
hold at least one public hearing before a
facilities plan is adopted, unless waived
by the Regional Administrator before
completion of the facilities plan accord-
ing to 5 35.917-5 of the Title II construc-
tion grants regulations. Hearings should
be held on section 208 plans. A copy of
the environmental assessment should be
available for public review before the
hearing and at the hearing, since these
hearings provide an opportunity to ac-
cept public input on the environmental
issues associated with the facilities plan
or the 208 water quality management
strategy. In addition, a Regional Admin-
istrator may elect to hold an EPA hear-
ing if environmental issues remain un-
resolved. EPA hearings shall be held
according to procedures in § 6.402.
(c) Environmental review. An envi-
ronmental review of a facilities plan or
section 208 plan shall be . conducted
according to the .procedures in § 6.204
and applying the criteria of § 6.510. If
deficiencies exist in the environmental
assessment, they shall be identified in
writing by the Regional Administrator
and must be corrected before the plan
can be approved.
(d) Additional procedures. (1) His-
toric and archaeological sites. If a facil-
ities or section 208 plan may affect prop-
erties with historic, architectural,
archaeological or cultural value which
are 11; ted in or eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places or
may cause irreparable loss or destruction
of significant scientific, prehistoric, his-
toric or archaeological data, the appli-
cant shall follow the procedures In
§6.214(a).
(2) If the facilities or section 208 plan
may affect wetlands, floodplains, coastal
zones, wild and scenic rivers, fish or
wildliff, the Regional Administrator
shall follow the appropriate procedures
described in § 6.214(b).
(e) Notice of intent. The notice cf in-
tent on a facilities plan or section 208
plan shall be issued according to § 6.206.
(f) Scope of EIS. It is the Regional
Administrator's responsibility to deter-
mine the scope of the EIS. He should.
determine if an EIS should be prepared
on a facilities plan(s) or section 208 plan
and which environmental areas should
be discussed in greatest detail in the EIS.
Once an EIS has been prepared for the
designated section 208 area, another
need not be prepared unless the signifi-
cant impacts of individual facilities or
other plan elements were not adequately
treated in the EIS. The Regional Ad-
ministrator should document his decision
not to prepare an EIS on Individual
facilities.
(g) Negative declaration. A negative
declaration on a facilities plan or sec-
tion 208 plan shall be prepared according
to § 6.212. Once a negative declaration
and environmental appraisal have been
prepared for the facilities plan for a cer-
tain area, grant awards may proceed
without preparation of additional nega-
tive declarations, unless the project has
changed significantly from that de-
scribed in the facilities plan.
§ 6.514 Content of environmental im-
pact statements.
EIS's for treatment works or plans
shall be prepared according to § 6.304.
Subpart F—Guidelines for Compliance
With NEPA in Research and Develop-
ment Programs and Activities
§ 6.600 Purpose.
This subpart amplifies the general
EPA policies and procedures described
in Subparts A through D by providing
procedures for compliance with NEPA
on actions undertaken by the Office of
Research and Development (ORD).
§ 6.602 Definitions.
(a) "Work plan." A document which
defines and schedules all projects re-
quired to fulfill the objectives of the
program plan.
(b) "Program plan." An overall plan-
ning document for a major research area
which describes one or more research
objectives, including outputs and target
completion dates, as well as person-year
and dollar resources.
(c) "Appropriate program official."
The official at each decision level within
ORD to whom f he Assistant Administra-
tor delegates responsibility for NEPA
compliance.
(d) "Exempt ion certification." A cer-
tified statemei.t delineating those ac-
tions specifically exempted from NEPA
compliance by existing legislation.
30-130— 75
15
-------
§ 6.604
Title 40—Protection of Environment
§ 6.604 Applicability.
The requirements of this subpart are
applicable to administrative actions
undertaken to approve program plans,
work plans, and projects, except those
plans and projects excluded by existing
legislation. However, no administrative
actions are excluded from the additonal
procedures in § 6.214 of this part con-
cerning historic sites, wetlands, coastal
zones, wild and scenic rivers, floodplains
or fish and wildlife.
§ 6.608 Criteria for determining when
to prepare EIS's.
(a) An EIS shall be prepared by ORD
when any of the criteria in § 6.200 apply
or when:
(1) The action will have significant
adverse impacts on public parks, wet-
lands, floodplains, coastal zones, wildlife
habitats, or areas of recognized scenic
or recreational value.
(2) The action will significantly deface
an existing residential area.
(3) The action may directly or through
induced development have a significant
adverse effect upon local ambient air
quality, local ambient noise levels, sur-
face or groundwater quality; and fish,
wildlife or their natural habitats.
(4) The treated effluent Is being dis-
charged into a body of water where the
present classification is being challenged
as too low to protect present or recent
uses, and the effluent will not be of
sufficient quality to meet the require-
ments of these uses.
(5) The project consists of field tests
involving the Introduction of significant
quantities of: toxic or polluting agricul-
tural chemicals, animal wastes, pesti-
cides, radioactive materials, or other
hazardous substances into the environ-
ment by ORD, its grantees or its con-
tractors,
(6) The action may involve the intro-
duction of species or subspecies not
indigenous to an area.
(7) There is a high probability of an
action ultimately being implemented on
a large scale, and this implementation
may result in significant environmental
impacts.
(8) The project involves commitment
to a new technology which is significant
and may restrict future viable alterna-
tives.
(b) An EIS will not usually be needed
when:
(1) The project is conducted com-
pletely within a laboratory or other fa-
cility, and external environmental effects
have been minimized by methods for
disposal of laboratory wastes and safe-
guards to prevent hazardous materials
entering the environment accidentally;
or
(2) The project is a relatively small
experiment or Investigation that Is part
of a non-Federally funded activity of
the private sector, and It makes no sig-
nificant new or additional contribution
to existing pollution.
§ 6,610 Procedures for compliance with
NEPA.
EIS related activities for compliance
with NEPA will be integrated into the
decision levels of ORD's research plan-
ning system to assure managerial con-
trol. This control includes those adminis-
trative actions which do not come under
the applicability of this subpart by as-
suring that they are made the subject
of an exemption certification and filed
with the Office of Public Affairs (OPA).
ORD's internal procedures provide de-
tails for NEPA compliance.
(a) Environmental assessment. (1)
Environmental assessments shall be sub-
mitted with all grant applications and
all unsolicited contract proposals. The
assessment shall contain the same in-
formation required for EIS's in § 6.304.
Copies of § 6.304 (or more detailed guid-
ance when available) and a notice of the
requirement for assessment shall be in-
cluded In all grant application kits and
attached to letters concerning the sub-
mission of unsolicited proposals.
(2) In the case of competitive con-
tracts, assessments need not be sub-
mitted by potential contractors since the
NEPA procedures must be completed be-
fore a request for proposal (RFP) Is Is-
sued. If there Is a question concerning
the need for an assessment, the poten-
tial contractor should contact the official
responsible for the contract.
(b) Environmental review. (1) At the
start of the planning year, an environ-
mental review will be performed for each
program plan with its supporting sub-
structures (work plans and projects) be-
fore incorporating them into the ORD
program planning system, unless they
16
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§ 6.702
are excluded from review by existing leg-
islation. This review is an evaluation of
the potentially adverse environmental ef-
fects of the efforts required by the pro-
gram plan. The criteria in f 6.608 shall be
used in conducting this review. Each pro-
gram plan with its supporting substruc-
tures which does not have significant ad-
verse Impacts may be dismissed from fur-
ther current year environmental consid-
erations with a single negative declara-
tion. Any supporting substructures of a
program plan which cannot be dismissed
with the parent plan shall be reviewed
at the appropriate subordinate levels of
the planning system for NEPA compli-
ance.
(i) All continuing program plans and
supporting substructures, including those
previously dismissed from consideration,
will be reevaluted annually for NEPA
compliance. An environmental review
will coincide with the annual planning
cycle and whenever a major redirection
of a parent plan is undertaken. All
NEPA-associated documents will be up-
dated as appropriate.
(11) All approved program plans and
supporting substructures, less budgetary
data, will be filed in the OPA with a no-
tice of Intent or negative declaration and
environmental appraisal.
(ill) Later plans and/or projects,
added to fulfill the mission objectives
but not identified at the time the pro-
gram plans were approved, will be sub-
jected to the same NEPA requirements
for environmental assessments and/or
reviews.
(iv) Those projects subjected to en-
vironmental assessments as outlined in
paragraph (a) of this section and not
exempt under existing legislation also
shall undergo an environmental review
before work begins.
(c) Notice of intent and EIS.
(1) If the reviews conducted accord-
ing to paragraph (b) of this section re-
veal a potentially significant adverse
effect on the environment and the ad-
verse impact cannot be eliminated by re-
planning, the appropriate program offi-
cial shall, after making sure the project
is to be funded, issue a notice of intent
according to § 6.206, and through proper
organizational channels, shall request the
Regional Administrator to assist him in
the preparation and distribution of the
EIS.
(.2) As soon as possible after release of
the notice of intent, the appropriate pro-
gram official shall prepare a draft EIS us-
ing the criteria in Subpart B, § 6.208 and
Subpart C. Through proper organiza-
tional channels, he shall request the Re-
gional Administrator to assist him in the
preparation and distribution of the draft
EIS.
(3) The appropriate program official
shall prepare final EIS's according to
criteria in Subpart B, § 6.210 and Sub-
part C.
(4) All draft and final EIS's shall be
sent through the proper organizational
channels to the Assistant Administrator
for ORD for approval. The approved
statements then will be distributed ac-
cording to the procedures in Appendix C.
(d) Negative declaration and environ-
mental impact appraisal. If an environ-
mental review conducted according to
paragraph (b) of this section reveals that
proposed actions will not have significant
adverse environmental impacts, the ap-
propriate program official shall prepare a
negative declaration and environmental
impact appraisal according to Subpart B,
5 6.212. Upon assurance that the program
will be funded, the appropriate program
official shall distribute the negative dec-
laration as described in 16.212 and
make copies of the negative declaration
and appraisal available in the OPA.
(e) Project start. As required by § 6.
108, a contract or grant shall not be
awarded for an extramural project, nor
for continuation of what was previously
an intramural project, until at least
fifteen (15) working days after a nega-
tive declaration has been issued or thirty
(30) days after forwarding the final EIS
to the Council on Environmental Quality.
Subpart G—Guidelines for Compliance
With NEPA In Solid Waste Management
Activities
§ 6.700 Purpose.
This subpart amplifies the general pol-
icies and procedures described in Sub-
parts A through D by providing addi-
tional procedures for compliance with
NEPA on actions undertaken by the Of-
fice of Solid Waste Management Pro-
grams (OS WMF).
§ 6.702 Criteria for the preparation of
environmental assessments and EIS's.
(a) Assessment preparation criteria.
An environmental assessment need not
17
-------
§ 6.704
Title 40—Protection of Environment
be submitted with all grant applications
and contract proposals. Studies and in-
vestigations do not require assessments.
The following sections describe when an
assessment is or is not required for other
actions:
(1) Grants, (i) Demonstration proj-
ects. Environmental assessments must
be submitted with all applications for
demonstration grants that will involve
construction, • land use (temporary or
permanent), transport, sea disposal, any
discharges into the air or water, or any
other activity having any direct or in-
direct effects on the environment ex-
ternal to the facility in which the work
will be conducted. Preapplication pro-
posals for these grants will not require
environmental assessments.
(li) Training. Grant applications for
training of personnel will not require
assessments.
(iii) Plans. Grant applications for the
development of comprehensive State,
interstate, or local solid waste manage-
ment plans will not require environmen-
tal assessments. A detailed analysis of
environmental problems and effects
should be part of the planning process,
however.
(2) Contracts, (i) Sole-source con-
tract proposals. Before a sole-source
contract can be awarded, an environ-
mental assessment must be submitted
with a bid proposal for a contract which
will Involve construction, land use (tem-
porary or permanent), sea disposal, any
discharges into the air or water, or any
other activity that will directly or indi-
rectly affect the environment external
to the facility in which the work will
be performed.
(11) Competitive contract proposals.
Assessments generally will not be re-
quired on competitive contract proposals.
(b) EIS preparation criteria. The re-
sponsible official shall conduct an en-
vironmental review on those OSWMP
projects on which an assesment is re-
quired or which may have effects on the
environment external to th.e facility in
which the work will be performed. The
criteria in § 6.200 shall be utilized in
determining whether an EIS need be
prepared.
§ 6.704 Procedures for compliance with
NEPA.
(a) Environmental assessment. (1)
Environmental assessments shall be sub-
mitted to EPA according to procedures
in. § 6.702. If there is a question concern-
ing the need for an assessment, the po-
tential contractor or grantee should con-
sult with the appropriate project officer
for the grant or contract.
(2) The assessment shall contain the
same sections specified for EIS's in
§ 6.304. Copies of § 6.304 (or more de-
tailed guidance when available) and a
notice alerting potential grantees and
contractors of the assessment require-
ments in § 6.702 shall be included in all
grant application kits, attached to letters
concerning the submission of unsolicited
proposals, and included with all RFP's.
(b) Environmental review. An envi-
ronmental review will be conducted on
all projects which require assessments
or whlrh will affect the environment
external to the facility in which the work
will be performed. This review must be
conducted before a grant or contract
award is made on an extramural project
or before an intramural project begins.
The guidelines in § 6.200 will be used
to determine if the project will have any
significant environmental effects. This
review will Include an evaluation of the
assessment by both the responsible offi-
cial and the appropriate Regional Ad-
ministrator. The Regional Administra-
tor's comments will include his recom-
mendations on the need for an EIS. No
detailed review or documentation is re-
quired on projects for which assessments
are not required and which will not affect
the environment external to a facility.
(c) Notice of intent and EIS. If any
of the criteria in § 6.200 apply, the re-
sponsible official will assure that a notice
of intent and a draft EIS are prepared.
The responsible official may request the
appropriate Regional Administrator to
assist him in the distribution of the
NEPA-associated documents. Distribu-
tion procedures are listed in Appendix C.
(d) Negative declaration and environ-
mental impact appraisal. If the environ-
mental review indicated no significant
environmental impacts, the responsible
official will assure that a negative decla-
ration and environmental appraisal are.
prepared. These documents need not be
prepared for projects not requiring an
environmental review.
(e) The EIS process for the Office of
Solid Waste Management Programs is
shown graphically in Exhibit 7.
18
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§6.810
Subpart H—Guidelines for Compliance
With NEPA in Construction of Special
Purpose Facilities and Facility Renova-
tions
§ 6.800 Purpose.
This subpart amplifies general EPA
policies and procedures described in Sub-
parts A through D by providing detailed
procedures for the preparation of EIS's
oh construction and renovation of spe-
cial purpose facilities.
§ 6.802 Definitions.
(a) Special purpose facility. A build-
ing or space, including land incidental to
its use, which is wholly or predominantly
utilized for the special purpose of an
agency and not generally suitable for
other uses, as determined by the Gen-
eral Services Administration.
(b) Program of requirements, A com-
prehensive document (booklet) describ-
ing program activities to be accomplished
in the new special purpose facility or
improvement. It includes architectural,
mechanical, structural, and space re-
quirements.
(c) Scope of work. A document similar
In content to the program of require-
ments but substantially abbreviated. It Is
usually prepared for small-scale projects.
§ 6.804 Applicability.
(a) Actions covered. These guidelines
apply to all new special purpose facility
construction, activities related to this
construction (e.g., site acquisition and
clearing), and any improvements or
modifications to facilities having poten-
tial environmental effects external to the
facility, including new construction and
Improvements undertaken and funded by
the Facilities Management Branch,
Facilities and Support Services Division,
Office of Administration; by a regional
office; or by a National Environmental
Research Center.
(b) Actions excluded. This subpart
does not apply to those activities of the
Facilities Management Branch, Facili-
ties and Support Services Division, for
which the branch does not have full fis-
cal responsibility for the entire project.
This Includes pilot plant construction,
land acquisition, site clearing and access
road construction where the Facilities
Management Branch's activity is only
supporting a project financed by a pro-
gram office. Responsibility for conslder-
ng the environmental impacts of such
i 'ejects rests with the office managing
and funding the entire project. Other
subparts of this regulation apply depend-
ing on the nature of the project.
§ 6.808 Criteria for the preparation of
environmental assessments and EIS's.
(a) Assessment preparation criteria.
The responsible official shall request an
environmental assessment from a con-
struction contractor or consulting archi-
tect/engineer employed by EPA if he is
involved in the planning, construction or
modification of special purpose facilities
when his activities have potential en-
vironmental effects external to the facil-
ity. Such modifications Include but are
not limited to: facility additions, changes
In central heating systems or wastewater
treatment systems, and land clearing for
access roads and parking lots.
(b) £75 preparation criteria. The re-
sponsible official shall conduct an en-
vironmental review of all actions involv-
ing construction of special purpose
facilities and improvements to these fa-
cilities. The guidelines in § 6.200 shall be
used to determine whether an EIS shall
be prepared.
§ 6.810 Procedures for compliance with
NEPA.
(a) Environmental review and assess-
ment. (1) An environmental review shall
be conducted when the program of re-
quirements or scope of work has been
completed for the construction, improve-
ment, or modification of special purpose
facilities. For special purpose facility
construction, the Chief, Facilities Man-
agement Branch, shall request the assist-
ance of the appropriate program office
and Regional Administrator in the re-
view. For modifications and Improve-
ments, the appropriate responsible
official shall request assistance hi making
the review from other cognizant EPA
offices.
(2) Any assessments requested shall
contain the same sections listed for EIS's
In § 6.304. Contractors and consultants
shall be notified In contractual docu-
ments when an assessmer> must be
prepared.
(b) Notice of intent, EIS, and negative
declaration. The responsible official shall
decide at the completion of the environ-
mental review whether there may be any
19
-------
§ 6.810
Title 40—Protection of Environment
significant environmental Impacts. If
there could be significant environmental
impacts, a notice of intent and an EIS
shall be prepared according to the pro-
cedures in § 6.206. If there may not be
any significant environmental impacts,
a negative declaration and environmental
impact appraisal shall be prepared ac-
cording to the procedures In § 6.212.
(c) Project start. As required by
§ 6.108, a contract shall not be awarded
or construction-related activities begun
until at least fifteen (15) working days
after release of a negative declaration, or
until thirty (30) days after forwarding
the final EIS to the Council on Environ-
mental Quality.
EXHIBIT 1
NOTICE Or INTENT TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM
SUGGESTED FORMAT
2. Proposed EPA action:
(Date)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(Appropriate Office)
(Address, City, State, Zip Code)
To All Interested Government Agencies and
Public Groups:
As required by guidelines for the prepara-
tion of environmental Impact statements
(EJS's), attached Is a notice of Intent to
prepare an EIS for the proposed EPA action
described below:
(Official Project Name
and Number)
(City, State)
If your organization needs additional In-
formation or wishes to participate In the
preparation of the draft EIS, please advise
the (appropriate office, city, State).
Very truly yours,
(Appropriate EPA Official)
(List Federal, State, and local agencies to be
solicited for comment.)
(List public action groups to be solicited for
comment.)
NOTICE or INTENT SUGGESTED FORMAT
NOTICE OF INTENT—ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
1. Project location:
City
County
State
3. Issues Involved:
4. Estimated project costs:
Federal Share (total) $
Contract $ Grant » Other $
Applicant share (if any):
(Name) _ $
Other (specify) --9
Total *
6. Period covered by project:
Start date: - _
(Original date, If project covers
more than one year)
Dates of different project phases:
Approximate end date:.. ....—
6. Estimated application filing date:
EXHIBIT 2
PUBLIC NOTICE AND NEWS RELEASE SUGGESTED
FORMAT
PUBLIC NOTICE
The Environmental Protection Agency
(originating office) (will prepare, will not
prepare, has prepared) a (draft, final) en-
vironmental Impact statement on the follow-
ing project:
(Official Project Name and Number)
(Purpose of Project)
(Project Location, City, County, State)
(Where EIS or negative declaration and en-
vironmental impact appraisal can be
obtained)
This notice is to Implement EFA's policy
of encouraging public participation In the
decision-making process on proposed EPA
actions. Comments on this document may
be submitted to (full address of originating
office).
EXHIBIT 3
• NEGATIVE DECLARATION SUGGESTED FORMAT
(Date)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(Appropriate Office)
(Address, City, State, Zip
COde)
20
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§6.810
To All Interested Government Agencies and B. Summarize Assessment.
Public Groups: 1. Brief description of project:.
*£X$%£^^
(EIS's). an environmental review has been
performed on the proposed EPA action " -
below:
3 Anv probable adverse environmental
(Offlclal Project Name and effecta wnlcn c^ot be avoided:
Number)
(~Potentl~al Agency""" *• Alternatives considered with evaluation
Financial Share) of each: -
(Project Location: City, IIIII""~IIIIIIIIIII""IIIIII"II"IIII
County, State) 5. Relationship between local short-term
uses of man's environment and malnte-
"(OthVr'Funds included)" nance and enhancement of long-term pro-
ductlvlty: .
PROJECT DESCRIPTION, ORIGINATOR, AND
PURPOSE 6. Steps to minimize harm to the environ-
ment:
(Include a map of the project area and a
brief narrative summarizing the growth the 'irX^rirVeVeniblVVnl^VretrievVbTe" corn-
project will serve, the percent of vacant land mltment of resources:
the project will serve, major primary and " • "
secondary Impacts of the project, and the
purpose of the project.) tholr resolution:
The review process did not Indicate sig-
nificant environmental Impacts would re- "9;AVe"n7lercVns"ulTe¥abVu7tne"projVct":"I
suit from the proposed action or significant
adverse Impacts have been eliminated by
making changes In the project. Conse- ""state rYpVesen'tatlve's'nameTIIIIIIIIIII
quently, a preliminary decision not to pre- L^^ representative's name:
pare an EIS has been made. Other-
This action is taken on the basis of a c. Reasons lor "concluding" there" wUl"bV"no
careful review of the engineering report, significant Impacts.
environmental impact assessment, and __
other supporting data, which are on file In (sfgnature Vf
the above office with the environmental 1m- appropriate official)
pact appraisal and are available for public (Date)
scrutiny upon request. Copies of the environ- _ .
mental Impact appraisal will be sent at cost HXHIBIT o
on your request. COVER SHEET FORMAT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
Comments supporting or disagreeing with IMPACT STATEMENTS
this decision may be submitted for consider- (Draft, Final)
atlon by EPA. After evaluating the com- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
menti received, the Agency will make a final _
decision; however, no administrative action IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
will be taken on the project for at least (Describe title of project plan and give
fifteen (15) working days after release of Identifying number)
the negative declaration. Prepared by:
Sincerely, (Responsible Agency Office)
Approved by:
^Appropriate¥pA*6fflclYf) (Responsible Agency Offlclal)
EXHIBIT 4 (Date)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL EXHIBIT 8
SUGGESTED FORMAT SUMMARY SHEET FORMAT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
A. Identify Project. IMPACT STATEMENTS
Name of Applicant; (Check One)
Address: ( ) Draft
Project Number: ( ) Final
21
-------
§ 6.810
Title 40—Protection of Environment
ENV UtO N MENTAL PROTHCTION AGENCT
tRespoiisible Agency Office)
1. Name of action. (Check one)
( ) Administrative action.
( ) Legislative action.
2. Brief description of action Indicating what
States (and counties) are particularly
affected.
3. Summary of environmental Impact and
adverse environmental effects.
4. List alternatives considered.
5. a. vfar draft aUteuwnU) Uat ftU
State, and Uval »6»«"W* Mid
comments have been requested.
b. (for final statements) List *U Federal
Ctmte, and local agencies and other
sources from which written com-
ments have been received.
6. Dates draft statement and final state-
ment made available to Council on En-
vironmental Quality and public.
EXHIBIT 7
FLOWCHART FOR OSWMP
NWIWIII 19* MflMDNINf I' AN ll» I! MQUIMO ON O1WW HMfff
CU
22
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§ 6.810
APPENDIX A
CHECKLIST FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS
Areas to be considered, when appropriate,
during an environmental review Include, but
are not limited to, the Items on this check-
list, based on Appendix II of the CEQ guide-
Hues for the preparation of environmental
Impact statements which appeared in the
FEDERAL. REGISTER August 1, 1973. The classi-
fication of items is not mandatory.
I. Natural environment. Consider the Im-
pacts of a proposed action on air quality,
water supply and quality, soil conservation
and hydrology, fish, and wildlife populations,
fish and wildlife habitats, solid waste dis-
posal, noLsc levels, radiation, and hazardous
substances use and disposal.
II. Land
-------
§6.810
Title 40—Protection of Environment
>4) Advises the Administrator and Deputy
Administrator through the Office or Federal
Activities cu projects or activities within
their respective iueaa or responsibilities which
Involve more than oue EPA office, are con-
troversial, are nationally significant, or
"pioneer" EPA policy, when these projects
have had or should have an EIS prepared on
them.
(gt The OJice o/ Legislation, (I) Provides
the necessary liaison with Congress.
(3) Coordinates the preparation of EIS's
required on reports on legislation originating
outside EPA. (See 5 6.106(d)).
(h) The Office o] Planning and Evaluation.
Coordinates the preparation of EIS's required
on EPA legislative proposals. (See {6.106
(d)).
TI. Responsibilities for Title It Construc-
tion Grants Program (Subpart E). (a) Re-
sponsible official. The responsible official for
EPA actions covered by this subpart Is the
Regional Administrator. The responsibilities
of the Regional Administrator In addition to
those in Appendix B.I. are to:
(1) Assist the Office of Federal Activities
In coordinating the training of personnel In-
volved lu the review and preparation of
NEPA-nssoclated documents.
(2) Require grant applicants and those who
have submitted plans for approval to pro-
vide the information the regional office re-
quires to comply with these guidelines.
(3) Consult with the Office of Federal
Activities concerning works or plans which
significantly affect more than one regional
office, are controversial, are of national sig-
nificance or "pioneer" EPA policy, when
these works have had or should have
had an EIS prepared on them.
(b) Assistant Administrator. The respon-
sibilities of the Office of the Assistant Admin-
istrator, as described In Appendix BI, shall
be assumed by the Assistant Administrator
for Water and Hazardous Materials for EPA
actions covered by this subpart.
(c) Oil and Special Materials Control Divi-
sion, Office of Water Program Operations,
coordinates all activities and responsibilities'
of the Office of Water Program Operations
concerned with preparation and review of
E'3's. This Included providing technical as-
sistance to the Regional Administrators on
EIS's and assisting the Office of Federal Ac-
tivities la coordinating the training of per-
sonnel Involved In the review and preparation
of NEPA-assoclated documents.
(
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§ 6.810
APPENDIX c
DISTIIBUTION AND AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS
I. Negative Declaration, (a) The respon-
sible official shall distribute two copies of
each negative declaration to:
(1) The appropriate Federal, State and
local agencies and to the appropriate State
and areawlde clearinghouses.
(2) The Office of Legislation, the Office of
Public Affairs and the Office of Federal
Activities.
(3) The headquarters EIS coordinator for
the program office originating the document.
When the originating office Is a regional
office and the action Is related to water qual-
ity management, one copy should be for-
warded to the Oil and Special Materials Con-
trol Division, Office of Water Program Oper-
ations.
(b) The responsible official shall distribute
one copy of each negative declaration to:
(1) Local newspapers and other local mass
media.
(2) Interested persons on request. It It Is
not practical to send copies to all Interested
persons, make the document available
through local libraries or post offices, and
notify individuals that this action has been
taken.
(c) The responsible official shall have a
copy of the negative declaration and any doc-
uments supporting the negative declaration
available for public review at the originating
office.
II. Environmental Impact Appraisal, (a)
The responsible official shall have the envi-
ronmental Impact appraisal available when
the negative declaration is distributed and
shall forward one copy to the headquarters
EIS coordinator for the program office origi-
nating the document and to any other Fed-
eral or State agency which requests a copy.
(b) The responsible official shall have a
copy of the environmental Impact appraisal
available for public review at the originating
office and shall provide copies at cost to per-
sons who request them.
in. Notice of Intent, (a) The responsible
official shall forward one copy of the notice
of Intent to:
(1) The appropriate Federal, State and
local agencies and to the appropriate State,
regional and metropolitan clearing houses.
(2) Potentially Interested persons.
(3) The Offices of Federal Activities, Pub-
lic Affairs and Legislation.
(4) The headquarters Grants Administra-
tion Division, Grants Information Brinch.
(9) The headquarters EIS coordinator for
the program office originating the notice.
When the originating office Is a regional office
and the action Is related to water quality
management, one copy should be forwarded
to the Oil and Special Materials Control Di-
vision, Office of Water Program Operations.
IV. Draft EIS's. (a) The responsible official
shall send two copies of the draft ELS to;
(1) The Office of Federal Activities.
(2) The headquarters EIS coordinator for
the program office originating the document.
When the originating office Is a regional of-
fice and the project is related to water qual-
ity management, send two copies to the OU
and Special Materials Control Division, Of-
fice of Water Program Operations.
(b) If none of the above offices requests
any changes within ten (10) working days
after notification, the responsible official
shall:
(1) Send five copies of the draft EIS to
CEQ.
(2) Send two copies of the draft EIS to
the Office of Public Affairs and to the Office
of Legislation.
(3) Send two copies of the draft EIS to
the appropriate offices of reviewing Federal
agencies that have special expertise or juris-
diction by law with respect to any Impacts
involved. CEQ's guidelines (40 CFR 1500.9
and Appendices n and in) list those agencies
to which draft EIS's will be sent for official
review and comment.
(4) Send two copies of the draft EIS to the
appropriate Federal. State, regional and
metropolitan clearinghouses.
(5) Send one copy of the draft EIS to
public libraries In the project area and In-
terested persons. Post offices, city halls or
courthouses may be used as distribution
points If public library facilities are not
available.
(c) The responsible official shall make a
copy of the draft EIS available for public
review at the originating office and at the
Office of Public Affairs.
V. Final EIS. (a) The responsible official
shall distribute the final EIS to the follow-
ing offices, agencies and Interested persons:
(1) Five copies to CEQ.
(2) Two copies to the Office of Public
Affairs. Legislation and Federal Activities.
(3) Two copies to the headquarters EIS
coordinator for the program office originating
the document.
(4) One copy to Federal. State and local
agencies and interested persons who made
substantive comments on the draft EIS or
requested a copy of the final EIS.
(8) One copy to a grant applicant.
(b) The responsible official shall make a
copy of the final EIS available for public
review at the originating office and at the
Office of Public Affairs.
VI. Legislative BIS. Copies of the legisla-
tive EIS shall be distributed by the responsi-
ble official according to the procedures In
section TV(b) of this appendix. In addition,
the responsible official shall send two copies
of the EIS to the Office of Federal Activities
and the EIS coordinator of the originating
office.
25
-------
APPENDIX II
Groundwater Extract from:
Alternative Waste Management Techniques
for Best Practicable Waste Treatment
EPA-430/9-75-013, October 1975
Supplement (February 11, 1976)
-------
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1976
PART IV:
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
ALTERNATIVE WASTE
MANAGEMENT
TECHNIQUES FOR BEST
PRACTICABLE WASTE
TREATMENT
Supplement
-------
6190
NONCES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FBL 482-6]
ALTERNATIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT
TECHNIQUES FOR BEST PRACTICABLE
WASTE TREATMENT
Supplement
Pursuant to Section 304(d) (2) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-500),
the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), gave notice on October 23, 1975
(40 PR 49598) that Alternative Waste
Management Techniques for Best Prac-
ticable Waste Treatment has been pub-
lished in final form. The final report
contains the criteria for best practicable
waste treatment technology and infor-
mation on alternative waste manage-
ment techniques.
The criteria for Best Practicable Waste
Treatment for Alternatives employing
land application techniques and land
utilization practices required that the
ground water resulting from land appli-
cation of wastewater meet the standards
for chemical quality [inorganic chemi-
cals] and pesticides [organic chemicals]
specified in the EPA Manual for Evalu-
ating Public Drinking Water Supplies in
the case of groundwater which poten-
tially can be used for drinking water
supply. In addition to the standards for
chemical quality and pesticides, the
bacteriological standards [microbiologi-
cal contaminants] specified in the EPA
Manual for Evaluating Drinking Water
Supplies were required in the case of
groundwater which is presently being.
used as a drinking water supply. The
pertinent section of the EPA Manual for
Evaluating Public Drinking Water Sup-
plies was included as Appendix D of the
Alternative Waste Management Tech-
niques for Best Practicable Waste Treat-
ment report.
Also specified in the Criteria for Best
Practicable Waste Treatment is that
"any chemical, pesticides, or bacterio-
logical standards for drinking water sup-
ply sources hereafter issued by EPA shall
automatically apply in lieu of the stand-
ards in the EPA Manual for Evaluating
Public Drinking Water Supplies. The
National Interim Primary Drinking
Water Regulations were published in
final form on December 24, 1975.
In consideration of the foregoing,
Chapter n and Appendix D of Alterna-
tive Waste Management Techniques for
Best Practicable Waste Treatment shall
read as follows.
Dated: February 4, 1976.
RUSSELL E. TRAIN,
Administrator.
CHAPTER II
CRITERIA FOR BEST PRACTICABLE WASTE
TREATMENT
Applicants for construction grant fundc
authorized by Section 201 of the Act must
have evaluated alternative waste treatment
management techniques and selected the
technique which will provide for the appli-
cation of best practicable waste treatment
technology. Alternatives must be considered
In three broad broad categories: treatment
and discharge Into navigable waters, land
application and utilization practices, and
reuse of treated wastewater. An alternative
Is "best practicable" If It Is determined
to be cost-effective in accordance with the
prqpedures set forth In 40 CFB Part 35
(Appendix B to this document) and If It
will meet the criteria set forth below.
(A) Alternatives Employing Treatment
and Discharge Into Navigable Waters. Pub-
licly-owned treatment works employing
treatment and discharge Into navigable wa-
ters shall, as a minimum, achieve the degree
of treatment attainable by the application
of secondary treatment as denned in 40 CFB
133 (Appendix C). Requirements for addi-
tional treatment, or alternate management
techniques, will depend on several factors,
Including availability of cost-effective tech-
nology, cost and the specific characteristics
of the affected receiving water body.
(B) Alternatives Employing Land Appli-
cation Techniques and Land Utilization
Practices. Publicly-owned treatment works
employing land application techniques and
land utilization practices which result In a
discharge to navigable waters shall meet the
criteria for treatment and discharge under
Paragraph (A) above.
The ground water resulting from the land
application of wastewater, Including the af-
fected native ground water, shall meet the
following criteria:
Case 1: The ground water can potentially
be used for drinking water supply.
(1) The maximum contaminant levels for
Inorganic chemicals and organic chemicals
specified In the National Interim Primary
Drinking Water Regulations (40 CFB 141)
(Appendix D) for drinking water supply sys-
tems should not be exceeded except as Indi-
cated below (see Note 1).
(2) If the existing concentration of a
parameter exceeds the maximum contami-
nant levels for inorganic chemicals or organic
chemicals, there should not be an Increase
in the concentration of that parameter due
to land application of wastewater.
Case II: The ground water Is used for
drinking water supply.
(1) The criteria for Case I should be met.
(2) The maximum microbiological con-
taminant levels for drinking water supply
systems specified In the National Interim
Primary Drinking Water Regulations (40
CFB 141) (Appendix D) should not be ex-
ceeded in cases where the ground water Is
used without disinfection (see Note 1).
Case III: Uses other than drinking water
supply.
(1) Ground water criteria should be estab-
llshed by the Regional Administrator based
on the present or potential use of the ground
water.
The Regional Administrator In conjunction
with the appropriate State officials and the
grantee shall determine on a site-by-slte
basis the areas In the vicinity of a specific
land application site where the criteria In
Case I, n, and III shall apply. Specifically
determined shall be the monitoring require-
ments appropriate for the project site. This
determination shall be made with the objec-
tive of protecting the ground water for use
as a drinking water supply and/or other
designated uses as appropriate and prevent-
ing Irrevocable damage to ground water. Be-
qulrements shall Include provisions lor mon-
itoring the effect on the native ground water.
(C) Alternatives Employing Reuse. The
total quantity of any pollutant in the effluent
from a reuse-project which Is directly at-
tributable to the effluent from a publicly-
owned treatment works shall not exceed that
which would have been allowed under Par-
agraphs (A) and (B) above.
NoiE'l.—Any amendments of the National
Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations
and any National Revised Primary Drinking
Water Regulations hereafter Issued by EPA
prescribing standards for public water sys-
tem relating to Inorganic chemicals, organic
chemicals or microbiological contamination
shall automatically apply in the same man-
ner as the National Interim Primary Drink-
ing Water Regulations.
APPENDIX D
GROUND WATER REQUIREMENTS
The following- maximum contaminant
levels contained in the National Interim Pri-
mary Drinking Water Regulations (40 CFR
141) are reprinted for convenience and clar-
ity. The National Interim Primary Drinking
Water Regulations were published In final
form In the FEDERAL REGISTER on Decem-
ber 24, 1976. In accordance with the criteria
for best practicable waste treatment, 40 CFH
141 should be consulted In its entirety when
applying the standards contained therein to
wastewater treatment systems -employing
land apppllcatlon techniques and land uti-
lization practices.
Maximum contaminant levels for inoi-
ganic chemicals. The following are the max-
imum levels of Inorganic chemicals other
than fluoride:
Level
(milligrams
Contaminant: per liter)
Arsenic 0.05
Barium l.
Cadmium 0.010
Chromium 0.05
Lead 0.05
Mercury —.. 0.002
Nitrate (as N) ' 10.
Selenium 0. 01
Silver 0.05
The maximum contaminant levels, for
fluoride are:
Temperature
decrees
Fahrenheit'
Degrees Celsius
Level
{milligram.'!
per liter)
53.7 and below 12 apd below 2.4
53.8 to 58.3 12.1 to 14.6 2.2
58.4 to 63.8 14.7 to 17.6 2.0
G3.01070.6 17.7 to 21.4 1.8
70.7 to 79.2 21.5 to 26.2 1.6
79.3 to 00.5 26.3 to 32.6 1.4
i Annual average of tbc maximum daily air tem-
perature.
Maximum contaminant levels for organic
chemicals. The following are the maximum
contaminant levels for organic chemicals:
Level
(milligram
(a) Chlorinated hydrocarbons: per liter)
Endrin (1,2,3,4,10,10-Hexachloro-
6,7 - epoxy - l,4,4a,5,6,7,8,8a-oc-
tahydro-l,4-endo,endo - 6,8-dl-
methano naphthalene) 0.0002
Lindane (1,2,3,4,5,6 - Hexachloro-
cyclohexane, gamma isomer).. 0.004
Methoxychlor (l,l,l-Trichloro-2,
2-bis [p-methoxyphenyl] eth-
ane) i 0.1
Toxaphene (C10H10C18 - Technical
chlorinated camphene, 67 to 69
percent chlorine) i 0.005
(b) Chlorophenoxys:
2,4-D (2,4-Dlchlorophenoxyacetlc
acid) o.l
2,4,5-TP Sllvex (2,4,6-Trichloro-
phenoxyproplonlo acid) 0.01
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 41, NO. 29—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY II, 1976
-------
NOTICES
6191
Maximum microbiological contaminant
level*. The maximum contaminant levels for
collform bacteria, applicable to community
water systems and non-community water
systems, are as follows:
(a) When the membrane niter technique
pursuant to I 141.21 (a) Is used, the number
of collform bacteria shall not exceed any of
the following:
(1) One per 100 mllilllters as the arith-
metic mean of all samples examined per
month pursuant to § 141.21 (b) or (c);
(2) Four per 100 mllilllters livmore than
one sample when less than 20 are examined
per month; or
(3) Four per 100 mllilllters In more than
five percent of the samples when 20 or more
are examined per month.
(b) (1) When 'he fermentation tube
method and 10 mlllillter standard portions
pursuant to § 141.21 (a) are used, collform
bacteria shall not '•-> present In any of the
following:
(1) More than 10 percent of the portions In
any month pursuant to § 141.21 (b) or (c);
(11) Three or more portions In more than
one sample when less than 20 samples are
examined per month; or
(111) Three or more portions In more than
five percent of the samples when 20 or more
samples are examined per month.
(2) When the fermentation tube method
and 100 mlllillter standard portions pursuant
to 5 141,21(a) are used, collform bacteria
shall not be present In any of the following:
(i) More than 60 percent of the portions
In any month pursuant to § 141.21 (b) or
(c);
(11) Five portions In more than one sample
when less than five samples are examined
per month; or
(111) Five portions in more than 20 percent
of the samples when five or more samples
are examined per month.
(c) For community or non-communltjf
systems that are required to sample at a rate-
of less than 4 per month, compliance with
Paragraphs (a), (b) (l),or (2) shall be based
upon sampling during a 3 month period, ex-
cept that, at the discretion of the State.
compliance may be based xipon sampling
during a one-month period.
[FB Doc.76-3932 Filed 2-10-78;8:46 am]
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 41, NO. 29—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1974
-------
APPENDIX III
Guidelines for the Land Disposal of Solid Wastes
40 CFR 241
-------
Port 241 Till* 40—Protection of Environment
PART 241—GUIDELINES FOR THE UNO
DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTES
Subpirt A—Q»n«ral Provisions
Sec.
341.100 Scope.
341.101 Definitions.
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§241.100
Subpart B—Requirement! and Recommended
Procedures
Sec.
241.200 Solid wastes accepted.
241.200-1 Requirement.
241.200-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.200-3 Recommended procedures: Oper-
ations.
241.201 Solid wastes excluded.
241.201-1 Requirement.
241.201-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.201-3 Recommended procedures: Oper-
ations.
241.202 Site selection.
241.202-1 Requirement.
241.202-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.202-3 Recommended procedures: Oper-
ations.
241.203 Design.
241.203-1 Requirement.
241.203-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.203-3 Recommended procedures: Oper-
ations.
241.204 Water quality.
241.204-1 Requirement.
241.204-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.204-3 Recommended procedures: Oper-
ations.
241.205 Air quality.
241.206-1 Requirement.
241.205-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.205-3 Recommended procedures: Opera-
tions.
241.206 Oas control.
241.206-1 Requirement.
241.206-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.206-3 Recommended procedures: Opera-
tions.
241.207 Vectors.
241.207-1 Requirement.
241.207-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.207-3 Recommended procedures: Opera-
tions.
241.208 Aesthetics.
241.208-1 Requirement.
241.208-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.208-3 Recommended procedures: Opera-
tions.
241.209 Cover material.
241.209-1 Requirement.
241.209-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.209-3 Recommended procedures: Opera-
tions.
241.210 Compaction.
241.210-1 Requirement.
241.210-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.210-3 Recommended procedures: Oper-
ations.
241.211 Safety.
Sec.
241.211-1 Requirement.
241.211-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241211-3 Recommended procedures: Oper-
ations.
241.212 Records.
241.212-1 Requirement.
241.212-2 Recommended procedures: De-
sign.
241.212-3 Recommended procedures: Oper-
ations.
APPENDIX—Recommended Bibliography.
AUTHORITY: Sec. 209(a) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act of 1965 (Pub. L. 89-272) as
amended by the Resource Recovery Act of
1970 (Pub. L. 91-612).
SOURCE: 39 FR 29333, Aug. 14, 1974, unless
otherwise noted.
Subpart A—General Provisions
§241.100 Scope.
(a) The guidelines are generally ap-
plicable to the land disposal of all solid
waste materials. However, the guide-
lines do not apply to hazardous, agricul-
tural, and mining wastes because of the
lack of sufficient information upon
which to base recommended procedures.
Concerning the specific practice of land
disposal of milled solid wastes, EPA
guidance is contained in a position state-
ment issued in November 1972.
(b) The requirement sections con-
tained herein delineate minimum levels
of performance required of any solid
waste land disposal site operation. The
recommended procedures sections are
presented to suggest preferred methods
by which the objectives of the require-
ments can be realized.1 The recom-
mended procedures are based on the
practice of sanitary landfllling municipal
solid waste: Normally, residential,. and
commercial solid waste generated within
a community. Sanitary landfllling is the
most widely applied environmentally ac-
ceptable land disposal method. If tech-
niques other than the recommended pro-
cedures are used, or wastes other than
municipal solid wastes are disposed, it is
the obligation of the proposed facility's
owner and operator to demonstrate to
the responsible agency in advance by
means of engineering calculations and
data that the techniques employed will
satisfy the requirements.
1 Further guidance may be found la the
EPA publication, "Sanitary Landfill Design
and Operation," which served as a basis
for the development of these guidelines.
-------
$241.101
Title 40—Protection of Environment
(c) Pursuant to section 211 of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended.
these guidelines are mandatory for Fed-
eral agencies. In addition, they are rec-
ommended to State, interstate, regional,
and local government agencies for use in
their activities.
(d) These guidelines are intended to
provide for environmentally acceptable
land disposal site operations. The guide-
lines do not establish new standards but
set forth requirements and recommended
procedures to ensure that the design,
construction, and operation of both ex-
isting and future land disposal sites meet
the health and environmental standards
for the area in which they are located.
The guidelines are intended to apply
equally to all solid waste generated by
Federal agencies, regardless of whether
processed or disposed of on or off Fed-
eral property; and solid waste generated
by non-Federal entities, but processed or
disposed of on Federal property; How-
ever, in the case of many Federal facili-
ties such as Post Offices, military re-
cruiting stations, and other offices, local
community solid waste processing and
disposal facilities are utilized, and proc-
essing and disposal is not within the
management control of the Federal
agency. Thus, implementation of the
guidelines can be expected only in those
situations where the Federal agency is
able to exercise direct management con-
trol over the processing and disposal op-
erations. However, every effort must be
made by the responsible agency, where
offsite facilities arc utilized, to attain
processing: and disposal facilities that
are in compliance with the guidelines.
Where non-Federal generated solid
waste is processed and disposed of on
Federal land and/or facilities, those fa-
cilities and/or sites must be in compli-
ance with these guidelines. Determina-
tion of compliance to meet the require-
ments of the guidelines rests with the
responsible agency, and they have the
authority to determine how such com-
pliance may occur.
(39 FR 29333, Aug. 14, 1974; 40 FR 5159,
Feb.4,1975]
§241.101 Definitions.
As used in these guidelines:,
(a) "Cell" means compacted solid
wastes that are enclosed by natural soil
or cover material in a land disposal site.
(b) "Cover material" means soil or
other suitable material that is used to
cover compacted solid wastes in a land
disposal site.
ic) "Daily cover" means cover mate-
rial that is spread and compacted on the
top and side slopes of compacted solid
waste at least at the end of each oper-
ating day in order to control vectors, flre,
moisture, and erosion and to assure as
aesthetic appearance.
?d) "Final cover" means cover mate-
rial that serves the same functions as
daily cover but, in addition, may be per-
manently exposed on the surface.
(e) "Free moisture" means liquid that
will drain freely by gravity from solid
materials.
(f) "Groundwater" means water pres-
ent in the saturated zone of an aquifer.
(g) "Hazardous wastes" means any
waste or combination of wastes which
pose a substantial present or potential
hazard to human health or living orga-
nisms because such wastes are nonde-
gradable or persistent in nature or be-
cause they can be biologically magnified,
or because they can be lethal, or because
they may otherwise cause or tend to
cause detrimental cumulative effects.
(h) "Infectious waste" means: (1)
Equipment, instruments, utensils, and
fomites of a disposable nature from the
rooms of patients who are suspected to
have or have been diagnosed as having a
communicable disease and must, there-
fore, be isolated as required by public
health agencies; (2) laboratory wastes,
such as pathological specimens (e.g. all
tissues, specimens of blood elements, ex-
creta, and secretions obtained from pa-
tients or laboratory animals) and dis-
posable fomites (any substance that may
harbor or transmit pathogenic orga-
nisms > attendant thereto; (3) surgical
operating room pathologic specimens
and disposable fomites attendant thereto
and similar disposable materials from
outpatient areas and emergency rooms.
(1) "Intermediate cover" means cover
material that serves the same functions
as dally cover, but must resist erosion
for a longer period of time, because it is
applied on areas where additional cells
are not to be constructed for extended
periods of time.
(j) "Leachate" means liquid that has
percolated through solid waste and has
extracted dissolved or suspended mate-
rials from It.
(k) "Municipal solid wastes" means
normally, residential, and commercial
solid waste generated within a com-
munity.
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency §241.200-3
(1) "Open burning" means burning of
solid wastes in the open, such as in an
open dump.
(m) "Open dump" means a land dis-
posal site at which solid wastes are dis-
posed of in a manner that does not pro-
tect the environment, is susceptible to
open burning, and is exposed to the ele-
ments, vectors, and scavengers.
(n) "Plans" means reports and draw-
ings, including a narrative operating de-
scription, prepared to describe the land
disposal site and its proposed operation.
(o) "Residue" means all the solids that
remain after completion of thermal proc-
essing, including bottom ash, fly ash, and
grate sittings.
(p) "Responsible agency" means the
organizational element that has the legal
duty to ensure that owners, operators or
users of land disposal sites comply with
these guidelines.
-------
§241.201
Title 40—Protection of Environment
wastes and covered immediately. In the
absence of applicable State laws, large
carcasses should be placed in a pit and
provided with a cover of compacted soil
or other suitable material to encourage
runoff of precipitation.
Water treatment plant sludges
containing no free moisture and digested
or heat treated waste water treatment
plant sludges containing no free moisture
should be placed on the working face
along with municipal solid wastes and
covered with soil or municipal solid
wastes. The quantities accepted should be
determined by operational problems en-
countered at the working face.
Incinerator and air pollution con-
trol residues containing no free moisture
should be incorporated into the working
face and covered at such intervals as
necessary to prevent them from becom-
ing airborne.
§ 211.201 Solid Huslci excluded.
§2(1.201-1 Requirement.
Using information supplied by the
waste genera tor/'owner, the responsible
agency and the disposal site owner/oper-
ator shall jointly determine specific
wastes to be excluded and shall identify
them in the plans. The generator/owner
of excluded wastes shall consult with the
responsible agency in determining an
alternative method of disposal for ex-
cluded wastes. The criteria used in con-
sidering whether a waste is unacceptable
shall include the hydrogeology of the site,
the chemical and biological character-
istics of the waste, alternative methods
available, environmental and health
effects, and the safety of personnel.
Disposal of pesticides and pesticide con-
tainers shall be consistent with the Fed-
eral Environmental Pesticides Control
Act of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-516) and recom-
mended procedures and. regulations pro-
mulgated thereunder.
§ 241.201—2 Recommended procedures:
Design.
Under certain circumstances it may be
necessary to accept special wastes at land
disposal sites. The following special
wastes require specific approval of
the responsible agency for accept-
ance at the site: Hazardous wastes,
Infectious institutional wastes, bulk
liquids and semi-liquids, sludges contain-
ing free moisture, highly flammable or
volatile substances, raw animal manure,
septic tank pumpings, raw sewage sludge,
and certain industrial process wastes.
Where the use of the disposal site for
such wastes is planned, a special assess-
ment is required of the following items:
The site characteristics, nature and
quantities of the waste, and special de-
sign and operations precautions to be
implemented to insure environmentally
safe disposal.
§ 241.201—3 Recommended procedures:
Operations.
Regular users of the land disposal site
should be provided with a list of the
materials to be excluded. The list should
also be displayed prominently at the site
entrance. If a regular user persists in
making unacceptable deliveries, he
should be barred from the site and re-
ported to the responsible agency.
§ 241.202 Site selection.
§ 241.202—1 Requirement.
Site selection and utilization shall be
consistent with public health and wel-
fare, and air and water quality Standards
and adaptable to appropriate land-use
plan.
§ 241.202-2 Recommended procedures:
Design.
(a) The hydrogeology of the site should
be evaluated in order to design site de-
velopment in a manner to protect or
minimize the impact on groundwater re-
sources Unacceptable hydrogeologic con-
ditions may be altered to render the site
acceptable, but all alterations should be
detailed in the plans. Precipitation, evap-
otransplration, and other cllmltological
conditions should be considered in site
selection and design.
(b) Characteristics of on-slte soil
should be evaluated with respect to their
effects on site operations, such as vehicle
maneuverability and use as cover ma-
terial.
(c) Environmental factors, climato-
logical conditions, and socioeconomlc
factors should be given full consideration
as selection criteria.
(d) The site should be accessible to
vehicles which the site is designed to
serve by all-weather roads leading from
the public road system; temporary roads
should be provided as needed to deliver
wastes to the working face.
(e) The site should not be located in
an area where the attraction of birds
would pose a hazard to low-flying air-
craft.
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency §241.204-2
§ 241.202—3 llrroiiimcndcd procedures:
Operations.
Not Applicable.
§241.203 Design
§ 241.203-1 Requirement.
Plans for the design, construction, and
operation of new sites or modifications
to existing sites shall be prepared or ap-
proved by a professional engineer. The
plans shall be submitted to the respon-
sible agency for review and, if warranted,
approval.
§241.203-2 Recommended procedures:
Design.
fa) The types and quantities of all
solid wastes expected to be disposed of
at the facility should be determined by
survey and analysis to form a basis for
design.
(b) Site development plans should be
prepared or approved by a professional
engineer and should Include: The vari-
ous design factors addressed elsewhere
in the guidelines, as well as:
(1) Initial and final topographies at
contour intervals of 5 feet or less.
(2) Land use and zoning within one-
quarter mile of the site including loca-
tion of all residents, buildings, wells,
water courses, arroyos, rock outcrop-
pings, roads, and soil or rock borings.
All airports within the vicinity of the site
should be identified to aid in assessing
the potential hazard of birds to aircraft.
(3) Location of all utilities within 500
feet of the site.
(4) Employee convenience and equip-
ment maintenance facilities.
(5) Narrative descriptions, with asso-
ciated drawings, indicating site develop-
ment and operation procedures.
(c) Plans should describe the pro-
jected use of the completed land disposal
site. In addition to maintenance pro-
grams and provisions, where necessary,
for monitoring and controlling decom-
position gases and leachate, the plans
should address the following ultimate
use criteria:
(1) Cultivated area. The major con-
cern if the completed site is to be culti-
vated is that the integrity of the final
cover not be disturbed by agricultural
cultivation activities. In this regard, a
sufficient depth of cover.material to al-
low cultivation and to support vegeta-
tion should be applied in addition to
that recommended for final cover.
(2) Structures. It is not recommended
practice to construct, major structures on
a completed land disposal site. If major
structures are to be built near a com-
pleted land disposal site, a professional
engineer should approve their design and
construction including provision for pro-
tection against potential hazards of solid
waste decomposition gases.
§ 241.203-3 Recommended procedures:
Operations.
Not applicable.
§ 241.204 Water quality.
§ 241.204-1 Requirement.
The location, design, construction, and
operation of the land disposal site shall
conform to the most stringent of appli-
cable water quality standards estab-
lished in accordance with or effective
under the provisions of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, as amend-
ed. In the absence of such standards,
the land disposal site shall be located.
designed, constructed and operated in
such a manner as to provide adequate
protection to ground and surface waters
used as drinking water supplies.
§ 241.204—2 Recommended procedures:
Design.
(a) Plans should include:
(1) Current and projected use of
water resources in the potential zone of
influence of the land disposal site.
(2) Groundwater elevation and move-
ment and proposed separation between
the lowest point of the lowest cell and
the predicted maximum water table ele-
vation.
(3) Potential interrelationship of the
land disposal site, local aquifers, and
surface waters based on historical rec-
ords or other sources of information.
(4) Background and initial quality of
water resources in the potential zone of
influence of the land disposal site.
(5) Proposed location of observation
wells, sampling stations, and testing
program planned, when appropriate.
(6) Description of soil and other geo-
logic material to a depth adequate to
allow evaluation of the water quality
protection provided by the soil and other
geologic material.
(7) Provision for surface water runoff
control to minimize infiltration and ero-
sion of cover material.
(8) Potential of leachate generation
and proposed control systems, where nee-
-------
§241.204-3
Title 40—Protection of Environment
essary, for the protection of ground and
surface water resources.
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency §241.210-3
§ 2 11.2011-2 H Salvage operations should be con-
ducted in such a manner as to not de-
tract from the appearance of the land
disposal site. Salvaged material should
be removed from the land disposal site
frequently enough to maintain aesthetic
acceptability.
§211.209 Cover material.
§241.209-1 Requirement.
Cover material shall be applied as nec-
essary to minimize flre hazards, infiltra-
tion of precipitation, odors, and blowing
litter; control gas venting and vectors;
discourage scavenging; and provide a
pleasing appearance.
§ 241.209-2 Recommended procedures:
Design.
Plans should specify:
. (a) Cover material sources and soil
classifications (Unified Soil Classifica-
tion System or U.S. Department of Agri-
culture Classification System).
(b) Surface grades and side slopes
needed to promote maximum runoff,
without excessive erosion, to minimize
Infiltration.
(c) Procedures to promote vegetative
growth as promptly as possible to combat
erosion and improve appearance of Idle
and completed areas.
(d) Procedures to maintain cover ma-
terial integrity, e.g., regarding and re-
covering.
§ 241.209-3 Recommended procedures:
Operations.
(a) Daily cover should be applied re-
gardless of weather; sources of cover
material should, therefore, be accessible
on all operating days. The thickness of
the compacted daily cover should not be
less than 6 inches.
(b) Intermediate cover should be ap-
plied on areas where additional cells are
not to be constructed for extended pe-
riods of time; normally, one week to one
year. The thickness of the compacted in-
termediate cover should not be less than
1 foot.
(c) Final cover should be applied on
each area as it is completed or if the area
is to remain idle for over one year. The
thickness of the compacted final cover
should not be less than. 2 feet.
§ 241.210 Compaction,
§ 241.210-1 Requirement.
In order to conserve land disposal site
capacity, thereby preserving land re-
sources, and to minimize moisture in-
filtration and settlement, municipal solid
waste and cover material shall be com-
pacted to the smallest practicable
volume.
§241.210-2 Recommended procedures:
Design.
(a) Arrangements should be made and
indicated in the plans whereby substitute
equipment will be available to provide
uninterrupted service during routine
equipment maintenance periods or equip-
ment breakdowns.
(b) An equipment maintenance facil-
ity should be provided onslte, or appro-
priate contract arrangements should be
made to receive such service.
(c) Equipment manuals, catalogs, and
spare parts lists should be compiled and
readily available onsite.
§ 241.210—3 Recommended procedures:
Operations.
(a) Municipal solid waste handling
equipment should on any operating day
be capable of performing the following
functions:
(1) Spread the solid waste accepted in
layers no more than 2 feet thick while
confining It to the smallest practicable
area;
40-S24 0—75 20
-------
§541.711
Title 40—Protection of Environment
<2> Compact the spread solid wastes
U> Hie .smallest practicable volume (sev-
eral such compacted layers will form a
cell); and
(3) Place, spread, and compact the
cover material .over the cell at least by
the end of each day's operation.
(b) A preventive maintenance pro-
gram should be employed to maintain
equipment in operating order.
(c) An operating manual describing
the various tasks that must be performed
during a typical shift should be available
to employees for reference.
§241.211 Safely.
§241.211-1 Requirement.
The land disposal site shall be de-
signed, constructed, and operated in such
a manner as to protect the health and
safety of personnel associated with the
operation. Pertinent provisions of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970 (Pub. L. 91-596) and regula-
tion promulgated thereunder shall apply.
§245.211—2 Recommended procedures:
Desipn.
A manual describing safety precau-
tions and procedures to be employed
should be developed.
§ 241.211—3 Recommended procedures:
Operations.
(a) A safety manual should be avail-
able for use by employees, and they
should be instructed in application of its
procedures,
Provisions should be made to ex-
tinguish any flres in wastes being deliv-
ered to the site or which occur at the
working face or within equipment or
personnel facilities.
Communications equipment should
be available on site for emergency
situations.
(f) Scavenging should be prohibited at
all times to avoid injury and to prevent
interference with site operations.
(g) Access to the site should be con-
trolled and should be by established
roiidways only. The site should be ac-
cessible only when operating personnel
are on duty. Large containers may be
placed at the site entrance so that users
can conveniently deposit waste after
hours. The containers and the areas
around them should be maintained in a
sanitary and litter-free condition.
(h) Traffic signs or markers should be
provided to promote an orderly traffic
pattern to and from the discharge area,
maintain efficient operating conditions,
and, if necessary, restrict access to haz-
ardous areas. Drivers of manually dis-
charging vehicles should not hinder
operation of mechanically discharging
vehicles. Vehicles should not be left un-
attended at the working face or along
traffic routes. If a regular user persist-
ently poses a safety hazard, he should
be barred from the site and reported to
the responsible agency.
§ 241.212 Records.
§ 241.212-1 Requirement.
The owner/operator of the land dis-
posal site shall maintain records and
monitoring data to be provided, as re-
quired, to the responsible agency.
§ 241.212—2 Recommended procedures:
Design.
Where appropriate, plans should pre-
scribe methods to be used in maintaining
records and monitoring the environmen-
tal impact of the land disposal site. In-
formation on recording and monitoring
requirements should be obtained from
the responsible agency.
§241.212—3 Recommended procedures:
Operations.
(a) Records should be maintained
covering at least the following:
(1) Major operational problems, com-
plaints, or difficulties.
(2) Qualitative and quantitative eval-
uation of the environmental Impact of
the land disposal site, with regard to the
effectiveness of gas and leachate control,
including results of: (i) Leachate sam-
pling and analyses; (ii) gas sampling
and analyses; (Hi) ground and surface
water quality sampling and analyses'up-
stream and downstream of the site.
(3) Vector control efforts.
(4) Dust and litter control efforts.
(5) Quantitative measurements of the
solid wastes handled. This should be ac-
complished through routine or periodic
utilization of scales and topographic sur-
veys of the site.
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§401.10
(6) Description of solid waste mate-
rials received, identified by source of
materials.
Upon completion of the site, a de-
tailed description, including a plat,
should be recorded with the area's land
recording authority. The description
should include general types and loca-
tions of wastes, depth, of fill, and other
information of interest to potential
landowners.
APPENDIX—RECOMMENDED BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Banta. J., ET AL. Sanitary landfill; man-
ual of engineering practices, No. 39. American
Society of Civil Engineers, 1959.
2. Black. C. A., D. D. Evans, J. L. White,
L. E. Ensmlnger, P. E. Clark, and R. C. Dl-
nauer. EDS. Methods of soil analysis. Pt. 1.
Physical and mlueraloglcal properties. In-
cluding statistics of measurement and sam-
pling. Madison. Wls., American Society of
Agronomy, Inc., 1905.
3. Black, R. J. Sanitary landfill ... an an-
swer to a community problem: a route to a
community asset. Public Health Service
Publication No. 1012. Washington, U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1970. (8 p.].
4. BJornson. B. P., H. D. Pratt, and K. S.
Lltttg. Control of domestic rats It mice. Pub-
lic Health Service Publication No. 563. Wash-
ington, U.S. Government Printing Office,
1950. Revised 1960, 1988. Reprinted [Bureau
of Solid Waste Management| 1970. 41 p.
5. Brashares. W. C.. and H M. Golden. Oc-
cupational Safety and Health Act. Special
bulletin. Washington. National Solid Wastes
Management Association, 1972.
6. Brunner, D. B., S. J. Hubbard, D. J. Kel-
ler, and J. L. Newton. Closing open dumps.
Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office.
1871. IB p. Reprinted 1972.
7. Brunner, D. R., and D. J. Keller, Sani-
tary landfill design and operation. Washing-
ton, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972.
59 p.
8. Sorg, T. J., and H. L. Hlckman, Jr. Sani-
tary landfill facts. 2d ed. Public Health Serv-
ice Publication No. 1792. Washington, U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1970. 30 p. Re-
printed 1971.
9. Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970; Public Law 91-696, 91st Cong., S. 2193,
Dec. 29, 1970. Washington, U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1970.
10. The Solid Waste Disposal Act as
amended; Title II of Public Law 89-272,
89th Cong., S. 306, Oct. 20, 1965; Public Law
91-512, 91st Cong., H.R. 11833, Oct. 26, 1970.
Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office,
1971. 14 p. Reprinted 1972.
11. Zausner, E. R. An accounting system
for sanitary landfill operations. Public
Health Service Publication No. 2007. Wash-
ington, U.S. Government- Printing Office.
1969. 18 p.
12. Federal Environment Pesticides Con-
trol Act of 1972; Public Law 92-516, 92d
Cong., H.R. 10729, Oct. 21, 1972. Washington,
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972.
13. Handbook: of chemistry and physics.
54th ed., Cleveland, CRC Press, Inc., 1973.
10
-------
APPENDIX IV
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources;
Subpart 0 - Standards of Performance for
Sewage Treatment Plants
40 CFR 60.150
and proposed amendment
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
Part 60
PART 60—STANDARDS OF PERFORM-
ANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY
SOURCES
Subpart A—General Provisions
See.
GO.i Applicability.
00,2 Definitions.
60.:) Abbreviations.
GO.4 Address.
60.S Determination of construction or
modification.
60.6 Review of plans.
60.7 Notification and recordkeeplng.
60.8 Performance tests.
60.9 Availability of Information.
60.10 State authority.
60.11 Compliance with standards and
maintenance requirements.
60.12 Circumvention.
Subparts B-C [Reserved]
Subpart D—Standards of Performance for
Fossil Fuel-Fired Steam Generators
60.40 Applicability and designation, of af-
fected facility.
60.41 Definitions.
60.42 Standard for participate matter.
60.43 Standard for sulfur dioxide.
60.44 Standard for nitrogen oxides.
60.45 Emission and fuel monitoring.
60.46 Test methods and procedures.
Subpart E—Standards of Performance for
Incinerators
60.50 Applicability and designation of af-
fected facility.
60.61 Definitions.
60.52 Standard for participate matter.
60.!i3 Monitoring of operations.
60.54 Test methods and procedures.
Subpart F— Standardi of Performance for
Portland Cement Plantt
60,60 Applicability and designation of
affected facility.
60.61 Definitions.
60.62 Standard for participate matter.
60.63 Monitoring of operations.
60.64 Test methods and procedures.
Subpart G—Standards of Performance for Nitric
Add Planli
60.70 Applicability and designation of af-
fected facility.
60.71 Definitions.
60.73 Standard for nitrogen oxides.
60.73 Emission monitoring.
60.74 Test methods and procedures.
Subpart H—Slandardi of Performance for Sulfurlc
Acid Planti
60.80 Applicability and designation of af-
fected faculty.
60.81 Definitions.
60.82 Standard for sulfur dioxide.
60.83 Standard for acid mist.
60.84 Emission monitoring.
60,85 Test methods and procedures.
Subpart I—Standards of Performance for Asphalt
Concrete Plants
Sec.
60.90 Applicability and designation of af-
fected facility.
60.91 Definitions.
60.92 Standard for participate matter.
60.93 Test methods and procedures.
Subpart J—Standards of Performance for
Petroleum Refineries
60.100 Applicability and designation of af-
fected facility.
60.101 Definitions.
60.102 Standard for paniculate matter.
$0.103 Standard for carbon monoxide.
60.104 Standard for sulfur dioxide.
60.105 Emission monitoring.
60.106 Test methods and procedures.
Subpart K—Standards of Performance for Storage
Vessels for Petroleum Liquids
60.110 Applicability and designation of
affected facility.
60.111 Definitions.
60.112 Standard for hydrocarbons.
60.113 Monitoring of operations.
Subpart L—Standards of Performance for
Secondary Lead Smelters
60.120 Applicability and designation of
affected facility.
60.121 Definitions.
60.122 Standard for partlculate matter.
60.123 Test methods and procedures.
Subpart M—Standards of Performance for Sec-
ondary Brass and Bronze Ingot Production Plants
60.130 Applicability and designation of
affected facility.
60.131 Definitions.
60.132 Standard for partlculate matter.
60.133 Test methods and procedures-.
Subpart N—Standards of Performance for Iron
and Steel Plants
60.140 Applicability and designation of
affected facility.
60.141 Definitions.
60.142 Standard for partlculate matter.
60.143 [Reserved]
60.144 Test methods and procedures.
Subpart 0—Standards of Performance for
Sewage Treatment Plants
60.160 Applicability and 'designation of
affected' facility,
60.151 Definitions.
60.152 Standard for partlculate matter.
60.153 Monitoring of operations.
60.154 Test methods and procedures.
Appendix A—Reference Methods
AtTTHORrrTi Sees. 111. 114, Pub. L. 91-604
(42 U.S.O. 1857(c)(6) and (9)).
SOURCE: The provisions of this Part 80 Ap-
pear at 38 F.R. 24877, Deo. 23, 1971, unless
otherwise noted.
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§60.154
Subpart O—Standards of Performance for
Sewage Treatment Plants
SOURCE: 39 FR 9319, Mar. 8, 1974, unless
otherwise noted.
§60.130 Applicuhility and designation
of nlTcclcd facility.
The affected facility to which the pro-
visions of this subpart apply is each
incinerator which burns the sludge pro-
duced by municipal sewage treatment
facilities.
§ f.0.1 31 Definitions.
As used in this subpart, all terms not
defined herein shall have the meaning
given them in the Act and in subpart A
of this' part...
§ 60.132 Stnndnrd for paniculate mat-
ter. ;
(a) tin and after the date on which the
performance test required to be con-
ducted by §'60.8 is completed, no owner
or operator of any sewage sludge incin-
erator subject to the provisions of this
subpart shall discharge or cause the dis-
chfvree into the atmosphere of:
d) Paiticulate matter at a rate in ex-
cess of 0.65 g/kg dry sludge input (1.30
Ita/ton,dry sludge input).
(2) Any gases which exihibit 20 per-
cent opacity" or greater. Where the pres-
ence of uncombined water is the only
reason'for failure to meet the require-
ments -of this paraeraph, such failure
shall not be a violation of this section,
§ 60.153 Mcnitorinj; of operations.
The ov.Tier or operator of any
sludge Incinerator subject to the provl-
sioiis of this subpart shall:
(.11 Install, calibrate, maintain, and
operata a flow measuring device which
can be ufcd'to determine either the mnss
or volume of sludge Charged to the incin-
erator, The flow measuring device shall
have an acruracy of ±5 percent over its
operating range.
(2) Provide access to the sludge
charged so that a well-mixed represen-
tative grab sample of the sludge can be
obtained.
§60.15-1 Test methods and procedures.
(a) The reference methods appended
to this part, except as provided for in
§60.8(b), shall be used to determine
compliance with the standards pre-
scribed in § 60.152 as follows:
(1) Method 5 for concentration of
particulate matter and associated mois-
ture content,
(2) Method 1 for sample and velocity
traverses,
(3) Method 2 for volumetric flow rate,
and
(4) Method 3 for gas analysis.
(b) For Method 5, the sampling time
for each run shall be at least 60 min-
utes and the'sampling rate shall be at
least 0.015 dscm/min (0.53 dscf/min),
except that shorter sampling times,
when necessitated by process variables
or other factors, may be approved by the
Administrator.
(c) Dry sludge charging rate shall be
determined as follows:
(1) Determine the mass (S.«) or vol-
ume (Sv) of sludge charged to the in-
cinerator during each run using a flow
measuring device meeting the require-
ments of §60.153(a)(l). If total input
during a run is measured by a flow meas-
uring device, such readings shall be used.
Otherwise, record the flow measuring de-
vice readings at 5-minute intervals dur-
ing a run. Determine the quantity
charged during each interval by averag-
ing the flow rates at the beginning and
end of the interval and then multiplying
the average for each interval by the time
for each interval. Then add the quantity
for each interval to determine the total
quantity charged during the entire run,
(SM) or (Sv).
(2) Collect, samples of the sludge
charged to the incinerator in non-porous
collecting jars at the beginning of each
mn and at approximately 1-hour in-
tervals thereafter until the test ends, and
determine for each sample the dry sludge
content (total solids residue) in accord-
ance with "224 G. Method for Solid and
Femisolid. Samples," Standard Methods
JOT the Examination of Water and
Wastewci'icr, Thirteenth Edition, Ameri-
can Public Hcnlrh Associaiion, Inc., New
York, N.Y., 1971, pp. 539-41, except that:
(1) Evaporating dishes shall be ignited
to at least 103|8C rather than the 550°C
specified instepS(a) (1).
(11) Determination of volatile residue,
step 3(b) may be deleted.
(1)1) The quantity of dry sludge per
unit sludge charged shall be determined
-------
§ 60.160 Title 40—Protection of Environment
In terms of either Ri,v (metric units: mg (3) Determine the quantity of dry
dry sludge/liter sludge charged or Eng- sludge per unit sludge charged In terms
lish units: lb/ft3) or R,,u (metric units: of either Rnr or Rn«.
mg dry sludge/me sludge charged or <0 If the volume of sludge charged Is
English units: Ib/lb). r*»d:
BD= (60X10-1) 1*5^! (Metric Units)
or
SD-(8.021) l£^v (Eng)lsh UnJts)
where:
So^arerape dry sludge charging rate during the run, kg/hr (English units: Ih/hr),
Rov = avorape quantity of dry sludge per unit volume of sludge charged to tho incinerator, mg/1 (English
units: lb/ft').
Sv = sludge charged to the Incinerator during the ran, m1 (English units: gal).
T = duration of run, mln (English units: mill).
60X10-'s-metric units conversion factor, l-kg-mln/m'-mg-hr.
8.021=>English units conversion factor, ft3-min/gal-hr.
(11) If the mass of sludge charged Is used:
.(60) RD"SM (Metric or English Units)
where:
Sn = avciage dry sludge charging rate during tho ran, kg/hr (English units: Ib/lir).
RDM = average ratio of quantity of dry sludge to quantity of sludge charged to the Incinerator, mf/mg (Englls'i
units: Ib/lb).
$M = slu
-------
PROPOSED RULES
•1S63
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
1FRL CM--] ]
[40CFRPartCO]
STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR
NEW STATIONARY SOURCES
Sewage Sludge Incinerators
Bubpart 0 sets forth standards of per-
formance for new, modified, and recon-
structed sewage sludge incinerators In
sewage treatment plants. The standards
Iniiit. emissions of participate matter to
•'. t;.kg cli-y sludge input (1.30 Ib/ton
. iy .--Incise input) and visible emissions
to 20 percent opacity. The State of
Alaska recently requested EPA to revise
S CO. 150 of the regulation. The basis of
tlie request is that Incinerators which
:irc small cr.ouyh 1o meet the needs of
mall communities in Alaska and also
comply with the particuhiU: matter
L.tandard are not tuailablu, and the clis-
j'Osnl of sewage sludge in landfills is not
a viable option becau.se of permafrost
:r.ul other factors resulting in landfill
problems (shallow and soft landfills).
'.['he Pi'oi1 used amendment would exempt
incinerators with a capacity of lef.s t'han
HO kg/hr (300 Ib/hr) dry sludge Pro-
vided that disposal by land application
or sanitary landfill are shown to be in-
I'casible br-cmise of freezing condition1-..
BACKGROUND
The standards of pcrformnnce forscvv-
n.gc sludge incinei'ators were promulgated
March 8, 1074 (33 FR 9308), under s/uo-
tinn 111 of the Clean Air Act. Section
111 directs the Administrator lo estab-
lish standards of performance for now
stationary sources which reflect the de-
gree of emission limitation achievable
t-hroush the application of the best sys-
tem pf emissipn reduction which (talcing
inlo account the cost of'achicjying suc'h
reduction) the Administrator determines
has been adequately demonstrated. The
best system of emission reduction for
sewage sludge incinerators < multiple
hearth and fluid bed reactor type Incin-
erators) was determined to be low energy
venturi scrubbers.
At the time the standards were pro-
mulgated EPA was developing a stand-
ard for murcury emissions from sewage
sludge incinerators and guidelines for
municipal sludge management. The
standard limiting mercury emissions
was promulgated under section 112 (Haz-
ardous Air Pollutants) of the Clean Air
Act on October 14, J975 (40 FR 48302.),
and the proposed guideline was issued for
public comment on June. 3, 1976, under
the title "Technical Bulletin on Munici-
pal Sludge Management: Environmental
Factors."
Incineration is., just one of several
methods available for sludge disposal,
The standards, which limit emissions of
mercury and particulate matter, insure
that adequate emission;control systems
are employed when incineration is used
as the method of sludge disposal. Incin-
eration is only a volume reduction
method. After incineration, the ash, ei-
ther dry or in scrubber, water, remains
to be disposed of to the land. Ash dis-
posal must be designed to protect ground
water, to prevent dust, and to insure no
erosion to surface waters.
INVESTIGATION
In investigating Alaska's request. EPA
contacted the vendors of sewage sludge
incinerators and found that multiple
hearth or fluid bed reactor type incin-
erators which can achieve the particu-
late matter standard are not commer-
cially available below a size capacity of
140 kg/hr (300 Ib/hr). This means that
incineration would not be a disposal
option where units smaller than 140
kg/hr are needed. Since the unique prob-
lems in parts of Alaska also prevent dis-
posal by land application or sanitary
landfill, sludge disposal cannot be ac-
complished in an environmciijtally :ic-
ccptablc mnanor under existing regula-
tions. EP'A concluded that a revision to
the standards of performance for sludge
incinerators is appropriate.
In dcveloping.a revision to the stand-
ard to accommodate the unique problems
in parts of Alaska, EPA intends that the
proposed exemption not create an incen-
tive to utilize small incinerators which
would not be covered under the stand-
ard. To avoid this situation the proposed
exemption applies only where an owner
or operator can demonstrate to the sat-
isfaction of the Admii.islrator that land
application and sanitary landfills are not
feasible disposal methods for the sewage
sludge. The size exemption is based on
the capacity of the waste water treat-
ment plant rather than the incinerator
in order to prevent constructing nvuHiplR
small incinerators rather than larger
units which would be subject to the
standard.
The proposed amendment of S CO.lTiO.
would not afreet applicable national mer-
cury emission standards under § 61.30
which currently regulates mercury emis-
sions from all sludge inMnerators. These
standards are not subject to the exemp-
tion because control of mercury emis-
sions can be achieved by ordinances or
statutes which prevent mercury-bearing
material from being introduced into the
municipal waste treatment system.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Interested persons may participate in
this proposed rulemaking by submitting
•written comments (in triplicate) to the
Emission Standards and.Engineering Di-
vision, 'U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711, Attention: Mr. Don R.
Goodwin. Comments on all aspects of
the proposed revision are welcome. Alt
relevant comments received not later
than March 15, 1977 will be considered.
Comments received will be available for
public inspection and copying at the EPA
Public Information Reference Unit,
Room 2922 (EPA Library), 401 M Street,
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
AUTHORITY: Sections 111, 114, and 301(n)
of tlie Glenn Air Act, as amended by sec. 4(a)
of Pub. L. 91-604, 84 Stat. 1G78 avid by sec.
15(c) (2) 'of Pub. L. 01-604, 84 Stnt. 1713 |42f
U.S.C. 1857C-6, 1857C-9 and 1857g(.i) |,
Dated: January 14,1977.
RUSSELL E, TRAIN;
Administrator.
In 40 CFR Part 60, it is proposed to
amend Subpart 0, by revising § 60.150 as
follows:
§ (if).'150 Applicability and (IcsijjMiiliiiu
of aflVclefl facility*
(a.) The affected facility to which the
provisions of this subpart apply is each
incinerator which combusts the sludge
produced by municipal sewage treatment
pi an Us except as provided under para-
graph (b'l Of 1111556011011.
(b) The owner or operator of a sew-
age sludge incinerator may apply to the
Administrator for an exemption to the
requirements of this subpart for any
sewage sludge inc.inorn.tor that i,-t in a
municipal waste treatment plant having
a' dry .sludge capacity below 140 kg/hr
(300, 'Ib/hifi. The Administrator wit
grant an exemption provided the ownci'
or operator demonstrates to the Admin-
istrator's satisfaction that it is not feas-
ible to dispose of. the sludge by land 9V
plication or in a sanitary landfill because;
of freezing conditions. For the purpose"
of determining the capacity of a munici-
pal, waste treatment plant under tllis
paragraph, the dry sludge capacity of
the municipal waste treatment plant or
the dry sludge capacity of the sewagC
sludge incinerator, whichever is greater,
is used.
|FU Diic.77-.2rm4 T'llod 1 -25.-77;8:45 ami1
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOt. 42, NO. 1 7-WEDNESDAY. JANUARY 26, 1977
-------
APPENDIX V
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
Subpart E - National Emission Standard for Mercury
40 CFR 61.50
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§61.02
PART 61—NATIONAL EMISSION STAND-
ARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
Subpart A—General Provision*
Sec.
81.01 Applicability.
S1.03 Definition*.
01.03 Abbreviation*.
61.04 Address.
61.05 Prohibited activities.
61.06 Determination of constructon or
modification.
61.07 Application for approval of construc-
tion or modification.
61.08 Approval by Administrator.
61.09 Notification of startup.
61.10 Source reporting and waiver request.
81.11 Waiver of compliance.
61.12 Emission tests and monitoring.
61.13 Waiver of emission testa.
61.14 Source test and analytical methods.
61.15 Availability of Information.
61.16 State authority.
61.17 Circumvention.
Subpart B—National Emission Standard for
Asbestos
61.20 Applicability.
61.21 Definitions.
61.22 Emission standard.
61.23 Air cleaning.
61.24 Reporting.
6156 Waste disposal sites.
Subpart C—National Emission Standard for
Beryllium
61.30 Applicability.
61.31 Definitions.
61.32 Emission standard.
61.33 Stack sampling.
61.34 Air sampling.
Subpart D—National Emission Standard for
Beryllium Rocket Motor Firing
61.40 Applicability.
61.41 Definitions.
61.42 Emission standard.
61.43 Emission testing—rocket firing or pro-
pellant disposal.
61.44 Stack sampling.
Subpart E—National Emission Standard for
Mercury
61.60 Applicability.
61.61 Definitions.
61.63 Emission standard.
61.63 Stack sampling.
61.64 Sludge sampling.
61.65 Emission monitoring.
Appendix A—Compliance Status Information,
Appendix B—Test Methods.
Method 101—Reference method for determi-
nation of partlculate and gaseous mercury
emissions from stationary sources (air
streams).
Method 102—Reference method for determi-
nation of partlculate and gaseous mercury
emissions from stationary sources (hydro-
gen streams).
Method 103—Beryllium screening method.
Method 104—Reference method for determi-
nation of beryllium emissions from sta-
tionary sources.
Method 105—Method for determination of
mercury In wastewater treatment
plant sewage sludges.
AUTHORITY: Sees. 112 and 114 of the Clean
Air Act, as amended by sec. 4(a) of Fub. L.
91-404, 84 Stat. 1678 (42 U.S.O. 1857C-7, 1867
0-8).
SOTTBCX: 88 FR 8820, Apr. 6, 1973, unless
otherwise noted.
Subpart E—National Emission Standard
for Mercury
§ 61.50 Applicability.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to those stationary sources which
process mercury ore to recover mercury,
use mercury chlor-alkali cells to produce
chlorine gas and alkali metal hydroxide,
and incinerate or dry wastewater treat-
ment plant sludge
[40 FR 48302, Oct. 14, 1975]
§ 61.51 Definitions.
Terms used in this subpart are defined
in the act, in Subpart A of this part, or in
this section as follows:
(a) "Mercury" means the element mer-
cury, excluding any associated elements,
and Includes mercury in partlculates, va-
pors, aerosols, and compounds.
-------
§61.52
Title 40—Protection of Environment
(b) "Mercury ore" means a mineral
mined specifically for Its mercury con-
tent..
(c) "Mercury ore processing facility"
means a facility processing mercury ore
to obtain mercury.
(d) "Condenser stack gases" mean the
gaseous effluent evolved from the stack of
processes utilizing heat to extract mer-
cury metal from mercury ore.
(e) "Mercury chlpr-alkali cell" means
a device which Is basically composed of
an electrolyzer section and a denuder
(decomposer) section and utilizes mer-
cury to produce chlorine gas, hydrogen
gas, and alkali metal hydroxide.
(f) "Mercury chlor-alkall electrolyzer"
means an electrolytic device which Is part
of a mercury chlor-alkall cell and utilizes
a flowing mercury cathode to produce
chlorine gas and alkali metal amalgam.
(g) "Denuder" means a horizontal or
vertical container which Is part of a mer-
cury chlor-alkall cell and in which water
and alkali metal amalgam are converted
to alkali metal hydroxide, mercury, and
hydrogen gas hi a short-circuited, elec-
trolytic reaction.
(h) "Hydrogen gas stream" means a
hydrogen stream formed In the chlor-
alkall cell denuder.
(1) "End box" means a contalner(s)
located on one or both ends of a mercury
chlor-alkall electrolyzer which serves
as a connection between the electrolyzer
and denuder for rich and stripped
amalgam.
(J) "End box ventilation system"
means a ventilation system which col-
lects mercury emissions from the end-
boxes, the mercury pump sumps, and
their water colectlon systems.
(k) "Cell room" means a structure(s)
housing one or more mercury electro-
lytic chlor-alkali cells.
(1) "Sludge" means sludge produced by
a treatment plant that processes munici-
pal or industrial waste waters.
(m) "Sludge dryer" means a device
used to reduce the moisture content of
sludge by heating to temperatures above
65°C (ca. 150°F) directly with combus-
tion gases.
[38 FR 8826, Apr. 8. 1973, as amended at
40 FR 48302, Oct. 14, 1975]
§ 61.52 Emission standard.
(a) Emissions to the atmosphere from
mercury ore processing facilities and
mercury cell chlor-alkali plants shall not
exceed 2300 grams of mercury per 24-
hour period.
(b) Emissions to the atmosphere from
sludge incineration plants, sludge drying
plants, or a combination of these that
process wastewater treatment plant
sludges shall'not exceed 3200 grams of
mercury per 24-hour period.
[40 FR 48302, Oct. 14, 1976]
§ 61.53 Stack sampling.
(a) Mercury ore processing facility.
(1) Unless a waiver of emission testing
is obtained under 5 61.13, each owner
or operator processing mercury ore shall
test emissions from his source,
(1) Within 90 days of the effective
date in the case of an existing source or
a new source which has an Initial start-
up date preceding the effective date; or
(li) Within 90 days of startup In the
case of a new source which did not have
an Initial startup date preceding the ef-
fective date.
(2) The Administrator shall be noti-
fied at least 30 days prior to an emission
test, so that he may at his option observe
the test.
(3) Samples shall be taken over such
a period or periods as are necessary to
accurately determine the maximum
emissions which will occur in a 24-hour
period. No changes in the operation shall
be made, which would potentially In-
crease emissions above that determined
by the most recent source test, until the
new emission level has been estimated by
calculation and the results reported to
the Administrator.
(4) All samples shall be analyzed, and
mercury emissions shall be determined
within 30 days after the source test. Each
determination will be reported to the Ad-
ministrator by a registered letter dis-
patched before the close of the next busi-
ness day following such determination.
(5) Records of emission test results
and other data needed to determine total
emissions shall be retained at the source
and made available, for Inspection by the
Administrator, for a minimum of 2 years.
(b) Mercury chlor-alkall plant—hy-
drogen and end-box ventilation gas
streams.
(1) Unless a waiver of emission test-
Ing is obtained under § 61.13, each owner
or operator employing mercury chlor-
alkali cell(s) shall test emissions from
his source,
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
§61.53
(1) Within 90 days of the effective
date In the case of an existing source or
a new source which has an initial startup
date preceding the effective date; or
(11) Within 90 days of startup in the
case of a new source which did not have
an initial startup date preceding the ef-
fective date.
(2) The Administrator shall be noti-
fied at least 30 days prior to an emission
test, so that he may at his option observe
the test.
(3) Samples shall be taken over such
a period or periods as are necessary to
accurately determine the maximum emis-
sions which will occur in a 24-hour
period. No changes In the operation shall
be made, which would potentially in-
crease emissions above that determined
by the most recent source test, until the
new emission has been estimated by cal-
culation and the results reported to the
Administrator.
(4) All samples shall be analyzed and
mercury emlsions shall be determined
within 30 days after the source test. All
the determinations will be reported to
the Administrator by a registered letter.
dispatched before the close of the next
business day following such determina-
tion.
(5) Records of emission test results
and other data needed to determine total
emissions shall be retained at the source
and made available, for inspection by
the Administrator, for a minimum of
2 years.
(c) Mercury chlor-alkall plants—
cell room ventilation system.
(1) Stationary sources using mercury
chlor-alkali cells may test cell room
emissions In accordance with paragraph
(c)(2) of this section or demonstrate
compliance with paragraph (c) (4) of this
section and assume ventilation emissions
of 1,300 gms/day of mercury.
(2) Unless a waiver of emission test-
Ing Is obtained under § 61.13, each owner
or operator shall pass all cell room air
In forced gas streams through stacks
suitable for testing,
(i) Within 90 days of the effective date
in the case of an existing source or a new
source which has an Initial startup date
preceding the effective date; or
(11) Within 90 days of startup In the
case of a new source which did not have
an initial startup date preceding the
effective date.
(3) The Administrator shall be noti-
fied at least 30 days prior to an emission
test, so that he may at his option observe
the test.
(4) An owner or operator may carry
out approved design, maintenance, and
housekeeping practices. A list of ap-
proved design, maintenance, and house-
keeping practices may be obtained from
the Administrator.
(d) Sludge incineration and drying
plants.
(1) Unless a waiver of emission testing
Is obtained under § 61.13, each owner or
operator of a source subject to the stand-
ard in § 61.52(b) shall test emissions from
that source. Such tests shall be conducted
in accordance with the procedures set
forth either in paragraph (d) of this
section or in I 61.54.
(2) Method 101 in Appendix B to this
part shall be used to test emissions as
follows:
(1) The test shall be performed within
90 days of the effective date of these
regulations in the case of an existing
source or a new source which has an
initial startup date preceding the effec-
tive date.
(ii) The test shall be performed within
90 days of startup in the case of a new
source which did not have an initial
startup date preceding the effective date.
(3) The Administrator shall be noti-
fied at least 30 days prior to an emission
test, so that he may at his option observe
the test.
j(4) Samples shall be taken over such
a period or periods as are necessary to
determine accurately the maximum
emissions which will occur in a 24-hour
period. No changes shall be made In the
operation which would potentially in-
crease emissions above the level deter-
mined by the most recent stack test, un-
til the new emission level has been esti-
mated by calculation and the results re-
ported to the Administrator.
(5) All samples shall be analyzed, and
mercury emissions shall be determined
within 30 days after the stack test. Each
determination shall be reported to the
Administrator by a registered letter dis-
patched before the close of the next busi-
ness day following such determination.
(6) Records of emission test results
and other data needed to determine total
-------
§61.54
Tifle 40—Protection of Environment
emissions shall be retained at- the source
and shall be made available, for Inspec-
tion by the Administrator, for a mini-
mum of 2 years.
[38 FR 8826, Apr. 8, 1973, as amended at
40 PR 48302, Oct. 14, 1975)
§ 61.54 Sludge sampling.
(a) As an alternative means for
demonstrating compliance with § 61.52
(b), an owner or operator may use
Method 105 of Appendix B and the proce-
dures specified in this section.
(1) A sludge test shall be conducted
within 90 days of the effective date of
these regulations in the case of an exist-
ing source or a new source which has an
initial startup date preceding the effec-
tive date; or
(2) A sludge test shall be conducted
within 90 days of startup in the case of a
new source which did not have an initial
startup date preceding the effective date.
(b) The Administrator shall be notified
at least.30 days prior to a sludge sampling
test, so that he may at his option observe
the test.
(c) Sludge shall be sampled according
to paragraph (c)(l) of this section,
sludge charging rate for the plant shall
be determined according to paragraph
(c) (2) of this section, and the sludge
analysis shall be performed according to
paragraph (c) (3) of this section.
(1) The sludge shall be sampled after
dewatering and before incineration or
drying, at a location that provides a
representative sample of the sludge that
is charged to the incinerator or dryer.
Eight consecutive grab samples shall be
obtained at intervals of between 45 and
60 minutes and thoroughly mixed into
one sample. Each of the eight grab sam-
ples shall have a volume of at least 200
ml but not more than 400 ml. A total of
three composite samples shall be ob-
tained within an operating period of 24
hours. When the 24-hour operating pe-
riod is not continuous, the total sam-
pling period shall not exceed 72 hours
after the first grab sample is obtained.
Samples shall not be exposed to any con-
dition that may result in mercury con-
tamination or loss.
(2) The maximum 24-hour period
sludge incineration or drying rate shall
be determined by use of a flow rate meas-
urement device that can measure the
mass rate of sludge charged to the In-
cinerator or dryer with an accuracy of
±5 percent over its operating range.
Other methods of measuring sludge mass
charging rates may be used if they have
received prior approval by the Adminis-
trator.
(3) The handling, preparation, and
analysis of sludge samples shall be ac-
complished according to Method 105 in
Appendix B.of this part.
(d) The mercury emissions shall be
determined by use of the following
equation:
Ena=l X 10-' CQ
where
Eif»=Mercury emissions, g/day.
c =Mercury concentration of sludge on a
dry solids "basis, iig/g (ppm).
Q =Sludge charging rate, kg/day.
(e) No changes in the operation of a
plant shall be made after a sludge test
has been conducted which would poten-
tially increase emissions above the level
determined by the most recent sludge
test, until the new emission level has
been estimated by calculation and the
results reported to the Administrator.
(f) All sludge samples shall be ana-
lyzed for mercury content within 30 days
after the sludge sample is collected. Each
determination shall be reported to the
Administrator by a registered letter dis-
patched before the close of the next busi-
ness day following such determination.
(g) Records of sludge sampling, charg-
ing rate determination and other data
needed to determine mercury content
of wastewater treatment plant sludges
shall be retained at the source and made
available, for inspection by the Admin-
istrator, for a minimum of 2 years.
[40 FR 48303, Oct. 14, 1976]
§ 61.55 Emission monitoring.
(a) Wastewater treatment plant sludge
incineration and drying plants. All such
sources for which mercury emissions ex-
ceed 1600 g/day, demonstrated either by
stack sampling according to § 61.53 or
sludge sampling according to § 61.54,
shall monitor mercury emissions at inter-
vals of at least once per year by use of
Method 105 of Appendix B, or the proce-
dures specified in § 61.54(c) and (d). The
results of monitoring shall be reported
and retained according to i 61.53(d) (5)
and (6), or § 61.54(f) and (g).
[40 FR 48303, Oct. 14, 1976)
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
App. B
ATRKDIX B—TEST METHOD*
METHOD IDS METHOD FOB DETEHMINATION OF
UZBCUBT IN WASTEWATEH TREATMENT PLANT
IBWAG* BLtJDGES
1. Principle and applicability. 1.1 Prin-
ciple—A weighed portion of the sewage
eludge sample Is digested In aqua regla for
2 minutes at 06°C, followed by oxidation
with potassium permanganate. Mercury In
the digested sample Is then measured by the
conventional spectrophotometer cold vapor
technique; An alternative digestion Involving
the use of an autoclave Is described In para-
graph 4.5.2 of this method.
1.2 Applicability—This method Is appli-
cable for the determination of total organic
and Inorganic mercury content In sewage
sludges, soils, sediments, and bottom-type
materials. The normal range of this method
Is 0.2 to 6 0g/g. The range may be extended
above or below the normal range by Increas-
ing or decreasing sample size and through In-
strument and recorder control.
2. Apparatus. 2.1 Analysis—The conven-
tional cold vapor technlquo(6) la used to
analyze the sample.
2.1.1 Atomic Absorption Spectrophoto-
meter >—Any atomic absorption unit having
an open sample presentation area in which
to mount the absorption cell Is suitable. In-
strument settings recommended by the par-
ticular manufacturer should be followed.
2.1.2 Mercury Hollow Cathode Lamp—
WestlnghQuae WL-22847. argon filled, or
equivalent.
2.1.3 Recorder—Any multlrange, variable-
speed recorder that Is compatible with the
TJV detection system Is suitable.
2.1.4 Absorption Cell—Standard spectro-
photometer cells 10 cm long, having quartz
end windows may be used. Suitable cells may
be constructed from plexiglass tubing, 2.5
cm OJJ. x 11.4 cm (ca. 1" O.D. x 4%"). The
ends are ground perpendicular to the longi-
tudinal axis, and quartz windows [2.5 cm
diameter x 0.16 cm thickness (ca. 1"- diameter
x M«" thickness) ] are cemented In place.
Gas Inlet and outlet ports [also of plexiglass
but 0.6 cm O.D. (ca. yt" O.D.) ] are attached
approximately 1.3 cm (V4") from each end.
The cell Is strapped to a burner for support
and aligned In the light beam to give the
maximum transmlttance. NOTE: Two 5.1 cm
x S.I cm (ca. 2" x 2") cards with 2.6 cm
(ca. 1") diameter holes may be placed over
each end of the cell to assist in positioning
the cell for maximum transmlttance.
2.1.6 Air Pump—Any peristaltic pump
capable of delivering 1 liter of air per minute
may be used. A Masterflex pump with elec-
tronic speed control has been found to be
satisfactory. (Regulated compressed air can
be used In an open one-pass system.)
1 Instruments designed specifically for the
measurement of mercury using the cold
vapor technique are commercially available
and may be substituted for the atomic
absorption epectrophotometer.
2.1.6 Flowmeter—Capable of measuring
an air now of 1 liter per minute.
2.1.7 Aeration Tubing—Tygon tubing is
used for passage of the mercury vapor from
the sample bottle to the absorption cell and
return. Straight glass tubing terminating in
a coarse porous frit Is used for sparging air
Into the sample.
2.1.8 Drying Tube—15 cm long x 1.9 cm
diameter (ca. 6" long x %" diameter) tube
containing 20 grams of the deslccant mag-
nesium perchlorate. The apparatus Is assem-
bled as shown In Figure 105-1. In place of the
magnesium perchlorate drying tube, a small
reading lamp with 60W bulb may be used to
prevent condensation of moisture Inside the
cell. The lamp Is positioned so as not to Inter-
fere with the measurement and to shine on
the absorption cell maintaining the air tem-
perature about 6°C above ambient.
3. Reagents. 3.1 Analysis.
3.1.1 Aqua Regla—Prepare Immediately
before use by carefully adding three volumes
of concentrated HC1 to one volume of con-
centrated HNO,.
3.1.2 Sulfurlc Acid, O.S'N—Dilute 14.0 ml
of concentrated sulfurlc acid to 1.0 liter.
3.1.3 Stannous Sulfate—Add 26 g stan-
nous sulfat« to 250 ml of 0.5N sulfurlc acid.
This mixture Is a suspension and should be
stirred continuously during use. Stannous
chloride may be used In place of the Stannous
sulfate.
3.1.4 Sodium Chloride—Hydroxylamlne
Sulfate Solution—Dissolve 12 grams of so-
dium chloride and 12 grams of hydroxylamlne
sulfate In distilled water and dilute to 100
ml. Hydroxylamlne hydrochlorlde may be
used In place of the hydroxylamlne suifate.
3.1,6 Potassium Permanganate—6% solu-
tion, w/v. Dissolve 5 grams of potassium per-
manganate In 100 ml of distilled water.
3.1.6 Stock Mercury Solution—Dissolve
0.1354 grams of reagent grade mercuric chlo-
ride (Assay >95%) In 75 ml of distilled
water. Add 10 ml of concentrated nitric acid
and adjust the volume to 100.0 ml. 1 ml = l
mgHg.
8.1.7 Working Mercury Solution—Make
successive dilutions of the stock mercury
solution to obtain a working standard con-
taining 0.1 ,tg per ml. This working standard
and the dilutions of the stock mercury solu-
tion should be prepared fresh dally. Acidity
of the working standard should be main-
tained at 0.16% nitric acid. This acid should
be added to the flask as needed before the
addition of the aliquot. Mercuric solutions
should not be prepared in plastic containers.
4. Procedures. Samples for mercury analy-
sis are subject to contamination from a
variety of sources. Extreme care must be
taken to prevent contamination. Certain In-
terferences may occur during the analysis
procedures. Extreme caution must be taken
to avoid Inhalation of mercury.
4.1 Sample Handling and Preservation.
4.1.1 Because of the extreme sensitivity
of the analytical procedure and the om-
nipresence of mercury, care must be taken
60-004—76-
-14
-------
App. B
Title 40—Protection of Environment
to avoid extraneous contamination. Sam-
pling devices, sample containers, and re-
agents should be ascertained to be free of
significant amounts of mercury; the sample
should not be exposed to any condition In
the laboratory that may result In contact or
airborne mercury contamination. Sample
containers to be used for collection and ship-
ment of mercury samples should be properly
cleaned before use. These should be rinsed
•with at least 20% v/v HNO, followed by
distilled water.
4.1.2 While the sample may be analyzed
without drying. It has been found to be more
convenient to analyze a dry sample. Moisture
may be driven off In a drying oven at a tem-
perature of 60 "C. No significant mercury
losses have been observed by using this dry-
Ing step. The dry sample should be pulver-
ized and thoroughly mixed before the aliquot
Is weighed.
4.2 Interferences.
4.2.1 Interferences that may occur In
sludge samples are sulfldes, high copper, high
chlorides, etc. A discussion of possible In-
terferences and suggested preventatlve meas-
ures to be taken Is given In Reference (6) (7),
4.2.2 Volatile materials which absorb at
the 253.7 nm will cause a positive Interfer-
ence. In order to remove any Interfering
volatile materials, the dead air space In the
BOD bottle should be purged with nitrogen
before the addition of stannous sulfate.
4.3 Handling Sample Mercury Vapors
After Analysis.
4.3.1 Because of the toxic nature of mer-
cury vapor, precaution must be taken to
avoid Its Inhalation. Therefore, a bypass
should be Included In the analysis system
to either vent the mercury vapor Into an
exhaust hood or pass the vapor through some
absorbing media, such as:
(a) equal volumes of 0.1N KMNOi and 10%
Haso,;
(b) 0.25% Iodine In a 3% KI solution.
A specially treated charcoal that will absorb
mercury vapor Is also available from Barne-
bey and Cheney, E. 8th Ave. and North Cas-
sldy St., Columbus, Ohio 43219, Catalog No.
680-13 or No. 580-22.«
4.4 Calibration.
4.4.1 Transfer 0, 0.6, 1.0, 2.0, 6.0 and 10 ml
allquots of the working mercury solution
containing 0 to 1.0 Mg of mercury to a series
of 300-ml BOD bottles. Add enough dis-
tilled water to each bottle to make a total
volume of 10 ml. Add 5 ml of aqua regla and
heat 2 minutes In a water bath at 95°C. Allow
the sample to cool and add 50 ml distilled
water and 16 ml of KMnO, solution to each
bottle and return to the water bath for 30
minutes. Cool and add 6 ml of sodium chlo-
rlde-hydroxylamlne sulfate solution to re-
duce the excess permanganate. Add 60 ml of
distilled water. Treating each bottle Individ-
ually, add 5 ml of stannous sulfate solution
and Immediately attach the bottle to the
aeration apparatus. At this point, the sample
Is allowed to stand quietly without manual
agitation. The circulating pump, which has
previously been adjusted to a rate of 1 liter
per minute, Is allowed to run continuously.
The absorbance, as exhibited either on the
spectrophotometer or the recorder, will In-
crease and reach maximum within 30 sec-
onds. As soon as the recorder pen levels off,
approximately 1 minute, open the bypass
valve and continue the aeration until the
absorbance returns to Its minimum value.
Close the bypass valve, • remove the fritted
tubing from the BOD, bottle and continue
the aeration. Proceed with the standards and
construct a standard curve by plotting peak
height versus mlcrograms of mercury.
4.6 Analysis.
4.5.1 Weigh triplicate 0.2g± 0.001 g por-
tions of dry sample and place In bottom of
a BOD bottle. Add 5 ml of distilled water
and 5 ml of aqua regla. Heat 2 minutes In a
water bath tit 95°C. Cool and add 50 ml dis-
tilled water and 15 ml potassium per-
manganate solution to each sample bottle.
Mix thoroughly and place In the water bath
for 30 minutes at 95°C. Cool and add 8 ml of
sodium chlorlde-hydroxylamlne sulfate to re-
duce the excess permanganate. Add 56 ml of
distilled water. Treating each bottle Indi-
vidually, add 5 ml of stannous sulfate and
Immediately attach the bottle to the aera-
tion apparatus. With each sample, continue
as described In paragraph 4.4.1 of this
method.
4.5.2 An alternative digestion procedure
using an autoclave may also be used. In this
method 6 ml of concentrated H,,SO4 and 2 ml
of concentrated HNO, are added to the 0.2
grams of sample. 5 ml of saturated KMnO,
solution are added and the bottle Is covered
with a piece of aluminum foil. The samples
are autoclaved at 121°C and 2.1 kg/cm" (ca.
15 pslg) for 16 minutes. Cool, make up to a
volume of 100 ml with distilled water, and
add 6 ml of sodium chlorlde-hydroxylamlne
sulfate solution to reduce the excess per-
manganate. Purge the dead air space, and
continue as described In paragraph 4.4.1 of
this method.
6. Calculation. 6.1 Measure the peak
height of the unknown from the chart and
read the mercury value from the standard
curve.
6.2 Calculate the mercury c6ncentratlon
in the sample by the formula:
/jgHg/gm =
lig Hg In the aliquot
wt. of the aliquot In g
•Mention of trade names or specific prod-
ucts does not constitute endorsement by the
Environmental Protection Agency.
5.3 Report mercury concentrations as fol-
lows: Below 0.1 Ag/g! between 0.1 ar.d 1 /ig/g,
to the nearest 0.01 p.g/g; between 1 and 10
ng/g, to nearest 0.1 p.g; above 10 Mg/g, to
nearest /ig.
B. Precision and accuracy. 6.1 According
to the provisional method In reference num-
ber 5, the following standard deviations on
replicate sediment samples have been re-
-------
Chapter I—Environmental ProfecMon Agency § 79.2
corded at the Indicated levels: 0.29 #g/g±0.03
and 0.82 £g/g±0.03. Recovery of mercury at
these levels, added as methyl mercuric chlo-
ride, was 97 and 94%, respectively.
7. References.
1. Bishop, J. N. "Mercury In Sediments,"
Ontario Water Resources Comm., Toronto,
Ontario, Canada, 1971.
2. Salrna, M. Private communication, EPA
Cal/Nev Basin Office, Alameda, California.
3. Hatch, W. R., and Ott, W. L. "Determina-
tion of Bub-Mlcrogram Quantities of Mer-
cury by Atomic Absorption Spectrophotom-
etry," Ana. Chdm. 40, 2085 (1968).
4. Bradenbergcr, H. and Bader, H. "The
Determination of Nanogram Levels of Mer-
cury In Solution by a Flameless Atomic Ab-
sorption Technique," Atomic Absorption
Newsletter 6,101 (1967).
5. Analytical Quality Control Laboratory
(AQCL), Environmental Protection Agency,
Cincinnati, Ohio, "Mercury In Sediment
(Cold Vapor Technique)," Provisional
Method, April 1972.
6. Kopp, J. P., Longbottom, M. C. and
Lobrlng, L. B. "Cold Vapor Method for De-
termining Mercury," Journal AWWA, 64, 1
(1972), pp. 20-26.
7. "Manual of Methods for Chemical Anal-
ysis of Water and Wastes," Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA-826/2-74-003, pp.
118-138.
[38 FR 8826, Apr. 6, 1073, as amended at
40 FR 48310, Oct. 14, 1976)
-------
APPENDIX VI
SUBCHAPTER H - Ocean Dumping
40 CFR 220-229
(42 FR 2462-2490)
January 11, 1977
-------
(ft
TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
PART VI
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
OCEAN DUMPING
Final Revision of Regulations and Criteria
-------
2462
RULES AND REGULATIONS
Title 40—Protection'of Environment
(FBL 667-7)
CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
SUBCHAPTER H—OCEAN DUMPING
FINAL REVISION OF REGULATIONS
AND CRITERIA
'The Environmental Protection Agency
today publishes final regulations and
criteria with respect to the transporta-
tion of wastes for the purpose of ocean
dumping. Under Title I of the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act of 1972, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1401
et seq., (hereafter "the Act") the Agency
on October 15,1973, (38 FR 28610 et seq.)
published regulations setting forth the
procedures to be followed, and the cri-
teria to be applied, in reviewing appli-
cations to dispose of materials in ocean
waters. These rules now appear at 40
CPR Parts 220-227. In addition, the
October 15 notice set forth substantive
criteria to be applied In evaluating per-
mits to discharge materials through
ocean outfalls, pursuant to sections 402
and 403 (c) of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act Amendments of 1972,
33 U.S.C. 1342, 1343. The regulations
published today delete all reference to
section 403(c) ocean outfall criteria and
make Parts 220-227 (with the addition
of Parts 228 and 229) solely addressed
to ocean dumping and implementation
of the Act. In the near future the Agency
will propose significant revisions to the
criteria for ocean outfalls.
The final regulations and criteria pub-
lished today affect both the procedures
to be followed in reviewing applications
for ocean dumping and the substantive
criteria to be applied in evaluating those
applications.
The. revisions announced today do not
include changes to 40 CFR Parts 223 and
226. Significant changes will be made to
those Parts in the near future. Parts 223
and 226 will be greatly expanded to pre-
sent more detailed procedures for en-
forcement proceedings and for proceed-
ings brought to revoke or suspend a per-
mit pursuant to section 105(f), 33 U.S.C.
1415 (f). However, these Parts as pres-
ently in force are reprinted here as they
originally appeared to provide a complete
set of the regulations presently in force.
The Agency believes that changes in
the present regulations announced to-
day are appropriate for several reasons:
Operating experience of EPA pointed
to several ways in which the regulations
required modification. There is a need
to specify in more detail the considera-
tions which go into a determination of
whether a permit will be issued. The
present regulations do not adequately ad-
dress the regulation of ocean dumping
sites. Alsa, some people consider the
present regulations inadequate with
respect to the disposal of dredged
material.
A petition for additional rulemaking by
the National Wildlife Federal' was re-
ceived In April of 1974 and pointed out
several areas in which the present regu-
lations require changes if they are to
completely satisfy th': Act, the Conven-
tion on the Prevention of Marine Pollu-
tion by Dumping of .Wastes and Other
Matter (hereafter, "Convention") open
for signlature December.29, 1972, at Lon-
don, and the Amendments to the Act In
light of the Convention which were
brought about by Pub. L. 93-254
(March 22, 1974). The Convention be-
came effective, according to Article XIX
(1), on August 30,. 1975, when the
fifteenth party acceded to its terms. The
first Consultative Meeting of the Con-
tracting Parties was held in London in
September, 1976, and these final regula-
tions reflect agreements on procedures
reached at that meeting.
In addition to the petition from the Na-
tional Wildlife Federal, an individual has
requested that the emergency permit pro-
visions contained in the regulations be
modified to require more adequate public
notice and opportunity for hearing prior
to the issuance of those permits. EPA has
thoroughly revised and expanded the
ocean dumping regulations and criteria
to allow for greater public participation
in the program.
The Agency has held several major
hearings on applications to dispose of
materials; the experiences of these hear-
ings and the Regional Administrators'
experiences in reviewing, applications
have prompted'several suggestions as-to
ways in which the present regulations
and criteria can be Improved to more
adequately address the implementation
of the >Act and Convention, and to ad-
dress the problems encountered by the
Regional Administrators.
The criteria have been modified to re-
flect recent advances in- scientific knowl-
edge, but there is no change in EPA's In-
tent to eliminate ocean dumping of un-
acceptable materials as rapidly as pos-
sible.
It is not possible to note in this pre-
amble all the places in the regulations in
which changes have been made; many
modifications are minor and will not
affect the day-to-day operation of the
program. However, the major substan-
tive changes have been noted below. It
must be emphasized that these final reg-
ulations will replace or amend seven .ex-
isting Parts of Title 40 CFR, and will
add Part 228. While the regulations ap-
pear to be long and complicated, the
Agency has attempted to follow a logical
pattern which will make their use more
convenient than one might assume at
first inspection. It also must be noted
that these regulations will constitute the
entire set of tools one needs to implement
the Act and the Convention.
These regulations and criteria were
published in proposed form in the FED-
ERAL REGISTER on June 28, 1976, (41 FR
26644 et seq.) and a Draft Environmental
Impact Statement on the criteria (Parts
227-228) was issued on July 14,1976. The
public comment period closed' September
24, 1976; 75 sets of comments were re-
ceived comprising some 375 pages. Some
substantive technical issues were raised,
and EPA held a technical workshop on
October 19-20,1976, concerning the trace
contaminant and dredged material cri-
teria. The comments received, the EPA
responses to the individual comments,
and the report and transcript of the
technical workshop are all included in
the, Final Environmental Impact State-
ment which is available from the address
given at the end of this preamble.
SUMMARY OF CHANGES MADE AS A
RESULT or COMMENTS RECEIVED
PART 220
Section 220.1—Purpose and scope. One
commenter suggested that Section 220.1
(a) (3) (ii) be changed to apply these reg-
ulations to a 200-mile contiguous zone.
This is not possible since the Act limits
jurisdiction over foreign flag vessels to
the territorial sea and the 12-rniile con-
tiguous zone of the United States. See
section 2(c) of the Act, as amended by
Pub. L. 93-254 (33 U.S.C. 1401).
It has been suggested that Section
220.He) (4) be changed to refer to "hu-
man life at sea" rather than "life at sea."
The language of this section follows that
of the Act. It is implicit that this section
refers to human life.
Section 220.2—Definitions. The defini-
tion of sewage treatment works in para-
graph (b) has been amended to make it
consistent with the definition found in
the FWPCA.
Section 220.3—Categories of permits.
(c) ^Emergency permits. Consultation
procedures for emergency permits have
been adopted by the Contracting Parties
to the International Convention. The
procedures in these regulations are con-
sistent with those adopted on an inter-
national basis.
(d)—Interim permits. The Agency re-
ceived a substantial number of comments
with respect to the interim permit pro-
visions.
Section 220.3 (d) in its revised form
provides that Interim permits will be is-
sued after April 23, 1978, only to interim
permit holders who have exercised best
efforts to meet the requirements of a Spe-
cial permit by that date and have imple-
mentation schedules adequate to allow
phasing out of ocean dumping or com-
pliance with the requirements of a spe-
cial permit, by December 31, 1981.
Commenters have questioned the le-
gality of Interim permits under the Act.
and have further questioned the issuance
of interim permits after the 1978 dead-
line. Others have argued that the 1978
cutoff date is too strict. Some have sug-
gested that this deadline be deleted al-
together, with applications for interim
permits to be considered on a case-by-
case basis.
Interim permits are not illegal under
the Act, since they do not authorize
dumping which would "unreasonably"
degrade or endanger the marine environ-
ment. The Act lists need for ocean dump-
ing as one factor to be considered in is-
suing permits. The "need factor" has
outweighed other considerations due to
the lack of alternative methods of dis-
posal and technology necessary to meet
environmental criteria. The need factor
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
Is largely a matter of time, and Interim
permits nave been Issued In order to give
existing dumpers sufficient time to de-
velop alternatives or to comply with en-
vironmental criteria. It should be noted
that In no event does this section au-
thorize dumping of materials that are
absolutely barred by the Act or the Con-
vention, or authorize dumping above
trace contaminant levels of materials
proscribed above trace contaminant
levels.
The April 23, 1978. deadline corre-
sponds to the fifth anniversary of the
effective date of the Act This date Is
significant In that Title n of the Act
provides for a research program aimed at
"minimizing or ending all dumping of
materials within five years of the effec-
tive date of this Act." Congress has ex-
pressed Impatience with the continued
issuance of Interim permits (see H.R.
Rep. No. 94-1047, 94th Cong., 2d Scss.
(1976)), and the EPA agrees that five
years Is sufficient time for dumpers to
develop technology • to end reliance on
ocean dumping which violates environ-
mental criteria.
Existing dumpers who are unable to
meet the 1978 deadline may receive In-
terim permits after that date if they
have implementation schedules adequate
to allow phasing out of ocean dumping
or compliance with all requirements of
a special permit by December 31, 1981.
Experience to date has shown that, while
five years Is sufficient time to.develop
alternatives and technology, three more
years are needed to Implement them.
The 1981 deadline Is based on the Im-
plementation schedules contained In
current interim permits, all of which
provide for compliance or phasing out
by the end of 1981. The proposed regu-
lations required Implementation sched-
ules for Industrial dumpers to provide
for compliance or phasing out by
April 23,1981. Revised § 220.3 (d) changes
this date to December 31, 1981, since It
now applies also to municipal dumpers,
who are unable to meet the April 23
date.
It has been suggested that the 1981
compliance date be changed to 1979 for
Industrial dumpers. This change has not
been made since some industrial dump-
ers are expected to meet the 1981 dead-
line but would not be able to meet a
1979 deadline. It should be stressed that
} 220.3 (d) requires Implementation plans
to provide for phasing out or compli-
ance by December 31, 1981, at the lat-
est. Interim permit holders who are able
to meet earlier deadlines will be re-
quired to do so. Interim permits with
earlier deadline dates are not to be
deemed to be affected by the regulations
promulgated today.
TJie deadlines contained in this sec-
tion are based on current projections of
technological feasibility, and it Is rea-
sonable to expect dumpers to meet them.
The primary purpose of the Act is to
protect the marine environment, and
dumping in violation of environmental
criteria cannot be allowed to continue
Indefinitely. The EPA therefore will not
RULES AND REGULATIONS
retain discretion to issue Interim permits
to applicants who do not meet the re-
quirements of this section.
The proposed regulations authorized
Issuance of Interim permits for sewage
treatment works on a showing that the
dumper had exercised best efforts to
comply with the requirements of a-spe-
cial permit. They did not require the
dumper to have an Implementation
schedule adequate to permit compliance
or phasing out by a specific date. No
deadline was imposed on municipal
dumpers because of their often compli-
cated dependence on public agency
funding sources. In response to several
objections, the distinction between mu-
nicipal and Industrial dumpers has been
removed, and all holders of interim per-
mits will now be required to meet a dead-
line of no later than 1981. Technology
exists to permit municipalities to meet
this deadline; and all Interim permits
currently held by municipalities provide
for compliance or phasing out by the end
of 1981.
Thus, the regulations promulgated
today do not substantially affect the
planning which must be conducted by
municipalities in light of the terms of
existing interim permits held by those
communities. It is noted that in a letter
to the Administrator dated October 28,
1976, from Congressmen Robert L. Leg-
gett, John B. Breaux, Edwin B. Forsythe
and Charles A. Mosher, all of the Sub-
committee on Fisheries and Wildlife Con-
servation and the Environment of the
Committee on Merchant Marine and
Fisheries, It was strongly recommended
that • municipalities and Industries be
treated the same, with respect to In-
terim permits. The Agency has changed
the final regulations consistent with
this recommendation.
New interim permits may be Issued
after 1978 to existing dumpers who ex-
ercise best efforts to comply with the re-
quirements of past permits. As an ex-
ample, municipal dumpers will not be
denied new permits for Inability, despite
best efforts, to raise necessary revenues
to comply with implementation sched-
ule*. While the precarious financial po-
sition of some municipalities may justify
noncompliance with implementation
schedules, it Is expected that few, if
any, exceptions will be granted by the
Agency. The showing which must be
made is significant, such as demonstrat-
ing that an outside construction or waste
disposal firm with which the municipal-
ity has entered into contracts has be-
come insolvent. In the past the commu-
nities employing ocean dumping as the
means to dispose of sludge have on occa-
sion submitted bare conclusions that no
other alternatives are available. Not only
will half-hearted attempts at compliance
with the regulations and weak efforts to
find alternatives not be considered to
be good faith efforts under the revised
criteria, but the Agency will undertake
independent enforcement actions to stop
such practices. It Is not expected that
financial reasons will be sufficient justl-
2463
fication for noncompliance Dy Industrial
dumpers.
Section 220.3 (d) authorizes issuance
of .interim permits after 1978 to dumpers
who have implementation schedules ade-
quate to allow phasing out of ocean
dumping or compliance with the require-
ments of a special permit by 1981. Con-
gressmen Leggett, Breaux, Forsythe and
Mosher, in then* letter of October 26.
1976, to the Administrator, have rec-
ommended that EPA make it explicit
"that the choice between phasing out
and complying with the criteria for a
special permit Is to be made by EPA—
not by the applicant." Section 227.23 does
make clear that this choice is1 up to the
Regional Administrator.
Other commenters have challenged
the authority of EPA to require phasing
out of ocean dumping, maintaining
that special permits must be Issued to all
applicants who meet the requirements
therefor.
Subpart C of Part 227 provides that
special permits may be denied to appli-
cants who have no need to ocean dump,
a factor which the Act directs the EPA
to consider in issuing permits. The en-
vironmental criteria of Part 227 Indicate
only that the materials to be dumped by
a particular dumper are not environ-
mentally unacceptable. Since the cumu-
lative effects of many dumpers may be
environmentally unacceptable, the EPA
must limit the total amount of ocean
dumping and will therefore grant per-
mits only to applicants who demon-
strate lack of acceptable alternatives to
ocean dumping. The purpose of Imple-
mentation plans is to assure that dump-
Ing In violation of the requirements of
Part 227 does not continue Indefinitely.
The Regional Administrators' must have
discretion to determine whether this
purpose will be achieved by compliance
with special permit requirements or by
obviating the need for dumping.
Section 220.3 (d) also provides that new
interim permits will be Issued only to
applicants who demonstrate that they
have exercised best efforts to comply
with all requirements of previous per-
mits.
One commenter has objected to this
provision as requiring denial of permit
applications for minor violations of pre-
vious permits. The same commenter has
suggested that permit violations be dealt
with according to the terms of the per-
mit, rather than by denying future per-
mits. There is no reason not to require
permit holders to follow all terms of
their permits in good faith, and it will
be within the discretion of the Regional
Administrator to determine whether
best efforts have been exercised.
The primary purpose of this provision
Is to ensure compliance with Implemen-
tation schedules. Most interim permits
provide for compliance with schedules
to be determined as of the expiration
date of the permit. If there are no pen-
alties for noncompliance during the term
of a permit, the only way to enforce com-
pliance is to deny subsequent permita.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, HO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
2464
RULES AND REGULATIONS
There, is no reason to give interim per-
mits to dumpers who have demonstrated
an unwillingness to exercise best efforts
to comply with the terms-of a permit.
Several minor changes have been made
in § 220.3 (d) in response to comments.
The proposed regulations provided for
the.,issuance of interim permits "under
certain conditions in ' accordance with
Subpart A of Part 227". One commenter
requested examples of the "certain con-
ditions" under which interim permits
would issue. Since the phrase "certain
conditions" referred only to the condi-
tions specified to Subpart A and was
therefore redundant, it has been deleted.
The phrase "has a treatment facility
under construction" has been changed to
"has an implementation schedule" since
there are methods to phase out dumping
or comply with environmental criteria
which do not require construction 'of
treatment facilities.
Proposed § 220.3 (d) would deny inter-
im permits to foe "expansion or modifi-
cation of an existing facility". Since it
has been pointed out that many imple-
mentation plans require modification or
expansion, this provision has been
changed to deny interim permits "for
the dumping of an increased amount of
waste from an existing facility''.
The criticism of EPA's repeated use of
interim permits has come from many
informed persons, and the objections
have been given careful consideration.
As expressed by Congressmen Leggett,
Breaux, Forsythe and Mosher in the let-
ter of October 26, 1976, to the Adminis-
trator, "EPA continues to allow a sub-
stantial volume of dangerous, toxic ma-
terials to be dumped under 'interim per-
mit' arrangements. * * * We feel that
such Interim permits' should be sum-
marily phased out without continued ex-
ceptions. The revised regulations • ' *
do not effect the intent of Congress as
expressed hi the Marine Protection, Re-
search, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972.''
The answer to the question of repeated
use of interim permits is founded on the
lack of firm scientific conclusions with
respect to individual and combined
dumping of wastes in the oceans. The
answer to this question is inextricably
linked -to the issues of defining trace con-
taminants and to the setting of special
permit conditions. If materials are in
trace quantities or less, or if they com-
ply with special permit conditions, then
one need not rely on interim permits
for continued dumping. Thus, by lenient
definitions of trace contaminants or
special. permit criteria, the Agency
could avoid the interim permit dilemma.
Obviously, the Agency will not arbitrari-
ly define trace contaminants or special
permits to so avoid the issues.
What the Agency has attempted to
do is to estimate as best it can those
levels of pollutants which may be ex-
pected to cause environmental harm, to
apply a safety factor, and to refuse to
sanction dumping of wastes containing
pollutants in these amounts unless there
is no other environmentally acceptable
alternative. EPA has also tried to.prepare
its regulations in view of criteria estab-
lished under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, State laws, and other Fed-
eral pollution control' laws. Obviously it
makes little sense to allow discharges of
mercury through a pipe into Chesapeake
Bay at levels higher than discharges from
a barge into the deep ocean, waters, for
example. The Agency also must consider
its credibility as the regulating agency.
If it demands that a small community
or an industry cease dumping within a
period of time, it should be confident
that there are feasible alternatives which
may be implemented within that time
period. Increasingly, this is true; and this
is the reason all interim permit holders
have been given firm phase-out dates. It
would be improper to adopt a cessation
date which has little factual foundation.
Increasingly, EPA has become aware
that the alternatives to ocean dumping
require careful evaluation; they may not
always be better.
The interim permit remains EPA's
most effective tool because it requires
the permittee to periodically report to
EPA as to the steps being taken to cease
dumping or bring the dumping within
the special permit limits, allows EPA to
retain conservative limits on special per-
mits, and gives EPA the flexibility to re-
fuse reissuance when the Agency con-
cludes that good faith efforts to finfl al-
ternatives are not being made. EPA
refused to reissue an interim permit to
the City of Camden.
Conceivably, EPA could abolish the
category of interim permits or make in-
terim permits of a five-year duration.
This would avoid some of the stigma at-
tached to the Agency's repeated issuance
to the same applicant of interim per-
mits. As with an artificial modification
of the special permit criteria, these op-
tions are unacceptable to EPA.
It must be emphasized that the numer-
ical limits on special permits (which de-
fine when interim permits only can be
obtained) are not founded on the most
precise analytical process. They may be
within orders of magnitude of a "cor-
rect" limit, but there is no confident
means to determine this. EPA has over
the past four years conducted several
open workshops with respect to the
"safe" or "unacceptable" levels of pollut-
ants which may be dumped into the
oceans. The latest was in October of
this year. The only agreement reached
at those sessions is that responsible
scientists are not confident as to a "safe"
number and that measuring environ-
mental effects in the ocean is most
difficult. With respect to any suggested
alternative permit criteria, significant
objections can be raised. In the discus-
sion of § 227.6 below, more details are
presented with respect to this problem.
The question, then, is not whether
EPA has established environmentally un-
acceptable levels, and continues to issue
permits which violate those levels, but is
whether EPA (1) has established levels
Which responsibly estimate concentra-
tions of wastes not acutely toxic or
otherwise clearly harmful; (2) has
created a permit system which' forces
dumpers to find satisfactory alternatives
as soon as possible; and (3) has estab-
lished environmental criteria which are
not inconsistent with criteria established
under other laws with respect to dis-
charges into inland waters. EPA believes
it has adequately met these regulatory
challenges.
(f) Permits for incineration at sea.
One commenter has suggested that
§ 220.3(f) be revised to-allow only re-
search or Interim permits to be issued
for incineration at sea untif criteria on
this type of disposal are promulgated.
This change has not been made. While
there is currently insufficient Informa-
tion on which to base general criteria for
ocean incineration, it is possible to cpn-
duct sufficient research on specific in-
cineration projects to satisfy EPA that
special-permits should be issued in spe-
cific instances.
PART 221
Section 221.1—Applications for per-
mits. This section has been revised
slightly-to require that applications must
be in writing, but not necessarily by let-
ter; that a full evaluation of all alter-
natives is not necessary; and that the
environmental impact of alternatives
must be considered.
Section 221.4—Adequacy of informa-
tion in application. This section has been
revised to allow an "adequate" descrip-
tion of the material to be dumped, rather
than requiring a "full" description. It
was pointed put that, in a practical sense,
it would be impossible to ever achieve a
"full" description of. any material,
PART 222
In response to public comments, the
Agency has made several changes in the
regulations which govern procedures to
be followed In reviewing applications for
ocean dumping permits.
Sectfbn 222.3—Notice of applications.
The Coastal Zone Management Program
of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
recommended that the notice require-
ments of § 222.3 (b) be modified to pro-
vide that the State agencies with respon-
sibility to implement the Coastal Zone
Management Act also receive notice of
applications for ocean dumping permits.
The requested modification has been
made. Also, in paragraph (g) of that
section, a sentence has been added to
clarify that copies of these notices will
also be sent to officials of the Depart-
ments of Commerce and Interior who are
responsible for programs which may be
affected by ocean dumping.
The notice provisions of § 222.3
prompted several requests for major ex-
pansion of the procedures to be followed
in providing notices to the public of
ocean dumping applications. Some com-
menters suggested that notices be placed
in several newspapers in the area from
which the transportation for the pur-
pose of dumping is to commence; other
commenters asked that specific provi-
sions be Included In the FEDERAL REGISTER
for service of notices on particular states
and private parties. Some parties stated
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOl. 42, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
RULES AND REGULATION?
2465
that the notice provision does not provide
adequate time to comment on the appli-
cation. Other parties are. protesting that
the notice provision allowed for unneces-
sary delay In the processing of applica-
tions.
The Agency believes that adequate
notice Is provided to the public by regu-
lations promulgated today. In practice.
the Regional Administrators provide sub-
stantially more notice to parties known
to be Interested in ocean dumping mat-
ters and to Federal and State authorities
within those Regions than is provided in
these regulations. The Intent of the regu-
lations promulgated today is not to
dictate the procedure which may be fol-
lowed in each instance but rather to state
the minimum procedures which must be
followed. Several of the commenters
who wish to be provided with more elab-
orate notice of proposed applications may
receive substantially more details on pro-
posed dumping than Is provided for in
this Part by simply requesting the .Re-
gional Administrator for the Region in
which they are located to so provide with
respect to each ocean dumping applica-
tion. Likewise, parties who believe that
they will continue to have an Interest in
ocean dumping matters may resuest that
they be sent detailed Information on each
application. With respect to the request
that the notice provisions allow for more
or less time, the Agency believes that the
present regulations provide an adequate
compromise between the need to allow
parties to prepare adequately If or presen-
tations at th$ public hearings and for the
need to promptly process ocean dumping
applications. The Agency is concerned
that the entire permit review process
may take an unreasonable period of time
If lengthy periods are allowed at the
various stages to provide opportunity for
parties to prepare new objections or
recommendations to the proposed Agency
action. The present regulations attempt
to allow tune for responsible participa-
tion in the permit review process while
at the same time expediting that process.
Section 222.4—Initiation of hearings.
A change has been made to the proposed
S 222.4 (b). In accordance with the deci-
sion of Judge Gerhard A. Gesell In the
case of "State of Maryland et al. v. 'Train
et al." (DJMd. Civil Action No. 5-1731)
May 10, 1976, 8 ERG 2050, 2054, the
Agency discretion with respect to'the
convening of the initial public hearing is
narrowly circumscribed. Therefore, the
final regulations state that the initial
hearing may be called whenever a per-
son properly requests such a hearing or
whenever the Administrator or Regional
Administrator, as the case may be, de-
termines that such request presents
genuine issues. The prior language re-
quired that the request present "sub-
stantial Issues of public interest". It is
Intended that the Administrator or Re-
gional Administrator deny the request
for a hearing only when It is clear that
the request Is notln good faith or raises
issues which have been clearly addressed
In prior hearings when there is no new
evidence. Denials of hearing requests will
be rare.
Section 222.8—Recommendations of
Presiding Officer. This section has been
amended to provide that the recommen-
dations of the Presiding Officer shall in-
clude a description of evidence relied
upon. Most recommended decisions have
already included such a description of
evidence, but this amendment clarifies
the requirement. It is not Intended that
this regulation will require that the pre-
siding officers cite to a transcript or
exhibit for every fact for which they rely
upon; rather, it is merely intended to en-
sure that there is a clear explication of
the factual bases for the -recommended
decision.
Section 222.9—Issuance of permits. In
§ 222.9(b)(l) the last phrase has been
deleted because a change has been made
to S 222.10(b) to the effect that the Ad-
ministrator or Regional Administrator
may not on their own discretion convene
an adjudicatory hearing. A new para-
graph (c) has been added to this section
to make clear that the term of a presently
valid permit may be extended pending
the conclusion of the proceedings held
pursuant to 5§ 222.7-222.9, at the discre-
tion of the Administrator or Regional
Administrator.
Section 222.10—Appeal to adjudica-
tory hearing. Paragraph (a) of this sec-
tion has been amended to provide that
the request .for an adjudicatory hearing
must be sent within 10 days following
the receipt of the notice of Issuance or
the denial of a permit. The previous lan-
guage required computation of the 10
days following the dispatch of the no-
tice. In an time requirements under the
Part 222 rules, If a document is sent by
the required date, it is considered timely
even if It Is received after the time con-
straint. As noted above, paragraph ,(b)
has been changed to delete the reference
to the Administrator or Regional Ad-
ministrator convening a public hearing
sua sppnte. The original assumption was
that there may be rare circumstances in
which jit may be appropriate for the
Agency to convene an adjudicatory
hearing to resolve difficult factual Is-
sues; it was pointed out by many com-
menters if there are significant factual
Issues involved there no doubt will be a
request for such a hearing. Paragraph
(b) has also been amended to provide
that the Administrator or Regional Ad-
ministrator, as the case may be, may call
an adjudicatory hearing when a proper
request has been made and when he de-
termines that such a hearing is warrant-
ed. The change deletes the language re-
quiring that such a request present sub-
stantial Issues of public Interest. This
modification makes clear that discretion
is allowed the Administrator or the Re-
gional Administrator to determine the
appropriateness of the convening of an
adjudicatory hearing. It is anticipated
that requests for adjudicatory hearings
which raise genuine issues and which
are brought in good faith, not in an at-
tempt to delay, will be acted upon favor-
ably by the Regional Administrator or
Administrator. Adjudicatory hearings
should be commencsd as soon as possible
following granting of the request. The
provision in these regulations for the
convening of an adjudicatory hearing Is
an effort by EPA to provide a forum for
resolution of major factual issues which
may be Involved In the.more significant
permit proceedings.
In paragraph (c) modification has
been made to allow the Administrator or
Regional Administrator, prior to the
conclusion of the adjudicatory hearing
and appeal process, to extend the dura-
tion of the previously issued permit until
a final determination has been made.
This change follows substantially the
recommendation made by the City of
Philadelphia.
Section 222.11—Conduct of adjudica-
tory hearings. The first sentence of this
section has been modified to delete the
word "any" and Insert the words "a rea-
sonable" to modify the time in which
someone must request to be admitted as
a party to an adjudicatory hearing. The
reason for the change Is that persons
should not be allowed to wait until the
last minute to enter an adjudicatory
hearing and thus to possibly alter the
Issues which have been narrowed for
consideration at .that hearing. The last
sentence of paragraph fa) is new. It
clarifies that the EPA staff will automat-
ically be considered a party to the ad-
judicatory hearing.
In paragraph (d), subparagraph (6)
has been deleted. This had-provided that
the prehearing conference could Include
discussion of prehearing discovery. It
was concluded that prehearing discovery
in most Instances would be Inappropri-
ate and would lengthen the hearing to
be conducted pursuant to this section
beyond the time contemplated when this
section was originally drafted. Of course,
the Presiding Officer may request that
the parties undertake Informal discovery
to assist in the expedition of the actual
hearing, but this discovery should not be
overly formal or time-consuming.
There was a great deal of comment
with respect to paragraph (e). setting
forth the adjudicatory hearing proce-
dures. Much of the comment went to the
statement that the burden of proof shall
be on the applicant In the case of ad-
judicatory hearings held pursuant to
S 222.10. Tills subsection has been
changed. It now provides that, In the
case of adjudicatory hearings held pur-
suant to § 222.10(b) (1), the person filing
the request under § 222.10 (a) has the
burden of going forward as to each Issue
raised by that request. This suggestion
substantially follows the recommenda-
tion made by the City of Philadelphia.
Furthermore, references to the biirden-of
proof have been deleted since It was
deemed inappropriate to attempt to allot
the burden of proof in procedural regu-
lations. The Legislative History of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanc-
tuaries Act of 1972, as amended, is clear
that the overall burden of persuasion
rests with the applicant for permit with
respect to basic Issues which must be
satisfied for a permit to be Issued.
Paragraph (e) (5) has been changed
to provide that rulings of the Presiding
Officer on the admlsslbllity of evidence.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
2466
RULES AND REGULATIONS
the propriety of cross-examination, and
other procedural matters merely shall
appear In the record. The prior state-
ment that these rulings shall be final
has been deleted since these Issues can be
clearly raised on appeal. And since inter-
locutory appeals are disallowed, there is
no necessity for such a phrase.
In paragraph (f)', which addresses the
procedures to be followed after the close
of the adjudicatory hearing, the page
limitations on briefs and- other docu-
ments have been revised to allow the fil-
ing of lengthier documents.
Section 222.12—Appeal to Administra-
tor. Consistent with changes made to
other sections of Part 222, in paragraph
(a) the ten-day limitation begins to run
after receipt of the determination of the
Regional Administrator rather than
after the determination itself. Also, In
later subsections of this section, the page
limitations have been expanded slightly
to allow more opportunity to summarize
and comment on the findings and con-
clusions of law.
Section 222.13—Computation of time.
This section Is new. It has been added to
clarify the means by which calculation
of time should be accomplished. The sec-
tion Is Identical to 40 CPR § 125.44, which
applies to National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System Permit proceedings.
PART 223'
Revisions to this Part will be promul-
gated in the near future.
PART 224
Section 224.2—Reports. Specific lan-
guajge has been added to state the type of
Information that must be reported when
an emergency dump at sea Is made.
PART 229
Section 225.2—Review of Dredge Ma-
te/lal Permits. The requirement that EPA
respond to Corps of Engineers permit ac-
tions only after a notice of Intent is re-
ceived has been deleted, since a permit
action may be terminated prior to that
point In some cases, and EPA review
'would normally begin prior to Issuance
of a notice of Intent.
PART 226
Revisions to this Part will be promul-
gated In the near future.
PART 227
Many of the comments severely criti-
cized the lack of a definition for "trace
contaminants", the basis upon which the
trace contaminant levels were set, and
the differences between the dredged ma-
terial criteria and the criteria for other
materials. A technical workshop was con-
vened by EPA to discuss these Issues.
There was general agreement among the
participants that the criteria should be
based, wherever possible, on impacts of
dumped materials on marine ecosystems,
and that these Impacts could be meas-
ured best by bioassays rather than by
relying on determination of total
amounts of specific constituents present
to a waste. The full transcript of that
workshop Is Included In the Final EIS.
It was recognized that dredged mate-
rial Is merely a special case of a material
containing liquid, suspended partlculate,
and solid phases, and that, while bloassay
techniques on liquid materials have been
developed to the point where they can be
applied on a routine basis, bioassay tech-
niques for the suspended partlculate and
solid phases of materials are still in an
advanced stage of research and are not
yet available for routine use. Neverthe-
less, the participants agreed that the
.criteria should be based on solid phase
bioassays, recognizing that there will be
an interim period during which the pro-
cedures will have to be specified on a
case-by-case basis, and that such In-
terim procedures may be less reliable and
more difficult to perform than proce-
dures which will be developed in the fu-
ture.
Sections of Part 227 have been re-
vised to reflect the recommendations of
the workshop; thus, all criteria are based
on ecosystem impact rather than on as-
sumptions regarding allowable devia-
tions from normal ambient values. These
revisions are consistent with the concept
of "unreasonable degradation" in these
regulations and are directed toward
achieving the goal of preventing signifi-
cant impact on the biota. The use of
bioassay results for regulatory purposes
will provide EPA with direct measure-
ments of the impact of dumping mate-
rials, so that it will no longer be neces-
sary to Infer damage indirectly through
measurements related to normal ambi-
ent values.
Substantial revisions have been made
in §§ 227.6, 227.13, and Subpart G. De-
tails of the specific changes are pre-
sented below in the discussion of those
sections. In general, § 227.6 has been re-
vised to use liquid, suspended particu-
late, and solid phase bioassays as the
basis for determining trace contami-
nants; § 227.13 has been changed to re-
quire bioassay results to be used In deter-
mining whether or not dredged material
is environmentally acceptable for ocean
dumping; and Subpart G has been re-
vised to include definitions of liquid, sus-
pended partlculate, and solid phases,
and of initial mixing allowances and
limiting permissible concentrations for
both liquid and solid phases.
Section 227.1—Applicability. Para-
graph (b) of this section has been
changed to make all of § 22*7.6 as well
as §§ 227.9 and 227.10 applicable to
dredged material, in addition to the
other sections aJready made applicable.
This is consistent with changes made in
§§ 227.6, 227.13, and Subpart G.
Section ,227.6—Trace contaminants.
This section has been completely re-
drafted in response to the many com-
ments received and to reflect the agree-
ments reached at the technical work-
shop called by EPA to discuss those
comments received during the public
comment period. The redrafted section
differs from that in the proposed regu-
lations published on June 28, 1976:
1. The Agency Is providing a broad
narrative interpretation of, the term
"trace contaminants." The term "trace
contaminants" is used in the Convention
only, not In the Act When the contract-
Ing parties to the Convention define this
term, the United States will be bound
by that definition. Should the Conven-
tion adopt a definition requiring more
stringent operational levels than the
United States is using, these levels will
have to be changed accordingly. In the
meantime, the Act and the Convention
can be enforced effectively by stating
the basis for regulation of these constitu-
ents.
Section i 227.6 (b) provides in general
terms that these constituents will be
considered as trace contaminants only
when they are present in such amounts
and forms that they will cause no signifi-
cant undesirable effects through either
toxicity or bioaccumulation.
2. Section 227.6 (c) states the criteria
for special permits and for wastes which
otherwise can be deemed environmen-
tally acceptable under Subpart'B. Para-
graph (c) of § 227.6 does not define trace
contaminants; it merely states what Is
acceptable for ocean dumping under the
environmental criteria of Subpart B,
The test to be applied on all wastes Is
the direct determination of the impact
of these constituents present in a waste
on the marine ecosystem, as measured
by bioassay techniques.
For liquid wastes and the liquid phases
of mixed wastes, It Is assumed that all of,
these constituents present are in forms
available to the biota. Section 227.6 (c) (1)
provides that constituents in the liquid
phase will be considered environmentally
acceptable (i.e., they qualify for special
permits) if they conform to the EPA ma-
rine water quality criteria. These criteria
are based on the most recent and com-
prehensive compilation of bioassay data
presently available, and recommend per-
missible ambient levels to avoid either
chronic toxicity or potential for bioaccu-
mulation of toxic materials, whichever
factor is more restrictive. Thus, by apply-
ing the marine water quality criteria to
the liquid phase, it Is practical to deter-
mine environmental impact through
chemical analysis.
For mercury, however, the marine
water -quality criteria are set near the
lowest ambient levels observed in ocean
waters; ambient levels In many parts of
the ocean deviate from this level signifi-
cantly. Therefore, an allowance for an
increase In mercury of 50 percent over
the local ambient level after initial mix-
Ing is allowed. This is consistent with the
existing criteria for both liquid and solid
phases, which are based on the range and
variation of historically observed values
for mercury in ocean waters and sedi-
ments. It should be noted that "normal
ambient concentrations" refers to con-
centrations that would be present were
there no dumping In the area. It should
also be noted that, within areas for which
a natural ambient concentration has
been identified, deviations In mercury
concentration up to 100 percenfr are not
uncommon; allowing for a change of 50
percent of the average ambient levels
therefore falls within the range of devi-
FEOERAl REGISTER, VOL. 47, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
atlon which occurs naturally to ocean
waters.
There are some organohalogens for
which marine water quality criteria have
not been set at this time.-When such
compounds are present in the liquid
phase of a waste, bioassay data on those
specific compounds must be presented by
the applicant, either through his own ef-
forts or from a search of the scientific!
literature. Alternatively, a bioassy may
be performed on the waste itself rather
than on these specific constituents, but
such bioassays must be of such a nature
as to provide data on chronic toxicity
and bioaccumulation potential.
For suspended participate and solid
phases, however, the state-of-the-art has
not yet advanced to the point where sedi-
ment quality criteria can be set. In fact,
research on benthlc bioassays is only now
at the stage where interim procedures
can be developed and used. Nevertheless,
there was general agreement among the
'participants at the technical workshop
that even the interim procedures now
available provide much better informa-
tion on the impact of solid phases of
waste materials on the marine ecosystem
than does any form of bulk analysis.
Therefore, bioassays on the solid phase
are called for in the criteria, recognizing
that interim procedures must be used for
a period of several months until stand-
ard procedures are developed by EPA
and Corps of Engineers research activi-
ties. EPA and the Corps of Engineers will
publish jointly, in the very near future,
standard benthlc bioassay procedures.
Until that time, guidance on interim pro-
cedures will be supplied by the Regional
Administrator or the District Engineer.
Interim and final benthic bioassay pro-
cedures acceptable for implementation of
this section will deal with the chronic
toxic effects or the bioaccumulation of
mercury, cadmium, organohalogens, oils
and greases.
The criterion for acceptability of a
waste based on the solid phase bioassay
is absence of significant difference be-
tween the control bioassay and the test
bioassay due to the presence of any of
the constituents listed in this section.
This section also recognizes that there
may be carcinogens, mutagens, and tera-
togens, for which water quality criteria
do not presently exist In such cases, spe-
cial studies may be required to estab-
lish appropriate limits. It is the intent of
this section that such studies will be re-
quired, unless there is sufficient informa-
tion in the scientific literature for the
Regional Administrator to determine ac-
ceptable levels of these constituents for
ocean dumping. If there is insufficient in-
formation in the scientific literature and
the applicant is unwilling to conduct
special studies, a special permit will be
denied under 5 227.5 (c), which prohibits
the dumping of materials whose proper-
ties are insufficiently described to permit
application of the Criteria.
3. Provision is made for the continuing
use of the existing numerical levels for
solid phases as an interim measure for
those cases in which satisfactory Interim
bioassay procedures are not available.
RULES AND REGULATIONS
The present levels 'allow about a 50
percent deviation from normal ambient
values. This is a very stringent require-
ment and it should be retained as a basic
requirement for use when further infor-
mation is not available. The language
has, however, been changed to allow the
application, in the case of solid materials,
of a limit not more than 50 percent
greater than the normal ambient value
in the "vicinity of the proposed dump site.
This is in .response to comments pointing
out that the data base on which these
criteria were set is quite small and may
not be representative of actual oceanic
sediments which may contain signif-
icantly lower concentrations of these
materials than is reflected in the nu-
merical criteria.
This section, as redrafted, applies to
all materials, to be dumped, Including
dredged materials. The terms "liquid
phase", "suspended particulate", and
"solid phase" are defined in 5 227.32, and
apply to all materials containing soluble
and insoluble materials.
Section 227.7—Limits established* for
specific wastes or waste constituents.
Paragraph (a) has been modified to
clarify its application only to liquid
materials immiscible with sea-water, not
those which may interact with seawater.
Paragraph (c) has been changed to clari-
fy that the intent of the paragraph is to
protect human health and that of the
marine ecosystem. Paragraph (d) has
been changed to include a requirement
for no more than 10 percent change-in
acidity or alkalinity for neutralization of
wastes.
Section 227.10—Hazards to fishing,
navigation, shorelines, and beaches. This
section has been changed to include the
term "unacceptable" Interference or
damage rather than "no" interference
or damage. This change was made in
response to comments which pointed out
the impossibility of proving that there is
no possibility of Interference or damage.
Applicants will be required to present
reasonable evidence that interference or
damage will be avoided, and the Regional
Administrator will have discretion to
determine what is "unacceptable".
Section- 227.13—Dredged materials.
This section has been completely re-
drafted in response to comments point-
ing out that the dredged material criteria
were not comparable to those for other
materials. As redrafted, dredged mate-
rial, as well as all other wastes contain-
ing liquid, suspended particulate and
solid phases, must meet the requirements
of §§ 227.5, 227.6, 227.9, 227.10, 227.13,
and Subpart G, in order to be environ-
mentally acceptable for ocean disposal.
An Initial-screening procedure is in-
corporated which is similar to the re-
quirement of 5 227.12 for inert natural
wastes, except that the exclusions in
§ 227.13 are more specific than those in
§ 227.12. The rationale for these exclu-
sions is presented in the final E1S.
Dredged materials which cannot meet
these requirements are subject to further
testing of both the liquid and solid
phases. To be environmentally acceptable
for ocean dumpK.j, the liquid phase, sus-
2467
pended particulate phase, and solid phase
must meet both .the trace contaminant;
requirements of ! 227.6 and the Limning
Permissible Concentration requirements
Of § 227.27:
Since the concepts of liquid phase,
suspended particulate phase, and solid
phase apply to all multiphase'materials.
the definition of the liquid phase for
dredged material (i.e., the elutriate) has
been -removed from J 227.13 and Incor-
porated in the definitions of Subpart O as
part of S 227.32.
Section 227.15—Factors considered in
determining the need for ocean dumping
Paragraph (a) has been changed to re-
quire that treatment be useful as well as
feasible. Paragraph (c) has been changed
to'include a provision for evaluating risks
to the environment for the use of alter-
natives. This change is also reflected in
5 227.16.
Section 227.18—Factors considered. A
requirement for considering impact on
potential recreational and commercial
use is included.
Section 227.19—Assessment of impact.
A requirement for assessing the impact
of alternatives is included.
Section 227.27—Limiting. Permissible
Concentration (LPC). This section has
been redrafted to define LPC for the. liq-
uid, suspended particulate, and solid
phases. The liquid phase LPC has been
associated, wherever possible, with the
applicable marine water quality criteria,
and the suspended particulate and solid
phases have been based on the avoidance
of overall chronic toxicity after allow-
ance for initial dispersion. Procedures for
conducting the appropriate bioassays will
be published in the near future by EPA
and the Corps of Engineers. Until such
procedures are published. Interim guid-
ance can be obtained from the Regional
Administrator or the District Engineer.
Some commenters pointed out that the
proposed regulations do not explicitly re-
quire analysis of wastes for those con-
stituents listed in Annex H of the Con-
vention. EPA has not specifically enu-
merated these constituents since it is not
necessary to do so hi order to determine
whether or not a waste is environmen-
tally acceptable for dumping. Section
227.27(a) (1) requires compliance with all
applicable marine water quality criteria;
there are criteria for all materials listed
in Annex II, except fluorides. Section
227.27
-------
2468
RULES AND REGULATIONS
tion factor used to determine the LPC
If there is reasonable scientific evidence
on a specific waste to support such a
claim. When such evidence is presented,
on this or other scientific aspects of the
criteria, EPA may convene an appropri-
ate scientific review panel to examine the
reasonableness of the evidence prior to
taking action.
Section 227.29—Initial mixing. Initial
mixing for the solid phase is included.
Field data and mathematical models for
predicting dispersion may be used where
available; when they are not available,
solid phases are assumed to be evenly
distributed over the ocean bottom in ah
area equivalent to that of the release
zone. This Is an assumption, but it Is a
conservative one which would err on the
side of environmental protection. Provi-
sion is also made in this section for using
different approaches to initial mixing
based on reasonable scientific evidence
In specific cases.
Section 227.30—High-level radioactive
wastes. It is noted that this definition,
which is given In the Act, is more re-
strictive than that provisionally recom-
mended by the International Atomic En-
ergy Agency, which is the minimum
standard binding on Contracting Parties
to the Convention.
Section 227.31—Applicable marine wa-
ter quality criteria. This is a new section
added to define the applicable marine
water quality criteria as being the cri-
teria presented for marine waters in the-
EPA publication "Quality Criteria for
Water" as amended by subsequent pub-
lications.
Section 227.32—Liquid, suspended par-
tlculate, and solid phases of materials.
This is a new section added to define, for
the purpose of these regulations, how
liquid, suspended participate, and solid
phases are determined for different types
of materials. Because some materials
may Interact with seawater, a general
provision Is Included to give the Regional
Administrator direction to require the
use of elutriation with seawater when he
has reason to believe that the elutriation
procedure may reveal toxic effects which
might otherwise remain hidden. These
definitions apply to any multi-phase ma-
terial regardless of origin; i.e., sewage
sludge as well as dredged material.
The definition of the liquid phase of
dredged material is the same as the defi-
nition of the elutriate in § 227.13 (c) of
the regulations proposed on June 28,
1976. For other materials containing
both soluble and insoluble matter, the
relative proportions of waste material
and seawater are to be determined by
EPA on a case-by-case basis. This gives
EPA discretion to select the best propor-
tions for measuring the maximum effect
a material might have when dumped in
seawater.
PART 228
Section 228.2—Definitions. The first
sentence in this section has been changed
to make that sentence consistent with
other statements In Part 228. The term
"disposal site" means an Interim or final
approved site, since the conditions of
Part 228 clearly apply to those interim
sites for which final Environmental Im-
pact Statements have not yet been con-
ducted and for which final designations,
therefore, have yet to be made.
Section 228.4—Procedures for desig-
nation of sites. Paragraph (e) of this
section has been revised In response to
criticisms concerning the proposed pro-
cedures for designation of dredged ma-
terial disposal" sites. This section now
explicitly states that EPA will designate
dredged material disposal sites and de-
scribes the procedures that will be used.
These procedures are the same that
are to be used in the designation of dis-
posal sites for the dumping of materials
under special and Interim permits. The
Act allows the Corps of Engineers to use
other sites than those recommended by
EPA when the use of EPA-designated
sites is not feasible. This section requires
that the same criteria be used by the
Corps of Engineers in site designation as
are used by EPA.
Section 228.12—Delegation of manage-
ment authority for interim ocean dump-
Ing sites. The Coast Guard has with-
drawn Its request to have disposal sites
reoriented to use LOBAN-C time delay
coordinates, and this section has been
changed accordingly; The dredged mate-
rial sites designated In § 228.4 have been
added to the list of sites in the table
following 5 228.12.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND INFLATIONARY IMPACT
STATEMENTS
Although the Agency is not required
by law to prepare an Environmental Im-
pact Statement In connection with, re-
vision of the regulations and criteria-per-
taining to ocean disposal, It has chosen to
prepare such a statement with respect to
the proposed revision to Part 227. See 39
FB 37419 (October 21, 1974). A final En-
vironmental Impact Statement has been
prepared and Is available for Inspection
in the office noted in the last paragraph
of this preamble. In addition, there are a
limited number of the statements avail-
able to persons who have an interest in
reviewing that document. Requests for
copies should be sent to the address
noted below.
Executive Order 11821 (November 27,
1974) requires that major proposals for
legislation and promulgation of regula-
tions and rules by agencies of the Exec-
utive Branch be accompanied by a state-
ment certifying that the inflationary
Impact of the proposal has been eval-
uated; OMB Circular A-107 (January 28,
1975) prescribes guidelines for the iden-
tification and evaluation of major pro-
posals requiring preparation of inflation-
ary impact certifications. The Adminis-
trator has directed that EPA regulatory
actions will require certification when
they are likely to result in: (1) annual -
ized costs exceeding $100,000,000; (2)
total additional costs of production of
any major project exceeding 5 percent of
selling price; or '(3) increase in net na-
tional energy consumption by the equiva-
lent of 25,000 barrels of oil per day. None
of these limiting criteria is exceeded by
the proposed revisions announced today
8
and, therefore, an inflationary impact
statement has not been prepared.
These regulations and criteria will be-
come effective February^p, 1977, and all
ocean dumping permits issued after that
date must be in compliance with these
regulations and criteria.
The Agency will consider all written
comments on these final regulations and
criteria in making any future revisions.
Comments should be provided in tripli-
cate and addressed to Chief, Marine Pro-
tection Branch (WH-548), Oil and Spe-
cial Materials Control Division, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, 401 M Street
SW, Washington, D.C. 20460.
(33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.)
Dated: December 30, 1976.
RUSSELL E. TRAIN,
Administrator.
Subchapter H of Chapter I of Title 40
Is hereby amended to read as follows:
SUBCHAPTER H—OCEAN DUMPING
Part
220 General.
221 Applications for Ocean Dumping
Permits under section 102 of the
Act.
222 Action on Ocean Dumping Permit
applications under section 102 of
the Act.
223 Contents of permits.
224 Records and reports required of
ocean dumping permittees under
section 102 of the Act.
225 Corps of Engineers Dredged Mate-
.rial Permits.
226 Enforcement.
227 Criteria for 'the evaluation of per-
mit applications for ocean dump-
ing of materials.
228 Criteria for the management of dis-
posal sites for ocean dumping.
229 General permits.
PART 220—GENERAL
Sec.
220.1 Purpose and scope.
2202 Definitions.
920.3 Categories of permits.
220.4 Authorities to Issue permits.
AUTHORITY: 33 TJ.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
§ 220.1 Purpose and scope.
(a) General. This Subchapter H estab-
lishes procedures and criteria for the
issuance of permits by EPA pursuant to
section 102 of the Act. This Subchapter H
also establishes the criteria to be applied
by the Corps of Engineers in its review
of activities involving the transportation
of dredged material for the purpose of
dumping it in ocean waters pursuant to
section 103 of the Act. Except as may be
authorized by a permit issued pursuant
to this Subchapter H, or pursuant to
section 103 of the Act, and subject to
other applicable regulations promulgated
pursuant to section 108 of the Act:
(1) No person shall transport from the
United States any material for the pur-
pose of dumping it into ocean -waters;
(2) In the case of a vessel or aircraft
registered in the United States or flying
the United States flag or hi the case of a
United States department, agency, or in-
FEOERAL REGISTER, VOL 42, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
strumentality, no person shall transport
from any location any material for the
purpose of dumping it Into ocean waters;
and
(3) No person shall dump any mate-
rial transported from a location outside
the United States:
(1) Into the territorial sea of the
United States; or
(11) Into a zone contiguous to the ter-
ritorial sea of the United States, extend-
ing to a line twelve nautical miles sea-
ward from the base line from which the
breadth of the territorial sea Is meas-
ured, to the extent that it may affect the
territorial sea or the territory of the
United States.
(b) Relationship to international
agreements. In accordance with section
102 (a) of the Act. the regulations and
criteria Included In this Subchapter H
apply the standards and criteria binding
upon the United States under the Con-
vention on the Prevention of Marine Pol-
lution by Dumping of Wastes and Other
Matter to the extent that application of
such standards and criteria do not relax
the requirements of the Act.
-------
2470
when the Administrator determines that
there exists an emergency requiring the
dumping of such materials which poses
an unacceptable risk to human health
and admits of no other feasible solution.
(d) Interim permits. Prior to April 23,
1978, Interim permits may be issued In
accordance with Subpart A of Part 227 to
dump materials which are not in com-
pliance with the environmental impact
criteria of Subpart B of Part 227, or
which would cause substantial adverse
effects as determined in accordance with
the criteria of Subparts D or E of Part
227 or for which an ocean disposal site
has not been designated on other than an
Interim basis pursuant to Part 228 of this
Bubchapter H; provided, however, no
permit may be issued for the ocean
dumping of any materials listed In
{ 227.5, or for any of the materials listed
In t 227.6, except as trace contaminants;
provided further that the compliance
date of April 23, 1978, does not apply to
the dumping of wastes by existing dump-
ers when the Regional Administrator
determines that the permittee has exer-
cised his best efforts to comply with aU
requirements of a special permit by
April 23, 1978, and has an implementa-
tion schedule adequate to allow phasing
out of ocean dumping or compliance with
all requirements necessary to receive a
special permit by December 31, 1981, at
the latest. No interim permit will be
granted for the dumping of waste from a
facility which has not previously dumped
wastes In the ocean (except when the
facility Is operated by a municipality now
dumping such wastes), from a new facil-
ity, or for the dumping of an Increased
amount of waste from the expansion or
modification of an existing facility, after
the effective date of these regulations. No
Interim permit will be Issued for the
dumping of any material In the ocean
for which an Interim permit had pre-
viously been Issued unless the applicant
demonstrates that he has exercised his
best efforts to comply with all provisions
of the previously Issued permits.
(e) Research permits. Research per-
mits may be Issued for the dumping of
any materials, other than materials spec-
ified in § 227.5 or for any of the mate-
rials listed in 5 227.6 except as trace con-
taminants, unless subject to the exclu-
sion of § 227.6 (g), Into-the ocean as part
of a research project when it is deter-
mined that the scientific merit of the
proposed project outweighs the potential
environmental or other damage that may
result from the dumping. Research per-
mits shall specify an expiration date no
later than 18 months from the date of
issue.
(f) Permits for incineration at sea.
Permits for incineration of wastes at sea
will be issued only as research permits
or as Interim permits until specific cri-
teria to regulate this type of disposal are
promulgated, except to those cases where
studies on the waste, the incineration
method and vessel, and the site have been
conducted and the site has been desig-
RULES AND REGULATIONS
nated for Incineration at sea In accord-
ance with the procedures of S 228.4 (b).
In all other respects the requirements of
Parts 220-228 apply.
§ 220.4 Authorities to issue permits.
(a) Determination by Administrator.
The Administrator, or such other EPA
employee as he may from time to time
designate In writing, shall Issue, deny,
modify, revoke, suspend, impose condi-
tions on, initiate and carry out enforce-
ment activities and take any and all other
actions necessary or proper and per-
mitted by law with respect to general,
special, emergency, interim, or research
permits.
(b) Authority delegated to Regional
Administrators.Regional Administrators,
or such other EPA employees as they may
from time to time designate In writing,
are delegated the authority to Issue,
deny, modify, revoke, suspend, impose
conditions on, initiate and carry out en-
forcement activities, and take any and
all other actions necessary or proper and
permitted by law with respect to special
and interim permits for:
(1) The dumping of material In those
portions of the territorial sea which are
subject to the jurisdiction of any State
within their respective Regions, and In
those portions of the contiguous zone
Immediately adjacent to such parts of
the territorial sea; and'In the oceans
with respect to approved waste disposal
sites designated pursuant to Part 228
of this Subchapter H, and
(2) Where transportation for dump-
Ing is to originate in one Region and
dumping is to occur at a location within
another Region's jurisdiction conferred
by order of the Administrator, the Re-
gion to which transportation is to orig-
inate shall be responsible for review of
the application and shall prepare the
technical evaluation of the need for
dumping and alternatives to ocean
dumping. The Region having jurisdic-
tion over the proposed dump site shall
take all other actions required by this
Subchapter H with respect to the permit
application, Including without limita-
tion, determining to Issue or deny the
permit, specifying the conditions to be
imposed, and giving public notice. If
both Regions do not concur in the dispo-
sition of the permit application, the Ad-
ministrator will make the final decision
on all issues with respect to'the permit
application, including without limita-
tion, issuance or denial of the permit
and the conditions to be imposed.
,(c) Review of Corps of Engineers
Dredged Material Permits. Regional Ad-
ministrators have the authority to re-
view, to approve or to disapprove or to
propose conditions upon Dredged Ma-
terial Permits for ocean dumping of
dredged material at locations within the
respective Regional jurisdictions. Re-
gional jurisdiction to act under this
paragraph (c) of | 220.4 is determined
by the Administrator in accordance with
§228.4(e).
PART 221—APPLICATIONS FOR OCEAN
DUMPING PERMITS UNDER SECTION
102 OF THE ACT
Sec.
221.1 Applications for permits.
2215 Other Information.
221.3 Applicant.
221.4 Adequacy of Information In applica-
tion.
221.5 Processing fees.
AUTHORITY: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
§ 221.1 Applications for permits.
Applications for general, special, emer-
gency, interim and research permits un-
der section 102 of the Act may be filed
with the Administrator or the appro-
priate Regional Administrator, as the
case may be, authorized by Section 220.4
to act on the application. Applications
shall be made in writing and shall con-
tain,, in addition to any other material
which may be required, the following:
(a) Name and address of applicant;
(b) Name of the person or firm trans-
porting the material for dumping, the
name of the person(s) or flrm(s) produc-
ing or processing all materials to be
transported for dumping, and the name
or other identification, and usual loca-
tion, of the conveyance to be used in the
transportation and dumping of the ma-
terial to be dumped, Including Informa-
tion on the transporting vessel's com-
munications and navigation equipment;
(c) Adequate physical and chemical
description of material to be dumped,
including results of tests necessary to
apply the Criteria, and the number,
size, and physical configuration of any
containers to be dumped;
(d) Quantity of material to be
dumped;
(e) Proposed dates and times of dis-
posal;
(f) Proposed dump site, and In the
event such proposed dump site is not a
dump site designated In this. Subchapter
H, detailed physical, chemical and bio-
logical Information relating to the pro-
posed dump site and sufficient to sup-
port its designation as a site according
to the procedures of Part 228 of this
Subchapter H;
(g) Proposed method of releasing the
material at the dump site and means by
which the disposal rate can be controlled
and modified as required;
(h) Identification of the specific proc-
ess or activity giving rise to the produc-
tion of the material;
(i) Description of the manner in which
the type of material proposed to be
dumped has been previously disposed of
by or on behalf of the person(s) or
firm(s) producing such material;
(j) A statement of the need for the
proposed dumping and an evaluation of
short and long term alternative means of
disposal, treatment or recycle of the ma-
terial. Means of disposal shall Include
without limitation, landfill, well Injec-
tion, incineration, spread of material
over open ground; biological, chemical or
physical treatment; recovery and recycle
10
FEDERAL. REGISTER, VOL 42, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY IT, 1977
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
2171
of material within the plant or at other
plants which may use the material, and
Storage. The statement shall also Include
an analysis of the availability and envi-
ronmental Impact of such alternatives;
and
(k) An assessment of the anticipated
environmental Impact of the proposed
dumping. Including without limitation.
the relative duration of the effect of the
proposed dumping on the marine envi-
ronment, navigation, living and non-liv-
ing marine resource exploitation, sci-
entific study, recreat!6n and other uses
of the ocean.
§ 221.2 Olher information.
In the event the Administrator, Re-
gional Administrator, or a person desig-
nated by either to review permit applica-
tions, determines that additional infor-
mation Is needed In order to apply the
Criteria, he shall so advise the applicant
in writing. All additional Information
requested pursuant to this 3 221.2 shall be
deemed part of the application and for
purposes of applying the time limitation
of 5222.1, the application will not be con-
sidered complete until such information
has been filed.
§ 221.3 Applicant.
Any person may apply for a permit un-
der this Subchapter H even though the
proposed dumping may be carried on by
a permittee who is not the applicant;
provided however, that the Administra-
tor or the Regional Administrator, as the
ease may be, may, in his discretion, re-
quire that an .application be filed by the
person or firm producing or processing
the material proposed to be dumped. Is-
suance of a permit will not excuse the
permittee from any civil or criminal lia-
bility which may attach by virtue of his
having transported or dumped materials
in violation of the terms or conditions
of a permit, notwithstanding that the
permittee may not have been the appli-
cant.
§ 221.4 Adequacy of information in ap-
plication.
No permit Issued under this Subchap-
ter H will be valid for the transportation
or dumping of any material which is not
accurately and adequately described in
the application. No permittee shall be
relieved of any liability which may arise
as a result of the transportation or
dumping of material which does not con-
form to Information provided in the ap-
plication solely by virtue of the fact that
such Information was furnished by an
applicant other than the permittee.
§ 221.5 Processing fees.
General .permits. Notice of every
complete application for a general per-
mit or notice of action' proposed to be
taken by the Administrator to issue a
general permit, without an application,
shall be given by publication In the FED-
ERAL REGISTER.
(3) Emergency permits. Notice of every
complete application for an emergency
permit shall be given by publication la
accordance with paragraphs (b) (IX (1)
and (11) of this section; provided, how-
ever, that no such notice and no tenta-
tive determination In accordance with
5 222.2 shall be required In any case in
which the Administrator determines:
(1) That an emergency, as defined in
paragraph (c) of 5 220.3 exists;
(11) That the emergency poses an un-
acceptable risk relating to human health;
(ill) That the emergency admits of no
other feasible solution; and
(IvJ That the public Interest requires
the Issuance of an emergency permit as
soon as possible.
Notice of any determination mode by
the Administrator pursuant to this para-
graph (b) (3) shall be given as soon .as
practicable after the Issuance of the
emergency permit by publication in ac-
cordance with paragraphs (b)(l) (1) and
(11) and with paragraphs (a), (c)-(l) of
tills section.
(c) Copies of notice sent to specific
persons. In addition to the publication of
notice required by paragraph (b) of this
section, copies of such notice will be
mailed by the Administrator or the Re-
gional Administrator, as the case may be.
to any person, group or Federal, State or
local agency upon request. Any such re-
quest may be a standing reque.st for cop-
ies of such notices and shall be submitted
In writing to the Administrator or to any
Regional Administrator and shall relate
to all or any class of permit applications
which may be acted upon by the Admin-
FEDERAl REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
2172
RULES AND REGULATIONS
istrator or such Regional Administrator,
as the case may be.
(d) Copies of notice sent to States. In
addition to the publication of notice re-
quired by paragraph (b) of this section,
copies of such notice will be mailed to
the State water pollution control agency
and to the State agency responsible for
carrying out the Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Act, if such agency exists, for each
coastal State within 500 miles of the pro-
posed dumping site.
(e) Copies of notice sent to Corps of
Engineers. In addition to the publication
of notice required by paragraph (b) of
this section, copies of .such notice will be
mailed to the office of the appropriate
District Engineer of the U:S. Army Corps
of Engineers for purposes of section 106
(c) of the Act (pertaining to navigation,
harbor approaches, and artificial Islands
on the outer continental shelf).
(f) Copies of notice sent to Coast
Guard. In addition to the publication of
notice required by paragraph (b) of this
section, copies of such notice will be sent
to the appropriate district office of the
U.S. Coast Guard for review and possible
suggestion of additional conditions to be
Included In the permit to facilitate sur-
veillance and enforcement.
(g) Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, Reorganization Plan No, 4 of 1970,
and the Act require that the Administra-
tor or the Regional Administrator, as the
case may be, consult with appropriate
regional officials of the Departments of
Commerce and Interior, the Regional Di-
rector of the NMFS-NOAA, and the
agency exercising administrative juris-
diction over the fish and wildlife re-
sources of the States subject to any
dumping prior to the issuance of a per-
mit under this Subchapter H. Copies of
the notice shall be sent to the persons
noted in paragraph (g) of this section.
(h) Copies of notice sent to Food and
Drug Administration. In addition to the
publication of notice required by para-
graph (b) of this section, copies of such
notice will be mailed to Food and Drug
Administration, Shellfish Sanitation
Branch (HF-417), 200 C Street SW.,
Washington, D.C. 20204.
(i) Failure to give certain notices. Fail-
ure to send copies of any public notice
in accordance with paragraphs (c)
through (h) of this section shall not in-
validate any notice given pursuant to
this section nor shall such failure invali-
date any subsequent administrative pro-
ceeding.
(j) Failure, of consulted agency to re-
spond. Unless advice to the contrary is
received from the appropriate Federal
or State agency within 30 days of the
date copies of any public notice were dis-
patched to such agency, such agency
will be deemed to have no objection to
the issuance of the permit Identified in
the public notice.
§ 222.4 Initiation of hearings
(a) In the case of any permit applica-
tion for which public notice in advance
of permit Issuance Is required in accord-
ance with paragraph (b) of f 222.3, any
person may, within 30 days of the date
on which all provisions of paragraph (b)
of § 222.3 have been Complied with, re-
quest a public hearing to consider the is-
suance or denial of, or the conditions to
be imposed upon, such permit. Any such
request for a public hearing shall be in
writing, shall identify the person re-
questing the hearing, shall state with
particularity any objections to the issu-
ance or denial of, or to the conditions
to be imposed upon, the proposed per-
mit, and shall state the Issues which are
proposed to be raised by such person
for consideration at a hearing.
(b) Whenever (1) a written request
satisfying the requirements of paragraph
(a) of this section has been received and
the Administrator or Regional Adminis-
trator, as the case may be, determines
that such request presents genuine is-
sues, or (2) the Administrator or Re-
gional Administrator, as the case may be,
determines in his discretion that a public
hearing is necessary or appropriate, the
Administrator or the Regional Adminis-
trator, as the case may be, will set a time
and place for a public hearing in accord-
ance with § 222.5, and will give notice
of such hearing by publication in accord-
ance with § 222.3. .
(c) In the event the Administrator or
the Regional Administrator, as the case
may be, determines that a request filed
pursuant to paragraph (a) of this sec-
tion does not comply with the require-
ments of such paragraph (a) or that such
request does not present substantial
issues of public interest, he shall advise,
in writing, the person requesting the
hearing of his determination.
§ 222.5 Time and place of hearings.
Hearings shall be held in the State in
closest proximity to the proposed dump
site, whenever practicable, and shall be
set for the earliest practicable date no
less than 30 days after the receipt of an
appropriate request for a hearing or a
determination by the Administrator or
the Regional Administrator, as the case
may be, to hold such a hearing without
such a request.
§ 222.6 Presiding Officer.
A hearing convened pursuant to this
Subchapter H shall be conducted by a
Presiding Officer. The Administrator or
Regional Administrator, as the case may
be, may designate a Presiding Officer.
For adjudicatory hearings held pursuant
to § 222.11, the Presiding Officer shall be
an Administrative La/w Judge.
§ 222.7 Conduct of public hearing.
The Presiding Officer shall be responsi-
ble for the expeditious conduct of the
hearing. The hearing shall be an in-
formal public hearing, not an adversary
proceeding, and shall be conducted so
as to allow the presentation of public
comments. When the Presiding Officer
determines that it is necessary or ap-
propriate, he shall cause a suitable rec-
ord, which may include a verbatim tran-
script, of the proceedings to be made.
Any person may appear at a public hear-
ing convened pursuant to § 222.5 whether
or not he requested the hearing, and may
12
be represented by counsel or any other
authorized representative. The Presid-
ing Officer is authorized to set forth
reasonable restrictions on the nature or
amount of documentary material or tes-
timony presented at a public hearing,
giving due regard.to the relevancy of any
such information, and to the avoidance
of undue repetitiveness of information
presented.
§ 222.il Kcconiinrndulions of Presiding
O nicer.
, Within 30 days following the adjourn-
ment of a public hearing convened pur-
suant to § 222.5, or within such addi-
tional period as the Administrator or the
Regional Administrator, as the case may
be, may grant to the Presiding Officer
for good cause shown, and after full
consideration of the comments received
at the hearing, the Presiding Officer will
prepare and forward to the Administra-
tor or to the Regional Administrator, as
the case may be, written recbmmenda-
tions relating to the issuance or denial of,
or conditions to be imposed upon, the
proposed permit and the record of the
hearing, if any. Such recommendations
shall contain a brief statement of the
basis for the recommendations including
a description of evidence relied upon in
justification either (1) for permit pro-
visions which differ from any tentative
determinations Issued prior to the hear-
ing or (2) for any permit denial. Copies
of the Presiding Officer's recommenda-
tions shall be provided to any interested
person on request, without charge. Copies
of the record will be provided in accord-
ance with 40 CFR 2.
§ 222.9 Issuance of pet-mils.
(a) Within 30 days following receipt of
the Presiding Officer's recommendations
or, where no hearing has been held, fol-
lowing the close of the 30-day period for
requesting a hearing as provided in
§ 222.4, the Administrator or the Re-
gional Administrator, as the case njay be,
shall make a determination with respect
to the issuance, denial, or imposition of
conditions on, any permit applied for
under this Subchapter H and shall give
notice to the applicant and to all persons
who registered their attendance at the
hearing by providing their name and
mailing address, if any, by mailing a let-
ter stating the determination and stat-
ing the basis therefor in terms of the
Criteria.
(b) Any determination to issue or deny
any permit after a hearing held pursu-
ant to § 222.7 shall take effect no sooner
than:
(1) 10 days'after notice of such deter-
mination is given if no request for an
adjudicatory hearing is filed in accord-
ance with I 222.10(a); or
(2) 20'days after notice of such deter-
mination is given If a request for an
adjudicatory hearing is filed in accord-
ance with paragraph (a) of § 222.10 and
the Administrator or the Regional Ad-
ministrator, as the case may be, denies
such request in accordance with para-
graph (c) of § 222.10; or
(3) The date on which a final deter-
mination has been made following an-
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY Tl, 1977
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
2473
adjudicatory hearing held pursuant to
9 222.11.
(c) The Administrator or Regional Ad-
ministrator, as the case may be, may
extend the term of a previously issued
permit pending the.conclusion of the pro-
ceedings held pursuant to 5§ 222.7-222.9.
(d) A copy of each permit issued shall
be sent to the appropriate District Office
of the U.S. Coast Guard.
g 222.10 Appeal to nJjudiciilory hour-
ing.
(a) Within 10 days following the re-
ceipt of notice of the issuance or denial
of any permit pursuant to § 222.9 after
a hearing held pursuant to § 222.7, any
interested person who participated In
such hearing may request that an adjudi-
catory hearing be held pursuant to
5 222.11 for the purpose of reviewing such
determination, or any part thereof. Any
such request for an adjudicatory hearing
shall be filed with the Administrator or
the Regional Administrator, as the case
may be, and shall be In writing, shall
Identify the person requesting the ad-
judicatory hearing and shall state with
particularity the objections -to the de-
termination, the basis therefor and the
modification requested.
(b) Whenever a written request satis-
fying the requirements of paragraph (a)
of this section has been received and,
the Administrator or Regional Adminis-
trator, as the case may be, determines
that an adjudicatory hearing Is war-
ranted, the Administrator or the Re-
gional Administrator, as the case may be,
will set a time and place for an adjudi-
catory hearing In accordance with
5 222.5, and wfll give notice of such hear-
ing by publication In accordance with
5 222.3.
cross-examine a witness who appears at
an adjudicatory hearing to the extent
that such cross-examination Is necessary
or appropriate for a full disclosure of
the facts. In multi-party proceedings the
Presiding Officer may limit cross-exami-
nation to one party on each side If he
is satisfied that the cross-examination
by one party will adequately protect the
Interests of other parties.
(4) When a party will not be unfairly
prejudiced thereby, the Presiding Officer
may order all of part of the evidence to
be submitted In written form.
(5) Rulings of the Presiding Officer on
the admissibillty of evidence, the propri-
ety of cross-examination, and other pro-
cedural matters, shall be final and shall
appear In the record.
(6) Interlocutory appeals may not be
taken.
(7) Parties shall be presumed to have
taken exception to an adverse ruling.
(8) The proceedings of all hearings
shall be recorded by such means as the
Presiding Officer may determine. The
original transcript of the hearing shall
be a part of the record and the sole offi-
cial transcript. Copies of the transcript
shall be available from the Environ-
mental Protection Agency in accordance
with 40 CFR 2.
(9) The rules of evidence shall jiot
apply.
(f) Decision after adjudicatory hear-
ing.
(1) Within 30 days after the conclu-
sion of the adjudicatory hearing, or
within such additional period as the Ad-
ministrator or the Regional Adminis-
trator, as the case may be, may grant to
the Presiding Officer for good cause
shown, the Presiding Officer shall submit
to the Administrator or the Regional
Administrator, as the case may be, pro-
posed findings of fact and conclusions
of law, his recommendation with respect
to any and all issues raised at the hear-
ing, and the record of the hearing. Such
findings, conclusions and recommenda-
tions shall contain a brief statement of
the basis for the recommendations.
Copies of the Presiding Officer's proposed
findings of fact, conclusions of law and
recommendations shall be provided to
all parties to the adjudicatory hearing
on request, without charge.
(2) Within 20 days following submis-
sion of the Presiding Officer's proposed
findings of fact, conclusions of law jind
recommendations, any party may_ Mb-
riDERAL REGISTER, VOl. 41, NO. 7—TUESDAY. JANUARY 11. 1977
-------
2471
RULES AND REGULATIONS
mit written exceptions, no more than
30 pages in length, to such proposed
findings, conclusions and recommenda-
tions and within 30 days following the
submission of the Presiding Officer's pro-
posed findings, conclusions and recom-
mendations any party may file written
comments, no more than 30 pages in
length, on another party's exceptions.
Within 45 days following the submission
of the Presiding Officer's proposed find-
ings, conclusions and recommendations,
the Administrator or the Regional Ad-
ministrator, as the case may be, shall
make a determination with respect to
all issues raised at such hearing and
shall affirm, reverse or modify the previ-
.ous or proposed determination, as the
case may be. Notice of such determina-
tion shall set forth the determination for
each such issue, shall briefly state the
basis therefor and shall be given by mail
to all parties to the adjudicatory hearing.
§ 222.12 Appeal to AdmiiiislriUor.
(a) Within 10 days following receipt
of the determination of the Regional
Administrator pursuant to paragraph
(f) (2) of § 222.11, any party to an ad-
judicatory hearing held in accordance
with § 222.11 may appeal such deter-
mination to the Administrator by filing
a written notice of appeal, or the Ad-
ministrator may, on his own initiative,
review any prior determination.
(b) The notice of appeal shall be no
more than 40 pages in length and shall
contain:
(1) The name and address of the per-
son filing the notice of appeal;
(2) A concise statement of the facts
on which the person relies and appro-
priate citations to the record of the ad-
judicatory hearing;
(3) A concise statement of the legal
basis on which the person relies;
(4) A concise statement setting forth
the action which the person proposes
that the Administrator take; and
(5) A certificate of service of the no-
tice of appeal on all other parties to
the adjudicatory hearing.
(c) The effective date of any deter-
mination made pursuant to paragraph
(f) (2) of § 222.11 may be stayed by the
Administrator pending final determina-
tion by him pursuant to this section
upon the filing of a notice of appeal
which satisfies the requirements of par-
agraph (b) of this section or upon ini-
tiation by the Administrator of review
of any determination in,the absence of
such notice of appeal.
(d) Within 20 days following the fil-
ing of a notice of appeal in accordance
with this section, any party to the ad-
judicatory hearing may file a written
memorandum, no more than 40 pages in
length, in response thereto.
(e) Within 45 days following the fil-
ing of a notice of appeal in accordance
with this section, the Administrator shall
render his final determination with re-
spect to all issues raised in the appeal
to the Administrator and shall affirm,
reverse, or modify the previous determi-
nation and briefly -state the basis for his
determination.
(f) In accordance i:-ith 5 U.S.C. section
704, the filing of an appeal to the Ad-
ministrator pursuant to this section
shall be a prerequisite to judicial review
of .any determination to issue, deny or
impose conditions upon any permit, or
to modify, revoke or suspend any per-
mit, or to take any other enforcement
action, under this Subchapter H.
§ 222.1.3 Compulation of lime.
In computing any period of time pre-
scribed or allowed in this part, except
unless otherwise provided, the day on
which the designated period of time be-
gins to run shall not be included. The
last day of the period so computed is to
be included unless it is a Saturday, Sun-
day, or a legal holiday in which the
Environmental Protection Agency is not
open for business, in which event the
period runs until the end of the next
day which is not a Saturday, Sunday,
or legal holiday. Intermediate Satur-
days, Sundays and legal holidays shall
be excluded from the computation when
the period of time prescribed or allowed
is seven days or less.
PART 223—CONTENTS OF PERMITS
Sec.
223.1 Contents of permits.
223.2 Generally applicable conditions of
permits.
AUTHORITY: 33 U.3.C. 1412 and 1418.
§ 223.1 Contents of permits.
Permits, other than general permits,
which may be issued on forms to be pub-
lished by EPA and must be displayed on
the vessel engaged in dumping, will in-
clude at a minimum the following:
(a) Name, of permittee;
(b) Means of conveyance and meth-
ods and procedures for disposal of mate-
rial to be dumped; and, in the case of
permits for the transportation of mate-
rial for dumping, the port through or
from which such material will be trans-
ported;
(c) A complete description, including
all relevant chemical and physical prop-
erties and quantities, of the material to
be dumped;
(d) The disposal site;
(e) The times at which the permitted
dumping may occur;
(f) Such monitoring relevant to the
assessment of the impact of permitted
dumping activities on the marine envi-
ronment at the disposal site, as the Ad-
ministrator determines is feasible; and
(g) Any other terms and conditions,
including those with respect to release
procedures, determined to be necessary
and adequate in order to conform the
permitted dumping activities to the fac-
tors set forth in Section 102(a1) of the
Act, and the criteria set forth in Part 227.
§ 223.2 Generally applicable conditions
of permits.
(a) Modification or revocation. Any
permit issued under this Part shall be
subject to modification, or revocation in
whole or in part for cause, as follows:
(1) Violation of any term or condition
of the permit;
14
(2) Misrepresentation, inaccuracy, or
failure to disclose all relevant facts in
the permit application;
(3) Changed circumstances, such as
changes 'in conditions obtaining at the
designated dumping site, and newly dis-
covered scientific1 data relevant to the
granting of the permit;
(4) Failure to keep the records, and to
notify appropriate officials of dumping
activities, as specified in §§ 224.1 and
224.2.
(b) Suspension. In addition to the con-
ditions of a permit imposed pursuant to
paragraph (a) of this section, each per-
mit shall be subject to suspension by the
Administrator or Regional Administra-
tor if he determines that the permitted
dumping has resulted, or is resulting, in
imminent and substantial harm to hu-
man'health or welfare or the marine en-
vironment. Such suspension shall be ef-
fective immediately upon receipt of noti-
fication thereof by the permittee.
(c) Hearings. Within 30 days after re-
ceipt of notice of revocation or modifica-
tion pursuant to paragraph (a) of this
section, or of .suspension pursuant to
paragraph (b) of this section, a permit-
tee or other interested person may re-
quest in writing a hearing on the issues
raised by any such revocation or suspen-
sion. Upon receipt of any such request,
the Administrator or Regional Admin-
istrator shall appoint a hearing officer to
conduct an adjudicatory hearing as may
-be required by law and by this sub-
chapter as now or hereafter in effect.
PART 224—RECORDS AND REPORTS RE-
QUIRED OF OCEAN DUMPING PER-
MITTEES UNDER SECTION 102 OF THE
ACT
Sec.
224.1 Records of permittees.
224.2 Reports.
AUTHORITY: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
§ 221.1 Records of permittees.
Each permittee named in a special,
interim, emergency or research permit
under section 102 of the Act and each
person availing himself of the privilege
conferred by a general permit, shall
maintain complete records of the follow-
ing information, which will be available
for inspection by the Administrator,
Regional Administrator, the Comman-
dant of the U.S. Coast Guard, or their
respective designees:
(a) The physical and chemical charac-
teristics of the material dumped pur-
suant to the permit;
(b) The precise times and locations of
dumping;
(c) Any other information required as
a condition of a permit by the Adminis-
trator or the Regional Administrator, as
the case may be.
§ 224.2 Reports.
(a) Periodic reports. Information re-
quired to be recorded pursuant to j 224.1
shall be reported to the Administrator
or the Regional Administrator, as the
case may be, for the periods Indicated
within 30 days of the expiration of such
periods:
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42," NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
2175
(1) For each six-month period, If any,
following the effective date of the permit;
(2) For any other period of less than
six months ending on the expiration date
of the permit; and
(3) As otherwise required in the condi-
tions of the permit.
(b) Reports of emergency dumping. If
material Is dumped without a permit pur-
suant to paragraph (c) (4) of 5 220.1, the
owner or operator of the vessel or aircraft
from which such dumping occurs shall
93 soon as feasible Inform the Adminis-
trator, Regional Administrator, or. the
nearest Coast Quard district of the In-
cident by radio, telephone, or telegraph
and shall within 10 days file a written
report with the Administrator or Re-
gional Administrator containing the In-
formation required under 5 224.1 and a
complete description of the circum-
stances under which the dumping oc-
curred. Such description shall explain
how human life at sea was In danger and
how the emergency dumping reduced
that danger. If the material dumped in-
cluded containers, the vessel owner or
operator shall Immediately request the
U.B. Coast Guard to publish In the local
Notice to Mariners the dumping location,
the type of containers, and whether the
contents are toxic or explosive. Notifica-
tion shall also be given to the Food and
Drug Administration, Shellfish Sanita-
tion Branch, Washington, D.C. 20204, as
soon as possible.
PART 225—CORPS OF ENGINEERS
DREDGED MATERIAL PERMITS
Sea.
225.1 General.
220.3 R»vlew of Dredged Material Permits.
225.3 procedure for Invoking economic
Impact.
228.4 Waiver by Administrator.
AUTHORITY: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
§ 225.1 General.
Applications and authorizations for
Dredged Material Permits under section
103 of the Act for the transportation of
dredged material for the purpose of
dumping it In ocean waters will be eval-
uated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engi-
neers in accordance with the criteria
set forth In Part 227 and processed In ac-
cordance with 33 CFR 209.120 with spe-
cial attention to 5 209.120(g) (17) and 33
CFR 209.145.
§ 225.2 Review of Dredged Mutci-inl IVr-
mils.
(a) The District Engineer shall send
a copy of the public notice to the ap-
propriate Regional Administrator, and
set forth in writing all of the following
Information:
(1) The location of the proposed dis-
posal site and Its physical boundaries;
(2) A statement as to whether the
site has been designated for use by the
Administrator pursuant to section 102
(c) of the Act;
(3) If the proposed disposal site has
not been designated by the Administra-
tor, a statement of the basis for the
proposed determination why no pre-
viously designated site Is feasible and a
FEDERAL
description of the characteristics of the
proposed disposal site necessary for its
designation pursuant to Part 228 of
this Subchapter H;
(4) The known historical uses of the
proposed disposal site;
(5) Existence and documented ef-
fects of other authorized dumpings that
have been made in the dumping area
(e.g., heavy metal background reading
and organic carbon content).;
(6) An estimate of the length of time
during which disposal will continue at
the proposed site;
(7) Characteristics and composition
of the dredged material; and
(8) A statement concerning a pre-
liminary determination of the need for
and/or availability of an environmental
Impact statement.
(b) The Regional Administrator will
within 15 days of the date the public
notice and other information required
to be submitted by paragraph (a) of
5 225.2 are received by him, review -the
information submitted and request from
the District Engineer any additional in-
formation he.deems necessary or ap-
propriate to " evaluate the proposed
dumping.
(c) Using the Information submitted
by the District Engineer, and any other
information available to him, the Re-
gional Administrator will within 15 days
after receipt of all requested informa-
tion, -make an independent evaluation
of the proposed dumping in accordance
with the criteria and respond to the Dis-
trict Engineer pursuant to paragraphs
(d) or (e) of this section. The Regional
Administrator may request an extension
of this 15 day period to. 30 days from the
District Engineer.
(d) When the Regional Administrator
determines that the- proposed dumping
will comply with the criteria, he will so
Inform the District Engineer in writing.
(e) When the Regional Administrator
determines that- the proposed dumping
will not comply with the criteria he
shall so Inform the District Engineer in
writing. In such cases, no Dredged Ma-
terial Permit for such dumping shall be
Issued unless and until the provisions of
§ 225.3 are followed and the Administra-
tor grants a waiver of the criteria pur-
suant to § 225.4.
§ 225.3 Procedure for invoking eco-
nomic impact.
(a) When a District Engineer's deter-
mination to issue a Dredged Material
Permit for the dumping of dredged mate-
rial into ocean waters has been rejected
by a Regional Administrator upon appli-
cation of the Criteria, the District Engi-
neer may determine whether, under § 103
(d) of the Act, there Is an economically
feasible alternative method or site avail-
able other than the proposed dumping
in ocean waters. If the District Engineer
makes any such preliminary determina-
tion that there Is no economically feasi-
ble alternative method or site available,
he shall so advise the Regional Adminis-
trator setting foi i h his reasons for such
determination and shall submit a report
of such determination to the Chief of
15
REGISTER, VOl. 47, HO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY
Engineers in accordance with 33 CFR
55 209.120 and 209.145.
(b) If the decision of the Chief of
Engineers is that ocean dumping at the
designated site Is required because of the
unavailability of feasible alternatives, he
shall so certify and request that the Sec-
retary of the Army seek a waiver from.
the Administrator of the Criteria or of
the critical site designation in accord-
ance with 5 225.4.
§ 225.4 Waiver by Administrator,
The Administrator shall grant the re-
quested waiver unless within 30 days of
his receipt of the notice, certificate and
request in accordance with paragraph
(b) of § 225.3 he determines In accord-
ance with this section that the proposed
dumping will have an unacceptable ad-
verse effect on municipal water supplies,
shellfish beds and fishery areas (includ-
ing spawning and breeding areas), wild-
life, or recreational areas. Notice of the
Administrator's final determination un-
der this section shall be given to the
Secretary of the Army.
PART 226—ENFORCEMENT
Sec.
226.1 Civil penalties.
226.2 Enforcement hearings.
226.3 Determinations.
226.4 Final action.
AUTHORITY: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418
§ 226.1 Civil penalties.
In addition to the criminal penalties
provided for in section 105 (b) of the Act,
the Administrator or bis designee may
assess a civil penalty of not more than
$50,000 for each violation of the Act and
of this subchapter. Upon receipt of In-
formation that any person has violated
any provision of the Act or of this sub-
chapter, the Administrator or his desig-
nee will notify such person in writing of
the violation with which he is charged,
and will convene a hearing no sooner
than 60 days after such notice, at a con-
venient location, before a hearing officer.
Such hearing shall be conducted in ac-
cordance with the procedures of 5 226.2.
§ 226.2 Enforcement hearings.
Hearings convened pursuant to § 226.1
shall be hearings on a record before a
hearing officer. Parties may be repre-
"sented by counsel and will have the right
to submit motions, to present evidence in
their own behalf, to cross-examine ad-
verse witnesses, to be apprised of all evi-
dence considered by the hearing officer
and to receive copies of the transcript of
the proceedings. Formal rifles of evidence
will not apply. The hearing officer will
rule on all evidentiary matters, and on
all motions, which will be subject to re-
view pursuant to 5 22C.3.
§ 226.3 Dclcrininulioria.
Within 30 days following adjournment
of the hearing, the hearing officer will
in all cases make findings of facts and
recommendations to the Administrator
including, when appropriate, a recom-
mended appropriate penalty, after con-
sideration of the gravity of the violation,
prior violations by the person charged,
11, 1977
-------
2476
RULES AND PECULATIONS
and the demonstrated good faith by such
person In attempting to achieve rapid
compliance with the provisions of the
Act and this subchapter. A copy of ttie
findings and recommendations of the
hearing officer shall be provided to the
person charged at the same time they
are forwarded to the Administrator.
Within 30 days of the date on which the
hearing officer's findings and recom-
mendations are forwarded to the Ad-
ministrator, any party objecting thereto
may file written exceptions with the Ad-
ministrator.
§ 226.4 Final action.
A final order on a proceeding under
this Part wffl be issued by the Adminis-
trator, or by such other person desig-
nated by the Administrator to take such
final action, no sooner than 30 days fol-
lowing receipt of the findings and recom-
mendations of the hearing officer. A
copy of the final order will be served by
registered mail (return receipt re-
quested) on the person charged or his
representative. In the event the final
order assesses a penalty, it shall be pay-
able within 60 days of the date of re-
ceipt of the final order, unless judicial
review of the final order is sought by
the person against whom the penalty is
assessed.
PART 227—CRITERIA FOR THE EVALUA-
TION OF PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR
OCEAN DUMPING OF MATERIALS
Subpart A—General
Sec.
227.1 Applicability.
227,2 Materials which satisfy the environ-
mental tmpact criteria of Subpart
B.
227.3 Materials which do not satisfy the
environmental Impact criteria of
Subpart B.
Subpart B—Environmental Impact
227.4 Criteria for evaluating environ-
mental Impact.
227.5 Prohibited materials.
227.6 Constituents prohibited aa other
than trace contaminants.
227.7 Limits established for specific wastes
or waste constituents.
227.8 Limitations on the disposal rates of
toxic wastes.
227.9 Limitations on quantities of waste
materials.
227.10 Hazards to fishing, navigation, shore-
lines or beaches.
227.11 ^ Containerized wastes.
227.12 Insoluble wastes.
227.13 Dredged Materials.
Subpart C—Need for Ocean Dumping
227.14 Criteria for evaluating the need for
ocean dumping and alternatives to
ocean dumping.
227.15 Factors considered.
227.16 Basis for determination of need for
ocean dumping.
Subpart D—Impact of the Proposed Pumping on
Esthetic, Recreational and Economic Values
227.17 Basis for determination.
227.18 Factors considered.
227.19 Assessment of Impact'.
Subpart E—Impact of the' Proposed Dumping on
Other Uses of the Ocean
227.20 Basis for determination.
227.21 Uses considered.
227.22 Assessment of Impact.
Subpart F—Special Requirements for Interim
Permits Under Sac>'on 102 of the Act
Sec.
227.23 General requirement.
227.24 Contents of environmental assess-
ment.
227.25 Contents of plans.
227.26 Implementation of plans.
Subpart G—Definitions
227.27 Limiting Permissible Concentration
(LPC).
227.28 Release zone.
227.29 Initial mixing.
227.30 High-level radioactive waste.
227.31 Applicable marine water quality cri-
teria.
227.32 Liquid, suspended particulate, and
solid phases of a material.
Subpart A—General
§ 227.1 Applicability.
(a) Section 102 of the Act requires
that criteria for the issuance of ocean
disposal permits be promulgated after
consideration of the environmental effect
of the proposed dumping operation, the
need for ocean dumping, alternatives to
ocean dumping, and the effect of the pro-
posed action on esthetic, recreational
and economic values and on -other uses
of the ocean. This Part 227 and Part 228
of this Subchapter H together constitute
the criteria established pursuant to sec-
tion 102 of the Act. The decision of the
Administrator, Regional Administrator
or Jhe District Engineer, as the case may
be, to issue or deny a permit and to im-
pose specific conditions ori any permit
issued will be based on an evaluation of
the permit application pursuant to the
criteria set forth in this Part 227 and
upon the requirements for disposal site
management pursuant to the criteria set
forth in Part 228 of this Subchapter H.
(b) With respect to the criteria to be
used in evaluating disposal of dredged
materials, this section and Subparts C,
D, E, and G apply in their entirety. To
determine whether the proposed dump-
Ing of dredged material complies with
Subpart B, only §§227.4, 227.5, 227.6,
227.9, 227.10 and 227.13 apply. An appli-
cant for a permit to dump dredged ma-
terial must comply with all of Subparts
C, D, E, G and applicable sections of B,
to be deemed to have met the EPA cri-
teria for dredged material dumping
promulgated pursuant to section 102 (a)
of the Act. If, in any case, the Chief
of Engineers finds that, in the dispo-
sition of dredged material, there is no
economically feasible method or site
available other than a dumping site, the
utilization of which would result in non-
compliance with the criteria established
pursuant to Subpart B relating to the
effects of dumping or with the restric-
tions established pursuant to section
102 (c) of the Act relating to critical
areas, he shall so certify and request
that the Secretary of the Army seek a
waiver from the Administrator pursuant
to Part 225.
(c) The Criteria of this Part 227 are
established pursuant to section 102 of the
Act and apply to the evaluation of pro-
posed dumping of materials under Title I
of the Act. The Criteria of this Part 227
deal with the evaluation of proposed
dumping of materials on a case-by-case
16
basis from information supplied by the
applicant or otherwise available to EPA
or the Corps of Engineers concerning the
characteristics of the waste and other
considerations relating to the proposed
dumping.
(d) After consideration of the provi-
sions of §§ 227.28 and 227.29, no permit
will be issued when the dumping would
result in a violation of applicable water
quality standards.
§ 227.2 Materials which satisfy the en-
vironmental impact criteria of Sub-
part B.
(a) If the applicant satisfactorily
demonstrates that the material proposed
for ocean dumping satisfies the environ-
mental impact criteria set forth in Sub-
part B, a permit for ocean dumping will
be issued unless:
(1) There is no need for the dump-
ing, and alternative means of disposal
are available, as determined in accord-
ance with the criteria set forth in Sub-
part C; or
(2) There are unacceptable adverse
effects on esthetic, recreational or eco-
nomic values as determined in accord-
ance with the criteria set forth in Sub-
part D; or
(3) There are unacceptable adverse
effects on other uses of the ocean as
determined in accordance with the cri-
teria set forth in Subpart E.
(b) If the material proposed for ocean
dumping satisfies the environmental Im-
pact criteria set forth in Subpart B, but
the Administrator or the Regional Ad-
ministrator, as the case may be, deter-
mines that any one of the considerations
set forth in paragraphs (a) (1), (2) or
(3) of. this section applies, he' will deny
the permit application; provided how-
ever, that he may issue an interim per-
mit for ocean dumping pursuant to para-
graph (d) of § 220.3 and Subpart P of
this Part 227 when he determines that:
(1) The material proposed for ocean
dumping does not contain any of the
materials listed in § 227.5 or listed in
§ 227.6, except as trace contaminants;
and
(2) In accordance with Subpart C
there is a need to ocean dump the mate-
rial and no alternatives are available to
such dumping; and
(3) The need for the dumping and the
unavailability of alternatives, as deter-
mined in accordance with Subpart C, are
of greater significance to the public in-
terest than the potential for adverse
effect on esthetic, recreational or eco-
nomic values, or on other uses of the
ocean, as determined in accordance with
Subparts D and E, respectively.
§ 227.3 Materials which do not satisfy
ihe environmental impact Criteria set
forth in Subpnrt B.
If the material proposed for ocean
dumping does not satisfy the environ-
mental impact criteria of Subpart B, the
Administrator or the Regional Adminis-
trator, as the case may be, will deny the
permit application; provided however,
that he may issue an interim permit pur-
suant to paragraph (d) of S 220.3 and
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
21T7
Subpart P of this Part 227 when he deter-
mines that:
(a) The material proposed for dump-
ing does not contain any of the materials
listed In Section 227.6 except as trace
contaminants, or any of the materials
listed in} 227.5;
(b) In accordance with Subpart C
there Is a need to ocean dump the mate-
rial; and
(c) Any one of the following factors Is
of greater, significance to the public in-
terest than the potential for adverse
impact on the marine environment, as
determined in accordance with Subpart
B:
(1) The need for the dumping, as de-
termined In accordance with Subpart C;
or
(2) The adverse effects of denial of
the permit on recreational or economic
values as determined hi accordance with
Subpart D; or
(3) The adverse effects of denial of the
permit on other uses of the ocean, as de-
termined In accordance with Subpart
E.
Subpart B—Environmental Impact
§ 227.4 Criteria for evaluating environ-
mental impact.
This Subpart B sets specific environ-
mental Impact prohibitions, limits, and
conditions for the dumping of materials
Into ocean waters. If the applicable pro-
hibitions, limits, and conditions are sat-
isfied, it Is the determination of EPA
that the proposed disposal will not un-
duly degrade'or endanger the marine en-
vironment and that the disposal will pre-
sent:
(a) No unacceptable adverse effects on
human health and no significant dam-
age to the resources of the marine en-
vironment;
(b) No unacceptable adverse effect on
the marine ecosystem;
(c) No unacceptable adverse persist-
ent or permanent effects due to the
dumping of the particular volumes or
concentrations of these materials; and
(d) No unacceptable adverse effect on
the ocean for other uses as a result .of
direct environmental Impact.
§ 227.5 Prohibited mnlcrials.
The ocean dumping of the following
materials will not be approved by EPA or
the Corps of Engineers under any cir-
cumstances :
(a) High-level radioactive wastes as
defined in §227.30;
(b) Materials in whatever form (In-
cluding without limitation, solids, liquids,
seml-llqulds. gases or organisms) pro-
duced or used for radiological, chemical
or biological warfare;
(c) Materials insufficiently described
by the applicant in terms of their compo-
sitions and properties to permit appli-
cation of the environmental Impact cri-
teria of this Subpart B;
(d) Persistent inert synthetic or nat-
ural materials which may float or remain
in suspension In the ocean in such a
manner that they may interfere materi-
ally with fishing, navigation, or other
legitimate uses of the ocean.
§ 227.6 Constituent* prohibited us oilier
than trace contaminants.
(a) Subject to the exclusions of para-
graphs (f), (g) and (h) of this section.
the ocean dumping, or transportation for
dumping, of materials containing the
following constituents as other than trace
contaminants will not be approved on
other than an emergency basis:
(1) Organohalogen compounds;
(2) Mercury and mercury compounds;
(3) Cadmium and cadmium com-
pounds;
(4) Oil of any. kind or in any form,
including but not limited to petroleum,
oil sludge, oil refuse, crude oil, fuel oil,
heavy diesel oil, lubricating oils, hydrau-
lic fluids, and any mixtures containing
these, transported for the purpose of
dumping insofar as these are not regu-
lated under the FWPCA;
(5) Known carcinogens, mutagens, or
teratogens or materials suspected to be
carcinogens, mutagens, or teratogens by
responsible scientific opinion.
(b) These constituents will be con-
sidered to be present as trace contam-
inants only when they are present in
materials otherwise acceptable for ocean
dumping in such forms and amounts in
liquid, suspended particulate, and solid
phases that the dumping of the mate-
rials will not cause significant undesira-
ble . effects, Including the possibility of
danger associated with their bloaccumu-
lation in marine organisms.
(c) The potential for significant un-
desirable effects due to the presence of
these constituents shall be determined by
application of results of bioassays on
liquid, suspended particulate, and solid
phases of wastes according to procedures
acceptable to EPA, and for dredged ma-
terial, acceptable to EPA and the Corps
of Engineers. Materials shall be deemed
environmentally acceptable for ocean
dumping only when the following condi-
tions are met:
(1) The liquid phase does not contain
any of these constituents in concentra-
tions which will exceed applicable marine
water quality criteria after allowance
for initial mixing; provided that mercury
concentrations in the disposal site, after
allowance for initial mixing, may exceed
the average normal ambient concentra-
tions of mercury in ocean waters at or
near the dumping site which would be
present hi the absence of dumping, by
not more than 50 percent; and
(2) Bioassay results on the suspended
particulate phase of the waste do not In-
dicate occurrence of significant mortality
or significant adverse sublethal effects
Including bloaccumulatlon due to the
dumping of wastes containing the con-
stituents listed in paragraph (a) of this
section. These bioassays shall be con-
ducted with appropriate sensitive marine
organisms as denned In § 227.27(c) using
procedures for suspended particulate
phase bioassays approved by EPA, or, for
dredged material, approved by EPA and
the Corps of Engineers. Procedures ap-
proved for bioassays under this section
will require exposure of organisms for a
sufficient period a time and under ap-
propriate conditions to provide reason-
17
able assurance, based on consideration of
the statistical significance of effects at
the 95 percent confidence level, that,
when the materials are dumped, no sig-
nificant undesirable effects will occur due
either to chronic toxicity or to bloaccu-
mulatlon of the constituents listed In
paragraph (a) of this section; and
(3) Bioassay results on the solid phase
of the wastes do not indicate occurrence
of significant mortality or significant ad-
verse sublethal effects due to the dump-
ing of wastes containing the constituents
listed in paragraph (a) of this section.
These bioassays shall be conducted with
sensitive benthic organisms using benthlc
bloassay procedures approved by EPA, or,
for dredged material, approved by EPA
and the Corps of Engineers. Procedures
approved for bioassays under this section
will require exposure of organisms for a
sufficient period of time to provide rea-
sonable assurance, based on considera-
tions of statistical significance of effects
at the 95 percent confidence level, that,
when the materials are dumped, no sig-
nificant undesirable effects will occur due
either to chronic toxicity or to bioaccu-
mulatlon of the constituents listed In
paragraph (a) of this section; and
(4) For persistent organohalogens not
Included in the applicable marine water
quality criteria, bioassay results on the
liquid phase of the waste show that such
compounds are not present in concen-
trations large enough to cause significant
undesirable effects due either to chronic
toxicity or to bloaccumulation in marine
organisms after allowance for Initial
mixing.
(d) When the Administrator, Region-
al Administrator or District Engineer, as
the case may be, has reasonable cause to
believe that a material proposed for
ocean dumping contains compounds
Identified as carcinogens, mutagens, or
teratogens for which criteria nave not
been Included In the applicable marine
water quality criteria, he may require
special studies to be done prior to issu-
ance of a permit to determine the Im-
pact of disposal on human health and/or
marine ecosystems. Such studies must
provide information.comparable to that
required under paragraph (c) (3) of this
section.
(e) The criteria stated in paragraphs
(c) (2) and (3) of tills section will be-
come mandatory as soon as announce-
ment of the availability of acceptable
procedures is made in the FEDERAL REG-
ISTER. At that time the interim criteria
contained in paragraph (e) of this sec-
tion shall no longer be applicable. As
Interim measures the criteria of para-
graphs (c) (2) and (3) of this section
may be applied on a case-by-case basis
•where interim guidance on acceptable
bioassay procedures Is provided by the
Regional Administrator or, In the case of
dredged material, by the District Encl-
neer; or, in the absence of such guidance,
permits may be issued for the dumping of
any material only when the following
conditions are met, except under an
emergency permit:
(1) Mercury and Its compounds aro
present in any solid phase of a material
in concentrations less than 0.75 nig/kg.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO 7—TUESDAY. JANUARY II. 1977
-------
2478
RULES AND REG"IATIONS
or less than 50 percent greater than the
average total mercury content of natural
sediments of similar lithologlc charac-
teristics as those at the disposal site; and
(2) Cadmium and its compounds are
present in any solid phase of a material
in concentrations less than 0.6 mg/kg,
or less than 50 percent greater than the
average total cadmium content of nat-
ural sediments of similar lithologic char-
acteristics as those at the disposal site;
and
(3) The total concentration of organo-
halogen constituents in the waste as
transported for dumping is less than a
concentration of such constituents
known to be toxic to marine organisms.
In calculating the concentration of or-
ganohalogens, the applicant shall con-
sider that these constituents are all bi-
ologically available. The determination
of the toxicity value will be based on ex-
isting scientific, data or developed by the
use of bioassays conducted in accordance
with approved EPA procedures; and
(4) The total amounts of oils and
greases as Identified in paragraph (a) (4)
of this section do not produce a visible
surface sheen in an undisturbed water
sample when added at a ratio of one part
waste material to 100 parts of water.
(f) The prohibitions and limitations of
this section do not apply to the constitu-
ents identified in paragraph (a) of this
section when the applicant can demon-
strate that such constituents are (1)
present in the material only as chemical
compounds or forms (e.g., inert insoluble
solid materials) non-toxic to marine life
and non-bioaccumulative in the marine
environment upon disposal and thereaf-
ter, or (2) present in the material only
as chemical compounds or forms which,
at the time of dumping and thereafter,
will be rapidly rendered non-toxic to ma-
rine life and non-bioaccumulative in the
marine environment by chemical or bio-
logical degradation in the sea; provided
they will not make edible marine orga-
nisms unpalatable; or will not endanger
human health or that of domestic ani-
mals, fish, shellfish, or wildlife-
(g) The prohibitions and limitations
of this section do not apply to the con-
stituents identified in paragraph (a) of
this section for the granting of research
permits if the substances are rapidly
rendered harmless by physical, chemical
or biological processes in the sea; pro-
vided they will not make edible marine
organisms unpalatable and will not en-
danger human health or that of domestic
animals.
(h) The prohibitions and limitations
of this section do not apply to the con-
stituents Identified in paragraph (a) of
this section for the granting of permits
for the transport of these substances for
the purpose of incineration at sea if the
applicant can demonstrate that Hie stack
emissions consist of substances which are
rapidly rendered harmless by physical,
chemical or biological processes in the
sea. Incinerator operations shall comply
with requirements which will be estab-
lished on a case-by-case basis.
§ 227.7 Limit* establish, d for specific
wastes or waste eonsr." incuts.
Materials containing the following
constituents must meet Che additional
limitations specified in this section to be
deemed acceptable for ocean dumping:
(a) Liquid waste constituents immis-
cible with or slightly soluble in seawater,
such as benzene, xylene, carbon disulfide
and toluene, may be dumped only when
they are present in the waste in concen-
trations below their solubility limits in
seawater. This provision does not apply
to materials which may interact with
ocean water to form insoluble materials;
(.b) Radioactive materials, other than
those prohibited by § 227.5, must be con-
tained in accordance with the provisions
of § 227.11 to prevent their direct disper-
sion or dilution in ocean waters;
(c) Wastes containing living orga-
nisms may not be dumped if the orga-
nisms present would endanger human
health or that of domestic animals, fish,
shellfish and wildlife by:
(1) Extending the range of biological
pests, viruses, pathogenic microrganisms
or other agents capable of infesting, In-
fecting or extensively and permanently
altering the normal populations of orga-
nisms;
(2) Degrading uninfected areas; or
'3) Introducing viable species not in-
digenous to an area.
(d) In the dumping of wastes of high-
ly acidic or alkaline nature into the
ocean, consideration shall be given to:
(1) the effects of any change in acidity
or alkalinity of the water at the disposal
site; and (2) the potential for synergistic
effects or for the formation of toxic
compounds at or near the disposal site.
Allowance may be made in the permit
conditions for the capability of ocean
waters to neutralize acid or alkaline
wastes; provided, however, that dump-
ing conditions must be such that the av-
erage total alkalinity or total acidity of
the ocean water after allowance for ini-
tial mixing, as defined in § 227.29, may be
changed, based on stoichiometric calcu-
lations, by no more than 10 per cent dur-
ing all dumping operations at a site to
neutralize acid or alkaline wastes.
(e) Wastes containing biodegradable
constituents, or constituents which con-
sume oxygen in any fashion, may be
dumped in the ocean'only under condi-
tions in which the dissolved oxygen after
allowance for initial mixing, as defined In
§ 227.29, will not be depressed by more
than 25 per cent below the normally an-
ticipated ambient conditions in the dis-
posal area at the time of dumping.
§ 227.8 Limitations on (lie disposal rales
of lovic wastes.
No wastes will be deemed acceptable
for ocean dumping unless such wastes
can be dumped so as not to exceed the
limiting permissible concentration as de-
fined in § 227.27; provided that this
§ 227.8 does not apply to those wastes for
which specific criteria are established in
§ 227.11 or 227.12. Total quantities of
wastes dumped at a site may be limited
as described in g 228.8.
§ 227.0 Limitations on quantities of
waste materials.
Substances which may damage the
ocean environment due to the quantities
in which they are dumped, or which may
seriously reduce amenities, may be
dumped only when the quantities to be
dumped at a single time and place are
controlled to prevent long-term damage
to the environment or to amenities.
§ 227.10 Hazards to fishing, navigation,
shorelines or benches.
(a) Wastes which may present a seri-
ous obstacle to fishing or navigation may
be dumped only at disposal sites and un-
der conditions which will ensure no un-
acceptable interference with fishing or
navigation.
'b') Wastes which may present a haz-
ard to shorelines or beaches may, be
dumped only at sites and under condi-
tions which will insure no unacceptable
danger to shorelines or beaches.
§ 227.11 Conla!ncri/cd wastes.
fa) Wastes containerized solely for
transport to the dumping site and ex-
pected to rupture or leak on impact or
shortly thereafter must meet the appro-
priate requirements of §§ 227.6, 227.7,
227.8, 227.9 and 227.10.
(b) Other containerized wastes will be
approved for dumping only under the
following conditions:
(1) The materials to be disposed of de-
cay, decompose or radiodecay to environ-
mentally innocuous materials within the
life expectancy of the containers and/or
their inert matrix; and
(2) Materials to be dumped are present
In such quantities and are of such nature
that only short-term localized adverse
effects will occur should the containers
rupture at any time; and
(3) Containers are dumped at depths
and locations where they will cause no
threat to navigation, fishing, shorelines,
or beaches.
§ 227.12 Insoluble wastes.
(a) Solid wastes consisting of inert
natural minerals or ma.teria.ls compatible
with the ocean environment may'be gen-
erally approved for ocean dumping pro-
vided they are insoluble above the ap-
plicable trace or limiting permissible
concentrations a-nd are rapidly and com-
pletely sett-leable, and they are of a par-
ticle size and density that they would
be deposited or rapidly dispensed without
damage to bent-hie, demersal, or pelagic
biota.
(b) Persistent inert synthetic or nat-
ural materials which may float or re-
main in suspension in the ocean as pro-
hibited in paragraph (d) of § 227.5 may
be dumped in the ocean only when they
have been processed in such a fashion
that they will sink to the bottom and
remain in place.
§ 227.13 Dredged materials.
(a) Dredged materials are bottfom sed-
iments or materials that have been
dredged or excavated from the navigable
waters of the United States, and thetr
18
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOl. 47, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
2479
disposal Into ocean .waters Is regulated
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
using the criteria of applicable sections
of Parts 227 and 228. Dredged material
consists primarily of natural sediments
or materials which may be contaminated
by municipal or Industrial wastes or by
runoff from terrestrial sources.such as
agricultural lands.
(b) Dredged material which meets the
criteria set forth In the following para-
graphs Cl), (2), or (3) Is environmen-
tally acceptable for ocean dumping with-
out further testing under this section:
(1) Dredged material Is composed
predominantly of-sand, gravel,' rock, or
any other naturally occurring bottom
material with particle sizes larger than
slit, and the material Is found in areas
of high current or wave 'energy such as
streams with large bed loads or coastal
areas with shifting bars and channels; or
(2) Dredged material Is for beach
nourishment or restoration and is com-
posed predominantly of sand, gravel or
sheH with particle sizes compatible with
material on the receiving beaches; or
(3) When: (1) The material proposed
for dumping Is substantially the same as
the substrate at the proposed disposal
site; and
(11) The site from which the material
proposed for dumping is to be taken Is
far removed from known existing and
historical sources of pollution so as to
provide reasonable assurance that such
material has not been contaminated by
tuch pollution,
(c) When dredged material proposed
for ocean dumping does not meet the
criteria of paragraph (b) of this section,
further testing of the liquid, suspended
participate, .and solid phases, as denned
In { 227.32, is required. Based on the re-
sults of such testing, dredged material
can be considered to be environmentally
acceptable for ocean dumping only under
the following conditions:
(1) The material is In compliance with
the requirements of { 227.6; and
(2) (1) All major constituents of the
liquid phase are In compliance with the
applicable marine water quality criteria
after allowance for initial mixing; or
(11) When the liquid phase contains
major constituents not included in the
applicable marine water quality criteria,
or there Is reason to suspect synergistic
effects of certain contaminants, bloas-
says on the liquid phase of the dredged
material show that It can be discharged
so as not to exceed the limiting permis-
sible concentration as denned In para-
graph (a) of § 227.27; and
(3) Bioassays on the suspended par-
tlculate and solid phases show that it can
be discharged so as not to exceed the
limiting permissible concentration as de-
fined In paragraph (b) of § 227.27.
(d) For the purposes of paragraph (c)
<2), major constituents to be analyzed
in the liquid phase are those deemed
critical by the District Engineer, after
evaluating and considering any com-
ments received from the Regional Ad-
ministrator, and considering known
sources of discharges in the area.
Subpart C—Need for Ocean Dumping
§ 227.14 Criteria for evaluating the need
for ocean dumping and alternative*
to ocean dumping.
This Subpart C states the basis on
which an evaluation will be made of the
need for ocean dumping, and alterna-
tives to ocean dumping. The- nature of
these factors does not permit -the pro-
mulgation of specific quantitative cri-
teria of each'permit application. These
factors will therefore be evaluated If ap-
plicable for each proposed dumping on
an Individual basis using the guidelines
specified in this Subpart C.
§ 227.15 Kaclors considered.
The need for dumping will be deter-
mined by evaluation of the following
factors:
(a) Degree of treatment useful and
feasible for the waste to be dumped, and
whether or not the waste material has
been or will be treated to this degree
before dumping;
(b) Raw materials and manufactur-
ing or other processes resulting hi the
waste, and whether or not these mate-
rials or processes are essential to the
provision of the applicant's goods or
services, or If other less polluting mate-
rials or processes could be used;
(c) The relative environmental risks,
Impact and cost for ocean dumping as
opposed to other feasible alternatives
including but not limited to:
(1) Landfill;
(2) Well Injection;
(3) Incineration;
(4) Spread of material over open
ground;
(5) Recycling of material for reuse;
(6) Additional biological, chemical, or
physical treatment of Intermediate or
final waste streams;
(7) Storage.
(d) Irreversible or irretrievable conse-
quences of the use of alternatives to
ocean dumping.
§ 227.16 Basis for determination o-f
need for ocean clumping.
(a) A need for »cean dumping will be
considered to have been demonstrated
when a thorough evaluation of the fac-
tors listed in § 227.15 has been made,
and the Administrator, Regional Admin-
istrator or District Engineer, as the case
may be, has determined that the follow-
ing conditions exist where applicable:
(1) There are no practicable Improve-
ments which can be made in process
technology or in overall'waste treatment
to reduce the adverse impacts of the
waste on the total environment;
(2) There are no practicable alterna-
tive locations and methods of disposal
or recycling available, including without
limitation, storage until treatment fa-
cilities are completed, which have less
adverse environmental impact or po-
tential risk to other parts of the environ-
ment than ocean dumping.
(b> For purposes of paragraph (a) of
this section, waste treatment or im-
provements in !•. jctsses and alternative
methods of disposal are practicable when
they are available at reasonable incre-
mental cost and energy expenditures,
which need not be competitive with the
costs of ocean dumping, taking Into ac-
count the environmental benefits derived
from such activity, including the rela-
tive adverse environmental impacts as-
sociated with the use of .alternatives to
ocean dumping.
(c) The duration of permits issued Un-
der Subchapter H and other terms and
conditions imposed in those permits shall
be'detcrmined after taking Into account
the factors set forth In this section. Not-
withstanding compliance with Subparts
B, D, and E of this Part 227 permittees
may,' on the basis of the need for and
alternatives to ocean dumping, be re-
quired to terminate all ocean dumping
by a specified date, to phase out all ocean
dumping over a specified period or peri-
ods, to continue research and develop-
ment of alternative methods of disposal
and make periodic reports of such re-
search and development In order to pro-
vide additional Information for periodic
review of the need for and alternatives
to ocean dumping, or to take such other
action as the Administrator, the Re-
gional Administrator, or District Engi-
neer, as the case may be, determines to
be necessary or appropriate.
Subpart D—Impact of the Proposed Dump-
ing on Esthetic, Recreational and Eco-
nomic Values
§ 227.17 Basis for determination.
(a) The Impact of dumping on es-
thetic, recreational and economic values
will be evaluated on an individual basis
using the following considerations:
(1) potential for affecting-recreational
use and values of ocean waters, Inshore
waters, beaches, or shorelines;
(2) potential for affecting the recrea-
tional and commercial values of living
marine resources.
(b) For all proposed dumping, full
consideration will be given to such non-
quantifiable aspects of esthetic, recrea-
tional and economic Impact as:
(1) responsible public concern for the
consequences of the proposed dumping;
(2) consequences of not authorizing
the dumping Including without limita-
tion, the Impact on esthetic, recreational
and economic values with respect to the
municipalities and industries involved.
§ 227.18 Factors considered.
The assessment of the potential for
Impacts on esthetic, recreational and
economic values will be based on an eval-
uation of the appropriate characteristics
of the material to.be dumped, allowing
for conservative rates of dilution, dis-
persion, and biochemical degradation
during movement of the materials from
a disposal site to an area of significant
recreational or commercial value. The
following specific factors will be consid-
ered in making such an assessment:
(a) Nature and extent of present and
potential recreational and commercial
use of areas which might be affected by
the proposed dumping;
19
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, t.O. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
2180
(b) Existing water quality, and nature
and extent of disposal activities, In the
areas which might be affected by the
proposed dumping:
(c) Applicable water quality stand-
ards;
(d) Visible characteristics of the ma-
terials (e.g., color, suspended particu-
lates) which result in an unacceptable
esthetic nuisance in recreational areas;
(e) Presence in the material of patho-
genic organisms which may cause a
public health hazard either directly or
through contamination of fisheries or
shellfisheries;
(f) Presence in the material of toxic
chemical constituents released in vol-
umes which may affect humans .directly;
(g) Presence in the material of chem-
ical constituents which may be bioaccu-
mulated or persistent and may have an
adverse effect on humans directly or
through food chain interactions;
(h) Presence in the material of any
constituents which might significantly
affect living marine resources of recrea-
tional or commercial value.
§ 227.19 Assessment of impact.
An overall assessment of the proposed
dumping and possible alternative meth-
ods of disposal or recycling will be made
based on the effect on esthetic, recrea-
tional and economic values based on the
factors set forth in this Subpart D, in-
cluding where applicable, enhancement
of these values, and the results of the
assessment will be expressed, where pos-
sible, on a quantitative basis, such as
percentage of a resource lost, reduction
in user days of recreational areas, or
dollars lost in commercial fishery profits
or the profitability of other commercial
enterprises.
Subpart E—Impact of the Proposed
Dumping on Other Uses of the Ocean
§ 227.20 Basis for dclcrminalion.
(a) Based on current state-of-the-art,
consideration must be given to any pos-
sible long-range effects of even the most
Innocuous substances when dumped in
the ocean on a continuing basis. Such a
consideration is made in evaluating the
relationship of each proposed disposal
activity in relationship to its potential,
for long-range impact on other uses of
the ocean.
(b) An evaluation will be made on an
Individual basis for each proposed dump-
Ing of material of the potential for effects
on uses of the ocean for purposes other
than material disposal. The factors to' be
considered in this evaluation include
those stated in Subpart D, but the eval-
uation of this Subpart E will be based
on the impact of the proposed dumping
on specific uses of the ocean rather than
on overall esthetic, recreational"and eco-
nomic values.
§227.21 Uses considered.
An appraisal will be made of the nature
and extent of existing and potential uses
of the disposal site itself and of any areas
which might reasonably be expected to
be affected by the proposed dumping, and
a .quantitative and qualitative evaluation
RULES AND PECULATIONS
made, where feasible, of the Impact of
the proposed dumplrg on each use. The
uses considered shall 'nclude, but not be
limited to:
(a) Commercial fishing in open ocean
areas;
(b) Commercial fishing in coastal
areas;
(c) Commercial fishing in estuarine
areas;
(d) Recreational fishing in open ocean
areas;
(e) Recreational fishing in coastal
areas;
(f) Recreational fishing in estuarine
areas;
(g) Recreational use of shorelines and
beaches;
(h) Commercial navigation;
(i) Recreational navigation;
(.1) Actual or anticipated exploitation
of living marine resources;
(k) Actual or anticipated exploitation
of non-living resources, including with-
out limitation, sand and gravel places
and other mineral deposits, oil and gas
exploration and development and off-
shore marine terminal or other structure
development; and
(1) Scientific research and study.
§ 227.22 Assessment o( impact.
The assessment of impact on. other
uses of the ocean will consider both tem-
porary and long-range effects within,the
state of the art, but particular emphasis
will be placed on any Irreversible or irre-
trievable commitment of resources that
would result from the proposed dumping.
Subpart F—Special Requirements for In-
terim Permits Under Section 102 of the
Act
§ 227.23 General requirement.
Each interim permit issued under sec-
tion 102 of the Act will include a re-
quirement for the development and
implementation, as soon as practicable,
of a plan which requires, at the discre-
tion of the Administrator or Regional
Administrator, as the case may be,
either:
(a) Elimination of ocean disposal of
the waste, or
(b) Bringing the waste into compliance
with all the criteria for acceptable ocean
disposal.
§ 227.24 Contents of environmental as-
sessment.
A plan developed pursuant to this Sub-
part P must include an environmental
assessment of the proposed action, In-
cluding without limitation:
(a) Description of the proposed
action;
(b) A thorough review of the actual
need for dumping;
(c) Environmental impact of the pro-
posed action;
(d) Adverse impacts which cannot be
avoided should the proposal be imple-
mented;
(e) Alternatives to the proposed
action;
(f) Relationship between short-term
uses of man's environment and the main-
tenance and enhancement of long-term
productivity;
(g) Irreversible and irretrievable com-
mitments of resources which would be
involved in the proposed action should
it be implemented; and
(h) A discussion of problems and ob-
jections raised by other Federal, State
and local agencies and by interested per-
sons in the review process.
§ 227.25 Contents of plans.
In addition to the environmental as-
sessment required by S 227.24, a plan
developed pursuant to this Subpart F
must include a schedule for eliminating
ocean dumping or bringing the wastes
into compliance with the environmental
impact criteria of Subpart B, Including
without limitation, the following:
(a) If the waste is treated to the de-
gree necessary to bring it into compli-
ance with the ocean dumping criteria,
the applicant should provide a descrip-
tion of the treatment and a scheduled
program for treatment and a. subsequent
analysis of treated material to prove the
effectiveness of the process.
(b) If treatment cannot be effected
by post-process techniques the applicant
should, determining the offending con-
stituents, examine his raw materials and
his total process to determine the origin
of the pollutant. If the offending con-
stituents are found in the raw material
the applicant should consider a new sup-
plier and provide an analysis of the new
material to prove compliance. Raw ma-
terials are to include all water used in
the process. Water from municipal
sources complying with drinking water
standards is acceptable. Water from
other sources such as private wells
should be analyzed for contaminants.
Water that has been used in the process
should be considered for treatment and
recycling as an additional source of
process water.
(c) If offending constituents are a re-
sult of the process, the applicant should
investigate and describe the source .of the
constituents. A report of this informa-
tion will be submitted to EPA and the ap-
plicant will then submit a proposal de-
scribing possible alternatives to the
existing process or processes and level of
cost and effectiveness.
(d) If an acceptable alternative to
ocean dumping or additional control
technology is required, a schedule and
documentation for implementation of
the alternative or approved control proc-
ess shall be submitted and shall include,
without limitation:
(1) Engineering plan;
(2) Financing approval;
(3) Starting date for change;
(4) Completion date;
(5) Operation starting date.
(e) If an acceptable alternative does
not exist at the time the application is
submitted, the applicant will submit an
acceptable in-house research program or
employ a competent research institution
to study the problem. The program of
research must be approved by the Ad-
ministrator or Regional Administrator,
as the case may be, befone the initiation
20
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42. NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
2481
of the research. The schedule and docu-
mentation for Implementation of a re-
search program will Include, without
limitation:
(1) Approaches;
(2) Experimental design;
(3) Starting date;
(4) Reporting Intervals;
(5) Proposed completion date;
(6) Date for submission of final re-
port.
§ 227.26 Implementation of plan*.
Implementation of each phase of a
plan shall be Initiated as soon as It Is
approved by the Administrator or Re-
gional Administrator, as the case may be.
Subpart G—Definitions
§ 227.27 Limiting permissible concen-
tration (LPC).
(a) The limiting permissible concen-
tration of the liquid phase of a material
is:
(1) That concentration of a constitu-
ent which, after allowance for initial
mixing as provided in 5 227.29, does not
exceed applicable marine water quality
criteria; or, when there are no applicable
marine water quality criteria,
(2) That concentration of waste or
dredged material in the receiving water
which, after allowance for initial mixing,
as specified in § 227.29. will not exceed a
toxldty threshold defined as 0.01 of a
concentration shown to be acutely toxic
to appropriate sensitive marine orga-
nisms in a bloassay carried out in ac-
cordance with approved EPA proced-
ures.
(3) When there is reasonable scien-
tific evidence on a specific waste mate-
rial to Justify the use of an application
factor other than 0.01 as specified in
paragraph (a) (2) of this section, such
alternative application factor shall be
used in calculating the LPC.
fb) The limiting permissible concen-
tration of the suspended participate and
solid phases of a material means that
concentration which will not cause un-
reasonable acute or chronic toxlclty or
other sublethal adverse effects based on
bloassay results using appropriate sen-
sitive marine organisms In the case of
the suspended particulate phase, or ap-
propriate sensitive benthlc marine orga-
nisms in the case of the solid phase; or
which will not cause accumulation of
toxic materials in the human food chain.
These bloassays are to be conducted in
accordance with procedures approved by
EPA, or, in the case of dredged material,
approved by EPA and the Corps of En-
gineers.1
(c) "Appropriate sensitive marine or-
ganisms" means at least one species
JAn Implementation manual Is being de-
veloped Jointly by EPA and the Corps of En-
glneera, and announcement of the availa-
bility of the manual will be published In the
FEUDAL REGISTER. Until this manual Is avail-
able. Interim guidance on tho appropriate
procedures can be obtained from tho Miirlue
Protection Branch, WH-548, Environmental
Protection Agency. 4O1 M Street SW. Wash-
ington, DO 20460, or the Corps of Engineers,
M the case may b«.
each representative of phytoplankton or
zooplankton, crustacean or mollusk, and
fish species chosen from among the most
sensitive species documented in the sci-
entific literature or accepted by EPA as
being reliable test organisms to deter-
mine the anticipated impact -of the
wastes on the ecosystem at the disposal
site. Bioassays, except on phytoplankton
or zooplankton, shall be run for a mini-
mum of 96 hours under temperature, sa-
linity, and dissolved oxygen conditions
representing the extremes of environ-
mental stress at the disposal site. Bio-
assays on phytoplankton or zooplankton
may be run for shorter periods of time
as appropriate for the organisms tested
at the discretion of EPA, or EPA and the
Corps of Engineers, as the case may be.
(d) "Appropriate sensitive benthic
marine organisms" means, at least one
species each representing filter-feeding,
deposit-feeding, and burrowing species
chosen from among the most sensitive
species accepted by EPA as being reli-
able test organisms to determine the an-
ticipated impact on the site; provided,
however, that until sufficient species are
adequately tested and documented, in-
terim guidance on appropriate orga-
nisms available for use will be provided
by the Administrator, Regional Admin-
istrator, or the District Engineer, as the
case may be.
§ 227.28 Release zone.
The release zone is the area swept out
by the locus of points constantly 100 me-
ters from the perimeter of the convey-
ance engaged in dumping activities, be-
ginning at the first moment in which
dumping is scheduled to occur and end-
ing at the last moment in which dump-
Ing is scheduled to occur. No release zone
shall exceed the total surface area of
the dumpsite.
§ 227.29 Initial mixing.
(a) Initial mixing is defined to be
that dispersion or diffusion of liquid,
suspended particulate, and solid phases
of a waste which occurs within four
hours after dumping. The limiting per-
missible concentration shall not be ex-
ceeded beyond the boundaries of the dis-
posal site during initial mixing, and shall
not be exceeded at any point In the
marine environment after Initial mix-
ing. The maximum concentration of the
liquid, suspended particulate, and solid
phases of a dumped material after ini-
tial mixing shall be estimated by one
of these methods, in order of preference:
(1) When field data on the proposed
dumping are adequate to predict initial
dispersion and diffusion of the waste,
these shall be used, If necessary, In con-
junction with an appropriate mathe-
matical model acceptable to EPA or the
District Engineer, as appropriate.
(2) When field data on the dispersion
and diffusion of a waste of character-
istics similar to that proposed for dis-
charge are available, these shall be used
in conjunction with an appropriate
mathematical model acceptable to EPA
or the District Engineer, as appropriate.
(3) When no flekl data are available,
theoretical oceanic turbulent diffusion
21
relationships may be applied to known
characteristics of the waste and the dis-
posal site.
(b) When no other means of 'estima-
tion are feasible,
(1) The liquid and suspended par-
ticulate phases .of the dumped waste
may be assumed to be evenly distributed
after four hours over a column of water
bounded on the surface by the release
zone and extending to the ocean floor,
thermocline, or halocline if one exists,
or to a depth of 20 meters, whichever is
shallower, and
(21 The solid phase of a .dumped
waste may be assumed to settle rapidly
to the ocean bottom and to be distributed
evenly over the ocean bottom in 'an area
equal to that of the release zone as de-
fined in 5 227.28.
(c) When there is reasonable scien-
tific evidence to demonstrate that
other methods of estimating a reason-
able allowance for initial mixing are
appropriate for a specific material, such
methods may be used with the concur-
rence of EPA after appropriate scien-
tific review.
§ 227.30 High-level radioactive waste.
High-level radioactive waste means
the aqueous waste resulting from the
operation of the first cycle solvent ex-
traction system, or equivalent, and the
concentrated waste from subsequent ex-
traction cycles, or equivalent, in a fa-
cility for reprocessing irradiated reactor
fuels or irradiated fuel from nuclear
power reactors.
§ 227.31 Applicable marine \vnler qual-
ity criteria.
Applicable marine water quality cri-
teria means the criteria given for marine
waters in the EPA publication "Qual-
ity Criteria for Water" as published In'
1976 and amended by subsequent sup-
plements or additions.
§ 227.32 Liquid, suspended paniculate,
and solid phases of a malcriiil.
(a) For the purposes of these regu-
lations, the liquid phase of a material,
subject to the exclusions of paragraph
(b) of this section, is the supernatant
remaining after one hour undisturbed
settling, after centrifugatlon and filtra-
tion through a 0.45 micron filter. The
suspended particulate phase is the su-
pernatant as obtained above prior to
centrifugation and filtration. The solid
phase includes all material settling: to
the bottom in one hour. Settling shall
be conducted according to procedures
approved by EPA.
(b) For dredged material, other ma-
terial containing large proportions of in-
soluble matter, materials which may in-
teract with ocean water to form Insolu-
ble matter or new toxic compounds, or
materials which may release toxic com-
pounds upon deposition, the Administra-
tor, Regional Administrator, or the Dis-
trict Engineer, as the case may be, may
require that the separation of liquid,
suspended particulate, and solid phases
of the material be performed upon a
mixture of the waste with ocean water
ratlier than on the material Itself. la
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NC 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY II, 1977
-------
2482
RULES AND REGULATIONS
such cases the following procedures shall
be used:
(1) For dredged material, the liquid
phase is considered to be the centrifuged
and 0.45 micron filtered supernatant-re-
maining after one hour undisturbed
settling of the mixture resulting from
a vigorous 30-minute agitation of one
part bottom sediment from the dredging
site with four parts water (vol/vol) col-
lected from the dredging site or from the
disposal site, as appropriate for the type
of dredging operation. The suspended
particulate phase is the supernatant as
obtained above prior to centrifugation
and filtration. The solid phase is con-
sidered to be all material settling to the
bottom within one hour. Settling shall
be conducted by procedures approved by
EPA and the Corps of Engineers.
(2) For other materials, the proportion
of ocean water used shall be the mini-
mum amount necessary to produce the
anticipated effect (e.g., complete neutral-
ization of an acid or alkaline Waste)
based on guidance provided by EPA on
particular cases, or in accordance with
approved EPA procedures. For such ma-
terials the liquid phase is the filtered and
centrifuged' supernatant resulting from
the mixture after 30 minutes of vigorous
shaking followed by undisturbed Settling
for one hour. The suspended particulate
phase is the supernatant as obtained
above prior to centrifugation and filtra-
tion. The solid phase is the insoluble ma-
terial settling to the bottom In that
period.
PART 228—CRITERIA FOR THE MANAGE-
MENT OF DISPOSAL SITES FOR OCEAN
DUMPING
Sec.
228.1 Applicability.
228.2 Definitions.
228.3 Disposal site management responsi-
bilities.
228.4 Procedures for designation of sites.
228.5 General criteria for the selection of
sites.
228.6 Specific criteria for site selection.
228.7 Regulation of disposal site use.
228.8 Limitations on times and rates of
disposal.
228.9 Disposal site monitoring.
228.10 Evaluating disposal impact.
228.11 Modification In disposal site use.
228.12 Delegation of management authority
for interim ocean dumping sites.
228.13 Guidelines for ocean disposal site
baseline or trend assessment surveys
tinder Section 102 of the Act.
AUTHORITY: 33 TT.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
§ 228.1 Applicability.
The criteria of this Part 228 are estab-
lished pursuant to section 102 of the Act
and apply to the evaluation of proposed
ocean dumping under Title I of the Act.
The criteria/of this Part 228 deal with
the evaluation of the proposed dumping
of material in ocean waters in relation
to continuing requirements for effective
management of ocean disposal sites to
prevent unreasonable degradation of the
marine environment from all wastes be-
ing dumped in the ocean. This Part 228
is applicable to dredged material disposal
sites only as specified in §§ 228.4 (e), 228.9,
and 228.12.
§ 228.2 Definitions.
(a) The term "disposal site" means an
interim or finally appnived and precise
geographical area within which ocean
dumping of wastes, is permitted under
conditions specified in permits issued un-
der sections 102 and 103 of the Act. Such
sites are identified by boundaries estab-
lished by (1) coordinates of latitude and
longitude for each corner, or by (2) co-
ordinates of latitude and longitude "for
the center point and a radius in nautical
miles from that point. Boundary coor-
dinates shall be identified as precisely as
is warranted by the accuracy with which
the site can be located with existing nav-
igational aids of by the implantation of
transponders, buoys or other means of
marking the site.
(b) The term "baseline" or "trend as-
sessment" survey means the planned
sampling or measurement of parameters
at set stations or in set areas in and near
disposal sites for a period of time suf-
ficient to provide synoptic data for
determining water quality, benthic, or
biological conditions as a result of ocean
disposal operations. The minimum re-
quirements for such surveys are given in
§ 228.13.
(c) The term "disposal site evaluation
study" means the collection, analysis,
and interpretation of all pertinent infor-
mation available concerning an existing
disposal site, including but not limited to,
data and information from trend assess-
ment surveys, monitoring surveys, spe-
cial purpose surveys of other Federal
agencies, public data archives, and so-
cial and economic studies and records of
affected areas.
(d) The term "disposal site designa-
tion, study" means the collection, analy-
sis and interpretation of all available per-
tinent data and information on a pro-
posed disposal site prior to use, including
but not limited to, that from baseline
surveys, special purpose surveys of other
Federal agencies, public data archives,
and social and economic studies and rec-
ords of areas which would be affected by
use of the proposed site.
(e) The term "management author-
ity" means the EPA organizational en-
tity assigned responsibility for Imple-
menting the management functions Iden-
tified in § 228.3.
(f) "Statistical significance" shall
mean the statistical significance deter-
mined by using appropriate standard
techniques of multivariate analysis with
results interpreted at the 95 percent con-
fidence level and based on data relating
species which are present in sufficient
numbers at control areas to permit a
valid statistical comparison with the
areas being tested.
(g) "Valuable commercial and recrea-
tional species" shall mean those species
for which catch statistics are compiled
on a routine basis by the Federal or State
agency responsible for compiling such
statistics for the general geographical
area impacted, or which are under cur-
rent study by such Federal or State agen-
cies for potential Development for com-
mercial or recreational use.
22
(h) "Normal ambient value" means
that concentration of a chemical species
reasonably anticipated to be present in
the water column, sediments, or biota in
the absence of disposal activities at the
disposal site in question.
§ 228.3 Disposal site management re-
sponsibilities.
Management of a site consists of regu-
lating times, rates, and methods of dis-
posal and quantities and types of ma-
terials disposed of; developing and main-
taining effective ambient monitoring pro-
grams for the site;, conducting disposal
site evaluation and designation studies;
and recommending modifications In site
use and/or designation (e.g., termination
of use of the site for general use or for
disposal of specific wastes).
Each site, upon interim or continuing
use designation, will be assigned to either
an EPA Regional office or to EPA Head-
quarters for management. These desig-
nations will be consistent with the
delegation of authority In § 220.4. The
designated management authority Is fully
responsible for all aspects of the man-
agement of sites within the general re-
quirements specified In § 220.4 and this
section. Specific requirements for .meet-
ing the management responsibilities
assigned to the designated management
authority for each site are outlined in
§§ 228.5 and 228.6.
§ 228.4 Procedures for designation of
sites.
(a) General Permits. Geographical
areas or regions within which materials
may be dumped under a general permit
will be published as part of the promulga-
tion of each general permit.
(b) Special and Interim Permits.
Areas where ocean dumping is permitted
subject to the specific conditions of In-
dividual special or Interim permits, will
be designated by promulgation In this
Part 228, and such designation will b£
made based on environmental studies of
each site, regions adjacent to the site,
and on historical knowledge of the im-
pact of waste disposal on areas similar
to such sites in physical, chemical, and
biological characteristics. All studies for
the evaluation and potential selection
of dumping sites will be conducted In ac-
cordance with the requirements of
f § 228.5 and 228.6.
The Administrator may, from time to
time, designate specific locations for
temporary use for disposal of small
amounts of materials under a special
permit only without disposal site desig-
nation studios when such materials sat-
isfy the Criteria and the Administrator
determines that the quantities to be dis-
posed of at such sites will not result in
significant impact on the environment.
Such designations will be done by prom-
ulgation In this Part 228, and will be for
a specified period of time and for speci-
fied quantities of materials. *
(c) Emergency Permits. Dumping sites
for materials disposed of under an emer-
gency permit will be specified by the Ad-
ministrator as a permit condition and
will be based on an Individual appraisal
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 47, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
2483
of the characteristics of the waste and
the safest means for Its-disposal.
(d) Research Permits. Dumping sites
for research permits will be determined
by the nature of the proposed study.
Dumping-sites win be specified by the
Administrator as a permit condition.
(e) Dredged Material Permits.
(1) Areas where ocean dumping of
dredged material Is permitted subject to
the specific conditions of Dredged Ma-
terial permits Issued by the TJ.S. Army
Corps of Engineers will be designated by
EPA by promulgation In this Part 228,
and such designation will be made based
on environmental studies of each-site, re-
gions adjacent to the site, and on histori-
cal knowledge of the Impact of dredged
material disposal on areas similar to such
sites In physical, chemical, and biologi-
cal characteristics. All studies for the
evaluation and potential selection of
dredged material disposal sites will be
conducted In accordance with the appro-
priate requirements of §§ 228.5 and 228.6,
except that:
(1) Baseline or trend assessment re-
quirements may be developed on a case-
by-case basis from the results of re-
search, including that now in progress
by the Corps of Engineers.
Oil) An environmental impact assess-
ment for all sites within a particular ge-
ographic area may be prepared based on
complete disposal site designation or
evaluation studies on a typical site or
sites In that area. In such cases, sufficient
studies to demonstrate the generic sim-
ilarity of all sites within such a geo-
graphic area •will be conducted.
(2) In those cases where a recom-
mended disposal site has not been desig-
nated by the Administrator, or where it
is not feasible to utilize a recommended
disposal site that has been designated by
the Administrator, the District Engineer
shall, in consultation with EPA, select.a
site in accordance with the requirements
of )| 228.S and 228.6 (a). Concurrence by
EPA In permits Issued for the use of such
site for the dumping of dredged material
at the site will constitute EPA approval
of the use of the site for dredged material
disposal only.
(3) Sites designated for the ocean
dumping of dredged material in accord-
ance with the procedures of paragraphs
(e) (1) or (e) (2) of this section shall be
used only for the ocean dumping of
dredged material under permits Issued
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
§ 228.5 General criteria fur the selection
of Biles.
(a) The dumping of materials into the
ocean will be permitted only at sites or
in areas selected to minimize the inter-
ference of disposal activities with other
activities in the marine environment,
particularly avoiding areas of existing
fisheries or shellflsheries, and regions of
heavy commercial or recreational navi-
gation.
(b) Locations and boundaries of dis-
posal sites will be so chosen that tempo-
rary perturbations in water quality or
other environmental conditions during
Initial mixing caused by disposal opera-
tions anywhere within the site can be ex-
pected to be reduced to normal ambient
seawater levels or to undetec table con-
taminant concentrations or effects be-
fore reaching any beach, shoreline, ma-
rine sanctuary, or known geographically
limited fishery or shellftshery.
If at anytime during or after dis-
posal site evaluation studies, it is deter-
mined that existing disposal sites pres-
ently approved on an interim basis for
ocean dumping do not meet the criteria
for site selection set forth in § § 228.5-
228.6, the use of such sites will be ter-
minated as soon as suitable alternate dis-
posal sites can be designated.
(d) The sizes of ocean disposal, sites
will be limited in- order to-localize for
identification and control any immediate
adverse impacts and permit the imple-
mentation of effective monitoring and
surveillance, programs to prevent ad-
verse long-range Impacts. The size, con-
figuration, and location of any disposal
site will be determined as a part of the
disposal site evaluation or designation
study.
(e) EPA will, wherever feasible, desig-
nate ocean dumping sites beyond the
edge of the continental shelf and other
such sites that have been historically
used.
§ 228.6 Specific criteria fur site selec-
tion.
(a) In the selection of disposal sites,
in addition to other necessary or appro-
priate factors determined by the Admin-
istrator, the following factors will be
considered:
(1) Geographical position, depth of
water, bottom topography and distance
from coast;
(2) Location in relation to breeding,
spawning, nursery, feeding, or passage
areas of living resources in adult or 'Ju-
venile phases;
(3) Location in relation to beaches and
other amenity areas;
(4) Types and quantities of wastes
proposed to be disposed of, and proposed
methods of release, Including methods of
packing the waste, if any;
(5) Feasibility of surveillance and
monitoring;
(6) Dispersal, horizontal transport and
vertical mixing characteristics of the
area, including prevailing current direc-
tion and velocity. If any;
(7) Existence and effects of current
and previous discharges and dumping In
the area (including cumulative effects);
(8) Interference with shipping, fishing,
recreation, mineral extraction, desalina-
tion, fish and shellfish culture, areas of
special scientific importance and other
legitimate uses of the ocean;
(9) The existing water quality and
ecology of the site as determined by
available data or by trend assessment or
baseline surveys;
(10) Potentiality for the development
or recruitment of nuisance species in the
disposal site;
(11) Existence at or in close proximity
to the site of any significant natural or
cultural features of historical Impor-
tance.
(b) The results of a disposal site eval-
uation and/or designation study based
23
on the criteria stated in paragraphs (D-
(11) will be presented in support of the
site designation promulgation as an en-
vironmental assessment of the Impact of
the use of the site for disposal, and will
be used in the preparation of an environ-
mental Impact statement for each site
where such a statement is required by
EPA policy. By publication of a notice in
accordance with this Part 228, an envi-
ronmental impact statement, in draft
form, will be made available for public
comment not later than the time of pub-
lication of the site designation as pro-
posed rulemaking, and a final EIS will be
made available at the time of final rule-
making.
§ 228.7 Regulation of disposal silc use.
Where necessary, disposal site use will
be regulated by setting limitations on
times of dumping and rates of discharge,
and establishing a disposal site monitor-
ing program.
§ 228.8 Limitations on times and rates
of disposal.
Limitations as to time for and rates
of dumping may be stated as part of the
promulgation of site designation) The
times and the quantities of permitted
material disposal will be regulated by the
EPA management authority so that the
limits for the site as specified in the site
designation are not exceeded. This will
be accomplished by the denial of permits
for the disposal of some materials, by
the imposition of appropriate conditions
on other permits and, If necessary, the
designation of new disposal sites under
the procedures of § 228.4. In no case may
the total volume of material disposed of
at any site under special or interim per-
mits cause the concentration of the total
materials or any constituent of any of
the materials being disposed of at the
site to exceed limits specified in the site
designation.
§ 228.9 Disposal site monitoring.
'(a)-.The monitoring program, if deemed
necessary by the Regional Administrator
or the District Engineer, as appropriate,
may include baseline or trend assess-
ment surveys by EPA, NOAA, other Fed-
eral agencies, or contractors, special
studies by permittees, and the analysis
and interpretation of data from remote
or automatic sampling and/or sensing
devices. The primary purpose of the
monitoring program is to evaluate the
Impact of disposal on the marine en-
vironment by referencing the monitoring
results to a set of baseline conditions.
When disposal sites are being used on a
continuing basis, such programs may
consist of the following components:
(i) Trend assessment surveys con-
ducted at Intervals frequent enough to
assess the extent and trends of environ-
mental impact. Until survey data or
other information are adequate to show
that changes in frequency or scope are
necessary or desirable, trend assessment
and baseline surveys should generally
conform to the applicable requirements
of § 228.13. These surveys shall be the
responsibility of the Federal government.
KOE«Al REGISTER, VOL. 41, NO 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY II, 1977
-------
2484
RULES AND REGULATIONS
(2) Special studies conducted by the
permittee to identify immediate and
short-term Impacts of disposal opera-
tions.
(b) These surveys may be supple-
mented, where feasible and useful, by
data collected from the use of automatic
sampling buoys, satellites or in situ plat-
forms, and from experimental programs.
(c) EPA will require the f ull participa-
tion of permittees, and encourage the full
participation of other Federal and State
and local agencies in the development
and implementation of disposal site
monitoring programs. The monitoring
and research programs presently sup-
ported by permittees may be incorpo-
rated into the overall monitoring pro-
gram insofar as feasible.
§ 228.10 Evaluating disposal impact.
(a) Impact of the disposal at each site
designated under section 102 of the Act
will be evaluated periodically and a re-
port will be- submitted as appropriate as
part of the Annual Report to Congress.
Such reports will be prepared by or under
the direction of the EPA management
authority for a specific site and will be
based on an evaluation of all data avail-
able from baseline and trend assessment
surveys, monitoring surveys, and other
data pertinent to conditions at and near
a site.
(b)' The following types of effects, in
addition to other necessary or appropri-
ate considerations, will be considered in
determining to what extent the marine
environment has been impacted by mate-
rials disposed of at 'an ocean disposal
site:
(1) Movement of materials into estu-
aries or marine sanctuaries, or onto
opeanfront beaches, or shorelines;
(2) Movement of materials toward
productive fishery or shellflshery areas;.
(3) Absence from the disposal site of
pollution-sensitive biota characteristic of
the general area;
(4) Progressive, non-seasonal, changes
In water quality or sediment composition
at the disposal site, when these changes
are attributable to materials disposed of
at the site;
(5) Progressive, non-seasonal, changes
In. composition or numbers of pelagic,
demersal, or benthic biota at or near the
disposal site, when these changes can
be attributed to the effects of materials
disposed of at the site;
(6) Accumulation of material con-
stituents (including without limitation,
human pathogens) in marine biota at or
near the site.
(c) The determination of the overall
severity of disposal at _ the site on the
marine environment, Including without
limitation, the disposal site and adjacent
areas, will be based on Uie evaluation of
the entire body of pertinent data using
appropriate methods of data analysis for
the quantity and typ? of data available.
Impacts will be categorized according to
the overall condition of the environment
of the disposal site and adjacent areas
based on the determination by the EPA
management authority assessing the
nature and extent of the effects identified
in paragraph (b) of this section in addi-
tion to other necessary or appropriate
considerations. The following categories
shall be used:
(1) Impact Category I: The effects of
activities at the disposal site shall be
categorized in Impact Category I when
one or more of the f ollowing conditions
is present and can reasonably be attrib-
uted toocean dumping activities:
(iF~There is identifiable progressive
movement or accumulation, in detectable
concentrations above normal ambient
values, of any waste or waste constituent
from the disposal site within 12 nautical
miles of any shoreline, marine sanctuary
designated under Title in of the Act,
or critical area designated under section
102(c) of the Act; or
(ii) The biota, sediments, or water
column of the disposal site, or of any
area outside the disposal site where any
waste or waste constituent from the dis-
posal site is present in' detectable' con-
centrations above normal ambient values,
are adversely affected by the toxicity of
such waste or waste constituent to the
extent that there are statistically signifi-
cant decreases in the populations of valu-
able commercial or recreational species,
or of specific species of biota essential to
the propagation of such species, within
the disposal site and such other area as
compared to populations of the same or-
ganisms in comparable locations outside
such site and area; or
(iii) Solid waste material disposed of
at the site has accumulated at the site or
in areas adjacent to it, to such an extent
that major uses of the site or of adjacent
areas are significantly impaired and the
Federal or State agency responsible for
regulating such uses certifies that such
significant impairment has occurred and
states in its certificate the basis for its
determination of such impairment; or
(iv) There are adverse effects on the
taste or odor "of valuable commercial or
recreational species as a result of disposal
activities; or
(v) When any toxic waste, toxic waste
constituent, or toxic byproduct of waste
Interaction, is consistently Identified In
toxic concentrations above normal am-
bient values outside the disposal site
more than four hours after disposal,
(2) Impact Category 11: The effects of
activities at the disposal site which are
not categorized In Impact Category I
shall be categorized in Impact Category
n.
§ 228.11 Modification in disposal site
use.
(a) Modifications In disposal site use
which involve the withdrawal of desig-
nated disposal sites from use or per-
manent changes in the total specified
quantities or types of wastes permitted
to be discharged to a specific disposal
site will be made through promulgation
of an amendment to the disposal site des-
ignation set forth in this Part 228 and
will be based on the results of the anal-
yses of impact described In § 228.10 or
upon changed circumstances concerning
use of the site.
(b), Modifications in disposal site use
promulgated pursuant to paragraph
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
2485
Approved interim dvmpinp tiles
Location (latitude, lonjUud*)
KPA
region
Primary
tflVW Nv WS6W W.,
»'"'
4ff>l«'00"N.toW20'WN.,73»30'00"W.to73'WOO"W II
»»40'OOr'N.toS9000'00"N.,72'00'WW.to7-2<'30'00"W ......................... II
«r23W'N.,7f«'00"W.,0.« nautical mile radius ......................... II
40»10'00"N..7S042'00"W.. 0.5 tumtlcnl loile radius ............................ II
HflO-flO" N. to HWOO" N., 6C°35'00" W. to Bff'JOW' W* ..... I ................... II
33»30'00"N.to3B035'(»"N.,74»lS'00"W.lo7402a'00"w""" .................... Ill
. to38°2S'00" N.. 74°10'00" W. lQ7*°20W w""."~.";i""I""I"~ Ill
JlWOO" N., WWOO" W., 31°47'0fl" N., SO'.VOf)'' W., 31'48'OCl" N.. SOWSO" W., IV
ZPVXW N. to 27°2b'00" N.', M°28'00" W. to W'44'00" W... VI
. lo28''10'00"N.,890lS'00"W. 10 ga'SPOO" W ..... '.....'. ...... '..."".. VI
Industrial wastes.
Do.
Municipal sowaijo
sludge.
Acid wastes.
Industrial wastu.
Collar dirt
Wrecks.
Industrial wastes.
Acid wastes.
Municipal sewage
sludge.
Industrial \vasU-s.
Do.
Do.
DBEDCED MATERIAL SITES
(All dredged material Bites will be retained
under EPA Headquarters management until
formally approved for continuing use 'or
otherwise assigned for Regional .management
prior to such designation.)
LOCATION (LAT., LONG.)
M&rblehead. MA—13*25'42" N., 70'34'00" W.
(2 N. Ml. diameter).
Boston. MA—41*49'00" N., 70°25'00" W. (1
N. Ml. diameter).
Portland. ME—43'33'18" N., 70*06'06" W. (1
Ml. diameter).
Cape Arundel, ME—43°17'46" N.. 70°27'12"
W. (500 yds. altimeter).
Absecon Inlet—39*21'07" N., 74'23'40" W.;
39*ai'18" N.. 74°23'63" W.
Cold Spring Inlet—38*66'41" N., 74'83'06"
W.; 88*66'33" N., 74*63'23" W.
Manaaquan Met—40.°06'22" N., 74*01'46"
W.;.40'06'38" N.,-74'01'39" W.
East Rockaway—40*34'30" N., 73*49'OO" W.:
40*36'08" N.. 73-4T06" W.; 40*34'10" N,
73'48'38" W.; 40'34'IS" N., 73*47'17" W.
Jones Inlet—40-34'32" N., 73*39'14" W.; 40*-
34'32" N., 73*37'06" W.; 40'33'48" N.. 73*-
37'06" W-: 40*33'48" N., 73*39'14" W.
Plre Island—40*36;49" N.. 73*23'60" W.; 40'-
37'12" N., 73'21'30" W.; 40*36'41" N.. 73*-
31'aO" W.; 40*38'10" N., 73*23'40" W.
Mud Dump—40'23'48" N., 73*51'28" W.; 40*-
21'48" N., 73'SO'OO" W.; 40*21'48" N., 73*-
5r28" W.; 40*23'48" N., 73*50'00" W.
Shark River—40* 12'4B" N., 73'50'45" W.;
40'12'44" N.. 73'59'oe" W.; 40*11'38" N,
73*59'28" W.; 40*11'42" N., 74'00'12" W.
Rockaway Inlet—40*32'30" N.. 73'65'00" Wj
40'32'30" N., 73*54'00" W.; 40'32'00" N,
73'64'00" W.; 40°32'00" N.. 73'S5'00" W.
San Juaa Harbor—IB'SO'IO" N., 66"08'29" Wj
18'30'ID" N.. 66'09'31" W.
Mayoguez Harbor—18'14'30" N.. 67'13'29"
W.; 18'16'30" N.. 67'14'Sl" W.
Areolbo Harbor—18'30'00" N.. 66'42'45"«,W^
IB'31'00" N.. 66°43'47" W.
Ponce Harbor—17*55'30" N., 68'38'29" W.;
17'64'30" N., 66'39'31" W.
Dam Neck—36*60'06" N., 75'63'17" W.; '36-
48'28" N., 7!i*53'17" W.; 36'46'28" N.. 75'-
64'19" W.; 36'60'05" N., 75'54'19" W.
Wilmington Harbor, NC—Hopper dredge dis-
posal In nrea east at a. line beginning 33'-
60'00" and 78'02'30" to38'48'45" and 78'-
M'OO" to 33°45'00" and 78'05'00".
Uorehead City Harbor—Maintenance dredg-
ing hopcr dredge disposal area 3 miles x 3
miles; aproxlmate latitude and longitude,
bounded north 34'40'00", south 34'38'30",
east 7G*41'OO". west 76'43'00".
aeorgetoBrn Harbor—33*11'18" N.. 7a*07'20"
Wji^SMl'lS" Nv *9'05'23" W.; 33'10'38"
K., 79'07-2l'' W.; 33'10'38" N., 79'05'24" W.
Charleston Harbor—32'18'oe" N, 79*41'67"
W.; 32*40'«2" N, 70'47'30" W.; 32'39'04"
N., 79'48'21" W.; 32'3G'2B" N , 79*43'48" W.
Port Royal Harbor—32'10'H" N., BO'36'00"
W,- 32'10'06" N., 80'36'35" W!; 32'08'41"
N., 80'35'49" W.; 32'08'38" N., 80'36'23" W.
Port Royal Harbor—32'05-46" N, 80'35'30"
W.; 32'05'42" N., BO'36'27" W.; 32°04'27"
N., 80'35M8" W.; 32'04'22" N., 80'36'16"
W.
Brunswick Harbor—Atlantic outlet, Ga., St.
Simons Saund, Brunswick Harbor. Bar.
Channel, maintenance dredging disposal
area 1 nautical mile wide by 2 nautical
miles long adjacent to the channel located
on the south side of the entrance and being
6.6 nautical miles from shore at a point
of beginning at 31'02'35" N. and 81'17'40"
W., thence due east to 31*02'35" N. and
81*16'30" W, thence due south to 31*00'-
30" N. and 81*16'30" W, thence due west
to 31'00'SO" N. and 81'16'30" W., thence
due north to the point of beginning.
Savannah River—Atlantic outlet, Ga., Sa-
vannah. River Bar Channel, maintenance
dredging disposal area 2 nautical miles
wide by 2 nautical miles long adjacent to
the channel, located on the southeast side
and being 6 nautical miles from shore at
point of beginning at 31'57'65" N. and
80'46'68" W., thence due east to 31'67'55"
N. and 80*44'20" W., thence due south to
.31"65'63" N. and 80'46'48" W, thence
northward to the point of beginning.
Canaveral Harbor—28'19'63" N., BO'31'08"
W.; 28'1B.'50" N., 80*29'40" W.; 28'17'35"
N., BO'30'52" W.; 28*18'38" N., 80'32'20"
W.
Fort Pierce Harbor—27'28'30" N., BO'12'33"
W.; 27'28'30" N., 80'11'27" W.; 27'27'30"
N., 80*11'27" W.; 27'27'30" N., 80*12'33"
W.
Jacksonville Harbor—SO'21'30" FT, 81M8'34"
W.; 30'21'30" N., Bl'17'26" W.; 30°20'30"
N., Bl'17'26" W.; 30'20'30" N., 81*18'34"
W.
Miami Beach—25°45'30" N., 80'03'54" W.;
25'46'30" N.. BO-02'60" W^ 25'44'30" N,
80'02'60" W.; 25'44'30" N., 80"03'B4" W.
Palm Beach Harbor—28*46'10" N., BO'02'00"
W.; 26*45'64" N., 80'02'06" W.; 26'45'64"
N., 80P02'13" W.; 26*46'10" N., BO'02'07"
W.
Port Everglades Harbor—26'07'00" N,
80'04'30" W.; 26°07'00" N., 80'03'30" W.;
2e'06'00" N., 80'03'30" W.; 26*06'00" N.,
SO'04'30" W.
St. Augustine Harbor—29-51'33" N.,
Bl'15'24" W.; 29'61'33" N.. 81'15'00" W.;
29'60'33" N., Bl'15'00" W.; 29'50'33" N,
Bl'15'24" W.
St Augustine Harbor—29'55'04" N.,
81'17'0-l" W.; 29'S5'13" N.. 81'16'H" W^
29'64'30" N., Bl'16'68" W.; 29'54'19" N,
81-16'61" W.
St. Lucle Inlet—27*00'68" N., 80'09'30" \V.;
27'09'68" N., 80'08'42" W.: 27'09'62" N,
80'08'42" W.; 27'0r63" N.. BO'09'30" W.
25
Charlotte Harbor—28*37'38" K., B2*19'55"
W, 26'37'36" N., 82'18'47" W.;'26'36'36"
N.. 82'18'47" W.; 26*36'38" N., 82'19'55"
W.
Tampa Harbor—27'38'OB" -N., 82'55'Oa" W.;
27'38'08" N., 82'64'00" W.; 27'37'08" N.,
82'54'00" W.; 27*37'08" N., 82*55'08" W.
Tampa Harbor—27'37'28" N., 83'00'09" W.;
27'37'34" N., 82'69'19" W.; 27°38'43" N.,
82'69'13" W.; 27'36'37" N., 83'00'03" W.
Pernandlua Harbor—30'42'00" K., 81'19'05"
W.; 30'42'00" N., Bl'17'55" W.; 30'41'00"
N., 81'17'55" W.; 30'41'00" N.. 81'19'OS"
W.
Ponce de Leon Inlet—29'08'OS" N., 80'65'50"
W.; 29*08'10" N., 80"55'40" W.; 29'05'34"
N., 80*65'10" W.; 29°05'28" N., 80'B5'20"
W.
Ponce de Leon Inlet—29'04'46" N., 80'63'40"
W.; 29-04'36" N., 80*53'40" W.; 29'04'38"
N.. 80'54'26" W.; 29*04'40" N., 80'84'26"
W.
Palm Beach Harbor—26'48'00" N., 79'58'55"
W.; 26'46'00" N., 79*57'47" W.; 28'45'00"
N., 79*67'47" W.; 26*45'00" N., 79'58'56"
W.
Largo Sound—25'06'06" N., 80'24'42" W.;
25'05'58" N., 80*24'05" t?.; 26'05'60" N.,
80'24'10" W.; 25'05'68" N., 80'24'47" W.
Key West—24'27'24" N.. 81'46'38" W.;
24'27'24" N., 81*44'32" W.; 24*26'20" N.,
81'44'32" W.; 24'26'20" N.. 81*45'38" W.
Anclote, PL—28'09'00" N., 83"61'48" W.;
28'09'00" K., 83'60'64" W.; 28'08'30" N.,
83'60'B4" W.; 28'08'30" N., 83'5r48" W.
Plthlachascotee River, PL—28°17'02" N..
82'46'21" W.; 28*17'02" N, 82°46'12" W.r
ZB'16'25" N., 82'45'00" W.,' 28'16'42" N.,
82-45'00" w.; 28°16'42" N., 82*46'21" W.
Wlthlacoochee River, PL—29°59'64" N.,
82'47'14" W.; 29'00'28" N., 82'48'08" W.;
29-00'14" N., 82>46'68" W.; 28'69'40" N.,
82'47'06" W.
Wlthlacoochee River, PL—28°59'OB" N.,
82'48'48" W.; 28*69'32" N., 82'47'40" W.;
28'59'18" N., 82'47'32" W.; 28'68'B4" N.,
82"48'40" W.
Cedar Keys, FL—29'08'43" N., 83'07'63" W.;
29'08'43" N.. 83'07'03" W.; 29-08'33" N..
B3'07'03" W.; 29'08'33" N., 83'07'B3" W.
Cedar Keys, PL—29'04'08" N., 83'04'06" W.;
29'04'01" N.. 83'03'54" W.; 29'03'28" N.,'
83'04'12".W^ 29*03'35" N., 83'04'24" W.
Horseshoe Cove, FL—29*25'23" N., 83'17'63"
W.; 29'25'18" N, 83'17'43" W.; 29'26'09"
K., 83'17'49" W.; 29'25'14<' N., 83*17'69"
W.
Horseshoe Cove, FL—29'25'58" N.. 83'17'32"
W.; 29°25'53" N., 83°17'22" W.; 29'25'44"
N., 83'17'28" W.; 29'25'49" N., 83'17'38"
W.
Mobile, AL—30*10.0' N., 88*07.7' W.; SO'10.4'
N., 88"05.2' W.; 30*09.4' N.. 88*04.7' W.;
30-08.5' N, 88*05.2' W.; SO'OB.S" N..
88"08.2' W.
Pftscagoula, MS—30*11.9' N., 88°33.1' W.;
30*11.9' N., 88*32.3' W.; 30*11.6' N., 88*32.4'
W.; 30'11.6' N., 88*32.1' W.; 30*10.6' N.,
88*33.2' W.; 30U0.6' N., 88*34.0' W.
QuUport, MS—30*12.0' N., BO'00.5' W.;
30*12.0' N., 88*69.5' W.; 30*11.0' N., 89*00.0'
W.; 30'07.0' N, 80*S6.6' W.; 30*06.6' N.,
88*57.0' W.; 30'10.5' N., 89*00.6' W.
Qulfpovt, MS—30*11.3' N., 88'68.4' W.;
30*115' N., 88*57.5' W.; 30*07.6' N., 08*64.4'
W.; 30*07.4' N., 88*54.8' W.
Fensacola, FL—30*10.8' N., 87*19.0' W.;
30-1C.7' N., 87*183' W.; 30*16.3' N., 87*18 2'
W.; 30*16.0' N, 87'19.4' W," 30*10.6' ' ,
87*19.4' W.
Pauaina City, FL—30*07.1' N., 85*45.9' W.;
30*07.2' N., 85'46.6' W.; 30*06.9' N., 85'45.T
W.; 30*06.7' N.. 86*45 6' W.
Port St. Joe, FL—29*60.9' N., 85*29.9' W4
29'51.3' N., 85-29.6' W.; 29*49.2' N., 85*28.2'
W.; 2
-------
2186
RULES AND P"GULATIONS
Port St. Joe, FL--29'53,9 N., 86'31.8' W.;
29"54.1' N., 86°31.3' W.; 29°62.2' N., 86'30.1'
W,; 29°62.2' N., 85*30.8' W.
SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TEXAS
Disposal Area No. 1—Beginning at lat.
29°28'03", long. .93°41'14"; thence to lat.
29'26'H", long. 93*41'14"; thence to Int.
29°26'11", long. 93°44'14"; thence to point
of beginning.
Disposal Area No. 2—Beginning at Int.
29'30'41", long. 93°43'49" thence to lat.
29°28'42", long. 93'41'33" thence to lat.
29°28'42", long. 93°44'49" thence to lat.
29'26'H", long. 3'44'11"; thence to point
of beginning.
Disposal Area No. 3—Beginning at lat.
29°34'24", long. 93°48'13" thence to lat.
29°32'47", long. 93°46'16" thence to lat.
29°32'06", long. 93'46'29" thence to lat.
29°31'42", long. 93°48'16" thence to lat.
29°32'69", long. 93"49'48"; thence to point
of beginning.
Disposal Area No. 4—Beginning at lat.
29°38'09", long. 93°49'23" thence to lat.
29'36'63", long. 9V48'18" thence to lat.
29'35'06", long. 93'50'24" thence to lat.
29'36'37", long. 93°51'09" thence to lat.
29«37'00", long. 93°50'06" thence to lat.
29*37'46", long. 93'50'26"; thence to point
of beginning.
GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TEXAS
Disposal Area No. 1—Beginning at lat.
29'18'GO", long. 94'39'30" thence to lat.
29°15'64", long. 94'37'06" thence to lat.
29'14'24". long. 94'38'42" thence to }at.
29'16'54", long. 94'41'30"; thence to point
of beginning.
PREEPORT HARBOR, TEXAS
Disposal Area No. 1—Beginning at lat.
28°54'42", long. 95°17'38" thence to. lat.
28°54'-3"; long. 95'16'54" thence to lat.
28"53'48", long. 95'17'27" thence to lat.
28'54'21", long. 95'18'03"; thence to point
of beginning.
MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL
Disposal Area No. 1—Beginning at lat.
28"24'31", long. 96°18'48"; tlionce to lat.
28°23'27", long. 96'17'38"; thence to lat.
28°23'16", long 96°17'64"; thence to lat.
28°24'18", long. 96'19'03"; thence to point
of beginning.
CORPUS CHRISTI SHTP CHANNEL
Disposal Area No. 1—Beginning at lat.
27"49'34", long. 97'01'B1" thence to lat.
27M8'28", long. 96°59'49" thence to lat.
27°48'18", long. 96°59'56" thence to lat.
27*49'23", long. 97°01'58"; thence to point
of beginning.
PORT MANSFIELD CHANNEL
Disposal Area No.
26'34'09", long. 97
26034'09", long. 97
26°33'57", long. 97
26°33'B7", long. 97
of beginning.
Disposal Area No. 1
26°34'17", long. 97
26"34'18", long. 97
26°33'E9", long. 97'
.26°33'68", long. 97'
of beginning.
1—Beginning at lat.
M5'B2" thence to lat.
16'18" thence to lat.
°15'18" thence to lat.
15'62"; thence to point
-A—Beginning at lat.
16'12" thence to lat.
1B'65" thence to lat.
16'52" thence to 1st.
16'11"; thence to point
BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR
Disposal Area No. 1—Beginning at lat.
26°04'38", long. 97'07'62"; thence to lat.
26'04'38", long. 97*08'43"; thence to lat
26'04'05", long. 87'06'42"; thence to lat.
26'04'05", long. 97'07'62"; thence to point
of beginning.
Mississippi River, Qvili Outlet, La.— Breton
Sound and Bar CVmnel. Maintenance
dredging disposal or?j O.B mile wide by
12.B miles long, parall •' to the channel and
located on the south Bide. Beginning at
29°32'23" N. and 89"12'20" W.. following
channel centerllno (azimuth 308°47') In
Breton Sound to 29°29'15" N. and
89°07'06" W., following crnterlino
(azimuth 300°36') of the gulf entrance
channel to 29C25'06" N. and 88°59'54" W.,
thence to 29°24'45" N. and 89',00'09" W.,
thence to 29°28'63" N., and 89°08'08" W.,
thence to 29°31'41" N. and 89'12'09" W.,
thence to the point of beginning.
Mississippi River, Baton Rouge to the Gulf
of Mexico, La.—South Pass. Maintenance
dredging disposal area 0.5 mile square,
parallel to the channel and located on the
west side. Beginning at 28°58'33" N. and
89"07'00" W, following channel center-
line (azimuth 295°41') of the gulf entrance
channel to 28°58'24" N. and 8S>°06'30" W.,
thence to 28°57'64" N. and 89°06'42" W.,
thence to 28°58'06" N. and 89"07'18" W.,
thence to the point of beginning.
Mississippi River, Baton Rouge to the Gulf of
Mexico, La.—Southwest Pass. Maintenance
dredging disposal area 2 miles' square,
parallel to the channel and located on the
west side. Beginning at 28°54'24" N. and
89°26'03" W., following channel centerllne
(azimuth 0°09') of the gulf entrance chan-
nel to 28°52'18" N. and 89°26'03" W.,
thence to 28°52'18" N. and 89'27'48" W.,
thence to 28"54'24" N. and 89°2T48" W.,
thence to the point of beginning.
Mississippi River Outlets, Venice, La.—Tiger
Pass. Maintenance dredging disposal area
0.5 mile wide by 1.5 miles long, parallel to
the channel and located on the north side.
Beginning at 29°08'18" N. and 89°25'45"
W., following channel centerline (azimuth
63° 64') of the gulf entrance channel to
29°07'36" N. and 89°26'61" W., thence to
29°07'48" N. and 89°27'00" W., thence to
29°08'36" N. and 89<25'57" W., thence to
the point of beginning.
Waterway from Empire, La. to the Gulf of
Mexico—Bar channel. Maintenance dredg-
ing disposal area 0.5 mile wide by 1 mile
long, parallel to the channel and located
on the west side. Beginning at 29 "15'06"
N. and 89°36'30" W., following channel
centerllne (azimuth 11°08') of the gulf en-
trance channel to 29'14'30" N. and
89°36'36" W, thence to 29'14'36" N. and
89°36'48" W., thence to 29'15'12" N. and
89°36'42" W., thence to the point of
beginning.
Barataria Bay Waterway, La.—Bar channel.
Maintenance dredging disposal area 0.5
mile wide by 2 miles long, parallel to the
channel and located on the east side. Be-
ginning at 29"16'18" N. and 89°5G'12" W.,
following channel centerline (azimuth
312'07') of the gulf entrance channel to
29°14'42" N. and 89°G4'36" W., thence to
29'14'30" N. and 89°54'24" W., thence to
29'16'OG" N. and 89"56'24" W., thence to
the point of beginning.
Bayou Lafourche and Lafourche—Jump
Waterway, La.—Bell Pass. Maintenance
dredging disposal area 2,000 feet wide by
1.5 miles long, parallel to the channel and
located on the west side. Beginning at
29WOO" N. and 90'13'45" W., following
Bell Pass centerllne (azimuth 12°65') in
the gulf entrance channel to 29°03'51" N.
and 90'14'06" W., thence to 29"03'57" N.
and 90'14'21" W., thence to 29°06'06" N.
and 90°14'03" W., thence to the point of
beginning.
Houma Navigation Canal, La.—Cat Island
Pass. Maintenance dredging disposal area
O.B mile wide by 6 miles long, parallel to
the Cat Island channel and located on
the west side. Beginning at 29°04'45" N.
and 90"34'48" W., following Cat Island
centerllne (azimuth 358°41') of the gulf
entrance channel to 29'03'42" N. and
90°34'34" W.i following Oat Isla,nd center-
line (azimuth 354°00') of the gulf entrance
channel to 29'00'24" N. and 90°34'12" W,
thence to 29'00'21" N. and 90C34'86" W.,
thence to 29"03'42" N. and 90°34'58" W,
thence to 29°04'48" N. and 90"35'18" W,
tho.nce to the point of beginning.
Atchafalaya River—Morgan City to the Gulf
of Mexico. La. and Atchafalaya River and
Bayous Chene, Boeuf and Black, La.—Bar
channel. Maintenance dredging disposal
area 0.5 miile wide* by 12 miles longi
parallel to the bar channel and located on
the east side. Beginning at 29°20'60" N.
and 91°24'03" W., following channel ceu-
terline (azimuth 37°67') of the gulf en-
trance channel to 29"11'35" N. and
91S32'10" W., thence to 29°ir21" N. and
91'31'37" W., thence to 29°30'36" N. and
91°23'27" W., thence to the point of
beginning.
Freshwater Bayou, La.—Bar channel.'Main-
tenance dredging disposal area 2,000 feet
wide by 3.5 miles long, parallel to the
channel and located on the west Bide. Be-
ginning at 29°32'00" N. and oa'18'48" W.,
following channel centerllne (azimuth
09°25') of the gulf entrance to 29*28'24"
N. and 92"19'30" W., thence to 29'28'25"
N. and 92'19'42" W, thence to 29°32'01"
N. and 92'19'00" W., thence to the point
of beginning.
Mermentau River, La. Maintenance dredging
disposal areas 0.6 mile wide and 1.5 miles
long, parallel to the entrance channels
in the Lower Mermentaxi River and In
the Lower Mud Lake, both located on the
west side:
Disposal Area "A", Mermentau River, La.
Beginning at 29°44'4fl" N. and 93°07'12" W.,
following channel centerllne (azimuth
256°59') of the gulf entrance to 29'43'39"
N. and 93"07'36" W., thence to 29'43'42" N.
and 93°07'48" W., thence to 29°44'51" N,
and 93"07'24" W,, thence to the point of
beginning.
Disposal Area "B", Mermentau River, La.
Beginning at 29°43'24" N. and 93'01'64" W.,
following channel centerltne '(azimuth
359°50') of the gulf entrance to 29'42'33"
N. and 93°02'12" W, thence to 29*42'36"
N. and 93°02'24" W., thence to 29'43"27" N.
and 93°02'06" W., thence to the point of
beginning.
Calcasleu River and Pass. La.—Bar chan-
nel. Maintenance dredging disposal areas A
through G parallel to the channel and lo-
cated on the east and west side:
Disposal Area "A", Calcasieu River and
Pass, La. Maintenance dredging disposal
area one mile square parallel to the bar
channel on the west bank. Beginning at
29"46'09" N. and 93°20'42" W., following
channel centerllne (azimuth 3[51°50') of the
first taipent gulfward in the gulf entrance
channel to 29°44'39" N. and 93°20'36" W-
thence to 2fl°44'36" N. and 93'21'33" W.,
thence to 29"45'12" N. and 93"21'42" W.,
thence to the point of beginning.
Disposal Area "B", Calcasleu River and
Pass, La. Maintenance dredging disposal area
1 mile square parallel to the bar channel
and located on the east bank. Beginning at
29°45'27" N. and 93'20'33" W., following
channel centerline (azimuth 351*60') of
the first tangent gulfward In the gulf en-
trance channel to 29°44'42" N. and B3'20'24"
W., thence to 29°44'45" N. and 93M9'80" W,
thence to 29°46'39" N. and 93'19'36" W.,
thence to the point of beginning.
Disposal Area "C", Calcasieu River and
Pass. La. Maintenance dredging disposal area
1 mile wide by 5 5 miles long, parallel to the
26
«DE»Al »EGISTER, VOL 47, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
2187
bar channel and locate on the west side.
Beginning at 29*44'30>* N. and 93*20'36" W .
following channel centerllne (azimuth
351*60') of the first tangent gulf ward In the
gulf entrance channel to 29*39*48" N and
93*19'48" W., thence to 29'39'42" N and
93-20*48". W.. thence to 29'44'2-t" N and
83-21*30" W.. thence to the point of begin-
ning.
Disposal Area "D". Calcasleu River and
Pass, La. Maintenance dredging disposal area
1 mile wide by 6.6 miles long, parallel to
the bar fitiannol and located on the west side.
Beginning at 29*37'48" N. and 93-19*24" W.,
following channel centerllne (azimuth
351*60') of the first tangent gulfward In the
gulf entrance channel to 29*37*24" N. and
93*19'24" W., following channel centerllne
(azimuth 321*37') of the second tangent
gulfward In the gulf entrance channel to
39*34*13" N. and 93*16'18" W., thence to
29«33'06" H. and 93*16*36" W., thence to
29'37'34" N. and 93*20*24" W.. thence to
29*37'48" W. and 93*20'24" W, thence to the
point of beginning.
Disposal Area "Eu, Calcasleu River and
Pass, La, Maintenance dredging disposal area
0.76 mile wide by ff.76 miles long, parallel to
the bar channel and located on the west side.
Beginning at 28'33'64" N. and 93-18*24" W.,
following channel centerllne ' (azimuth
$21*37') of the second tangent gulf ward In
the gulf entrance-channel to 29*31*00" N.
and 93*13*48" W., following channel center-
line (azimuth 368*68') of the third tangent
gulfward in the gulf entrance channel to
29*29'00" N. and 03M3'42" W. thence to
29*28*64" N. and 93*14'24" W., thence to
29-30'54" N. and' 93*14*24" W., thence to
39*33'12" N. and 93*16*36" W., thence to the
point of beginning.
Disposal Area "F". Calcasleu River and
Pass, La. Maintenance dredging disposal area
0.75 mile wide by 2.5 miles long, parallel to
the bar channel and located on the east side.
Beginning at 29*44*42" N. and 93*20*12" W.,
following channel centerjlne (azimuth
351*60') of the first tangent gulfward In the
gulf entrance channel to 29'42'36" N. and
93-19*48" W., thience to 29'42'42" N. and
93*19*06" W, thence to 29*44*43." N. and
93*19'24" W.. thence to the point of begin-
ning.
Disposal Area "Q", Calcasleu River an'd
Pass, La. Maintenance dredging disposal area
1 mile wide by 0.5 mile long, parallel to the
bar channel and.located on.the west side.
Beginning at 29*44*54" N., and 93"20;3G" W:,
following channel centerllne (azimuth
351*50') of the first tangent gulfward In the
gulf entrance channel to 29*44'42" N., and
93*20*36" W.. thence to 29'44'42" N., and
93-20*48" W, 'following channel centerllne
•gain to 29*44'30" N., and 93"20'42" W..
thence to 29*44'24" N. and 93J21'30" W.,
thence to 29-44*48" N. and 93°21'30" W.,
thence to the point of beginning.
Crescent City Harbor—41'43'la" N..
124*12'10" W. (1.000yd. diameter)
Crescent City 'lOO fathom—41-43'50" N..
124*28*00" W. (1,000 yd. diameter)
Humboldt Bay Harbor—40'45'44" N.,
124*15*42" W. (500 yd. diameter)
Noyo River—39*25*45" N., 123°49'42" W. (500
yd. diameter)
Pftrallon Islands—37*31*45" N., 122'59'00"
W. (1,000 yd. radius)
San Francisco- Channel Bar—37'45'06" X.,
132-35'45" W. (6,000 yds. x 1,000 yds.)
Moss Landing 100 fathom—3Q'3T53" N,
m*49'04" W. (600 yd. radius)
Port Hueneme—34-05*00" N.. 119*14'00" W.
(1.000 yd. radius)
Los Angeles—33-37*06" N.. 118'17'24'* W.
(1,000 yd. radius)
Newport Beach—33'31*42" N., m-54'48" W.
(1.000 yd. radius)
San Diego—Point Loma—32*35*00" N,
117*17*30" W. (1.000 yd. radius)
San Diego 100 fathom—32*36*50" N.,
117-20*40" W. (1,000 yd. radius)
Honolulu Harbor—31*14'30" », 167'64'30"
W. (1,000 yd. radius)
Kaual—NawUlwill—21-55*30" N., 169'17'00"
W. (1,000 yd. radius)
Kaual—Hanapepe—21'60'18" N., 159*35*30"
W. (1,000 yd. radius)
Guam—Apr'a Harbor—13*29*30" N.,
144-34*30" E. (1,000 yd. radius)
American Samoa—Pago Pago Harbor—
14-23*00" 3., 170'39'30" W. (1,000-yd.
radius)
Mouth of Columbia River—40'14'37" N..
124*10'34" W.; 46'13*53" N., 124"10*01"
W.; 4G-13'43" N., 124*10'26" W.; 40°14'28"
N., 124-10'59" W.
Mouth of Columbia River—46-13*03" N.,
124*06*17" W.; 46-12'50" N.. 124-05*55"
W.; 46-12*13" N.. 124-06*43" W.; 40'12'26"
N., 124-07'05" W.
Mouth of Columbia River—46° 16*43" N.,
124-05'21" W.; 46*16*36" N., 124*05*11"
W.; 46*15*11" N., 124-05*53" W.; 46-15*18"
N., 124-06*03" W.
Mouth of Columbia River—46'12'12" N.,
124-09'00." W.; 46°12'00" N, 124°08'42"
W.; 46*11*48" N., 124°09W W.; 46'12'00"
N., 124°09'18" W.
Mouth of Columbia River—46-12*05" N.,
124'05'46" W.; 46*11*62" N., 124-05*25"
W.; 46*11'16" N., 124'06'14" W.; 46'11'28"
N., 124-06*35" W.
Chetco River Entrance-r42-01'66" N.,
124°16'33" W.; 42*01*56" N., 124*16*09"
W.; 42-01*38" N., 124*16*09" W.; 42*01'38"
N., 124°16'33" W.
Rogue River Entrance—42'24'16" N..
124-26*48" W.; 42°24'04" N., 124°26'35"
W.; 42-23*40" N., 124°27'13" W.; 42<23'62"
N., 124-27*26" W.
Coqullle River Entrance—43-07*64" N., 124*-
27*04" W.; 43*07*30" N.. 124*26*27" W.I
43°07'20" N, 124-26*40" W.; 43°07*.44" N.,
124*27*17" W.
Coos Bay Entrance—43*21*69" N., 124*22/45"
W.; 43-21*48" N., 124*21*69" W.; 43°21'36"
N., 124-22*05" W.; 43-21*46" N.. 124-22'-
61" W.
Coos Bay Entrance—43 '22*44" N., 124-22'18"
W.; 43°22'29" N'., 124°21'34" W.; 43*22'-
16" N., 124-21'42" W.; 43°22'31" N., 124°-
22*26" W.
Umpqua River Entrance—43*40*07" N., 124--
14*18" W.; 43°40'07" N., 124-13*42" W.;
43°39'63" N.. 124'13'42" W.; 43-39'63" N.,
121-14*18" W.
Sulslaw River Entrance—14°01'32" N.. 124--
09'37" W.; 44°01'22" N., 124°09'02" W.:
44°01'14" N.. 124'09'07" W.; 44-01*24" N.,
124°09'42" W.
Tlllamook Bay Entrance—45'34'09" N.. 123'-
59'37" W.; 45'34'09" N., 123"58'45" W.;
45°33'55" N., 123 = 58'45" W.; 45-33*55" N..
123'59'37" W.
Depoe Bay—44-48*33" N., 124°03'53" W.; 44'-
48'32" N.. 124'03'43" W.; 44-48*15" N,
124-03*45" W.; 44°48'16" N., 124°03'65" W.
Depoe Boy—44*48'09" N., 124'05'OS" W.; 44'-
48*09" N., 124°04'55" W.; 44'47'63" N.,
124-04*55" W.; 44 = 47'53" N., 124-05*05" W.
Yaqulna Bay and Harbor Entrance—44'36'-
31" N., 124'00'04" W.; 44-36*31" N., 124'-
05*16" W.; 44'30'17" N., 124-05*16" W.I
44-3G'17" N., 124°06'04" W.
Port Orford—42°44'08" N., 124'29'38" W.;
42-44'08" N, 124°29'28" W.; 42'43'52" N.,
124-29'2B" W.; 42°-t3'52" N., 124°29'38" W.
Willapa Btxy—46-44'00" N.. I24"10'00" W.;
46'39'00" N., 124'09'00" W.
Nome—04°30'40" N.. 1C5'25'62" W.; 64'29'-
18" K.. 165'26'04" W.; 64"29'13" N., 165'-
25'22" W.: C4-29'51" N.. 165°24'45" W.
Anchorage Harbor—Gri4'07" N., 149'53'5G"
W.; 61*14'16" N.. M-i-04'15" W.; 61'14'45"
K., 149'63'36" W.; Sl'14'36" N . 149'63'17"
W.
27
(b) The following sites are designated
"Approved Ocean Dumping Sites" for
continuing use, subject to the listed re-
strictions:
(1) Gulf Ocean Incineration Site—Region
VI. Location—Latitude and Longitude—
27-06*12" N., 93-24'16" W.; 28*32'24" N.,
93*16*30" W.; 26-19*00" N., 93'66'00" W.;
26-62MO" N.. 94-04*40" W.
Size—(square miles) 1892.
Depth—(feet) 4500.
Primary Use: At sea Incineration primarily
for organochlorlue wastes. Incineration of
other wastes will require research studies or
equivalent technical documentation to de-
termine acceptability for ocean incinera-
tion.
Period of use: Until September 18, 1981.
Restriction: Only one ship will be permitted
to burn wastes at a time, except under ex-
treme emergencies.
§ 228.13 Guidelines for ocean disposal
site Iwseline or Ircnd assessment sur-
veys under Section 102 of the Act.
The purpose of a baseline or trend as-
sessment survey is to determine the
physical, chemical, geological, and bio-
logical structure of a proposed or exist-
ing disposal site at the time of the sur-
vey. A baseline or trend assessment sur-
vey is to be regarded as a comprehensive
synoptic and representative picture of
existing conditions; each such survey is
to be planned as-part of a continual
monitoring program through which
changes in conditions at a disposal site
can be documented and assessed. Sur-
veys will be planned in coordination with
the ongoing programs of NOAA and
other Federal, State, local, or private
agencies with missions In the marine en-
vironment. The field survey data collec-
tion phase of a disposal site evaluation or
designation study shall be planned and
conducted to .obtain a body of- Informa-
tion both representative of the site at the
time of study and obtained by techniques
reproducible hi precision and accuracy
in future studies. A full plan of study
which will provide a record of sampling,
analytical, and data reduction procedures
must be developed, documented and ap-
proved by the EPA management author-
ity. Plans for all surveys which will
produce information to be used in the
preparation of environmental impact
statements will be approved by the Ad-
ministrator or his designee. This plan of
study also shall be incorporated as an
appendix into a technical report on the
study, together with notations describ-
ing deviations from the plan required
in actual operations. Relative emphasis
on individual aspects of the environment
at each site will depend on the type of
wastes disposed of at the site and the
manner in which such wastes are likely
to affect the local environment, but no
major feature of the disposal site may be
neglected. The observations made and
the data obtained are to be based on the
information necessary to evaluate the
site for ocean dumping. The parameter
measured will be those indicative, either
directly or in directly, of the immediate
and long-term impact of pollutants on
the environment at the disposal site
and adjacent land or water areas. An
flOEJIAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
2488
RUIES AND REGULATIONS
Initial disposal site evaluation or desig-
nation study should provide an Im-
mediate baseline appraisal of a particular
site, but it should also be regarded as tbe
first of a series of studies to be con-
tinued as long as the site is used for waste
disposal.
(a) Timing. Baseline or trend assess-
ment surveys will be conducted with due
regard for climatic and seasonal impact
on stratification and other conditions in
the upper layers of the water column.
Where a choice of season is feasible, trend
assessment surveys should be made dur-
ing those months when pollutant ac-
cumulation within disposal sites is likely
to be most severe, or when pollutant Im-
pact within disposal sites is likely to be
most noticeable.
(1) Where disposal sites are near large
riverine inflows to the ocean, surveys will
be done with due regard for the seasonal
variation in river flow. In some cases
several surveys at various river flows may
be necessary before a site can be ap-
proved.
(2) When initial surveys show that
seasonal variation Is not significant and
surveys at greater than seasonal Inter-
vals are adequate for characterizing a
site, resurveys shall be carried out In
climatic conditions as similar to those
of the original surveys as possible, par-
ticularly in depths less than 200 meters.
(b) Duration. The actual duration of
a field survey will depend upon the size
and depth of the site, weather condi-
tions during the survey, and the types of
data to be collected. For example, for a
survey .of an area of 100 square miles on
the continental shelf, Including an aver-
age dump site and the "region con-
tiguous to it, an on-site operation would
be scheduled for completion within one
week of weather suitable for on-site
operations. More on-site operating time
may be scheduled for larger or highly
complex sites.
(c) Numbers and Locations of Sam-
pling Stations. The numbers and loca-
tions of sampling stations will depend in
part on the local bathymetry with mini-
mum numbers of stations per site fixed
as specified in the following sections.
'Where the bottom is smooth or evenly
sloping, stations for water column meas-
urements and benthic sampling and col-
lections, other than trawls, shall be
spaced throughout the survey area hi a
manner planned to provide maximum
coverage of both the disposal site and
contiguous control areas, considering
known water movement characteristics.
Where there are major irregularities in
the bottom topography, such as canyons
or gullies, or in the nature of the bottom,
sampling stations for sediments and ben-
thic communities shall be spaced to pro-
vide representative sampling of the
major different features.
Sampling shall be done within the
dump site itself and in the contiguous
area. Sufficient control stations outside a
disposal site shall be occupied to char-
acterize the control area environment
at least as-well as the disposal site itself.
Where there are known persistent cur-
rents, sampling in contiguous areas shall
Include at least two stations downcurrent
of the dump site, and at least two sta-
tions upcurrent of the site.
(d) Measurements in the Water Col-
umn at and near the Dump Site.
(1) Water Quality Parameters Meas-
ured. These shall include the major Indi-
cators of water quality, particularly those
likely to be affected by the waste pro-
posed to be dumped. Specifically included
at all stations are measurements of tem-
perature, dissolved oxygen, salinity, sus-
pended solids, turbidity, total organic
carbon, pH, inorganic nutrients, and
chlorophyll a.
(1) At one station near the center of
the disposal site, samples of the water
column shall be taken for the analysis of
the following parameters: mercury, cad-
mium, copper, chromium, zinc, lead, ar-
senic, selenium, vanadium,, beryllium,
nickel, pesticides, petroleum hydrocar-
bons, and persistent organohalogens.
These samples shall be preserved for
subsequent analysis by or under the di-
rect supervision of EPA laboratories in
accordance with the approved plan of
study.
(11) These parameters are the basic
requirements for all sites. For the evalu-
ation of any specific disposal site addi-
tional measurements may be required,
depending on the present or Intended
use of the site. Additional parameters
may be selected based on the materials
likely to be in wastes dumped at the site,
and on parameters likely to be affected
by constituents of such wastes. Analysis
for other constituents characteristic of
wastes discharged to a particular dis-
posal site, or of the impact of such
wastes on water quality, will be included
in accordance with the approved plan of
study.
(2) Water Quality Sampling Require-
ments. The number of samples collected
from the water column should be suffi-
cient to Identify representative changes
throughout the water column such as to
avoid short-term Impact due to disposal
activities. The following key locations
should be considered In selecting water
column depths for sampling:
(1) Surface, below Interference from
surface waves;
(11) Middle of the surface layer;
(ill) Bottom of the surface layer;
(iv) Middle of the thermocline or halo-
cline, or both If present;
(v) Near the top of the stable layer
beneath a thermocline or halocline;
(vi) Near the middle of a stable layer;
(vii) As near the bottom as feasible;
(viii) Near the center of any zone
showing pronounced biological activity
or lack thereof.
In very shallow waters where only a
few of these would be pertinent, as a
minimum, surface, mid-depth and bot-
tom samples shall be taken, with samples
at additional depths being added as in-
dicated by local conditions. At dis-
posal sites far enough away from the
influence of major river inflows, ocean
or coastal currents, or other features
which might cause local perturba-
tions in water chemistry, a minimum of
5 water chemistry stations should be oc-
cupied within the boundaries of a site.
Additional stations should be added when
the area to be covered In the survey Is
more than 20 square miles or when local
perturbations in water chemistry may be
expected because of the presence of one
of the features mentioned above. In zones
where such Impacts are likely, stations
shall be distributed so that at least 3
stations are occupied In the transition
from one stable regime to another. Each
water column Chemistry station shall be
replicated a minimum of 2 times during
a survey except in waters over 200 meters
deep.
(3) Water Column Biota. Sampling
stations for the biota In the water col-
umn shall be as near as feasible to'sta-
tions used for water quality; in addition
at least two night-time stations in the
disposal site and contiguous area are re-
quired. At each station vertical or oblique
tows with appropriately-meshed nets
shall be used to assess the microzoo-
plankton, the nekton, and the macrozoo-
plankton, Towing times and distances
shall be sufficient to obtain representa-
tive samples of organisms near water
quality stations. Organisms shall be
sorted and identified to taxonomlc levels
necessary to identify dominant orga-
nisms, sehsitive or Indicator organisms,
and organism diversity. Tissue samples of
representative species .shall be analyzed
for pesticides, persistent organohalogens,
and heavy metals. Discrete water samples
shall also be used to'quantitatively assess
the phytoplankton at each station.
These requirements are the minimum
necessary in all cases. Where there are
discontinuities present, such as thermo-
clines, haloclines, convergences, or up-
welling, additional tows shall be made -in
each water mass as appropriate.
(e) Measurements of the Benthic Re-
gion.
(1) Bottom Sampling. Samples of the
bottom shall be taken for both sediment
composition and structure, and to deter-
mine the nature and numbers of benthic
biota.
(i) At each station sampling may con-
sist of core samples, grab samples, dredge
samples, trawls, and bottom photography
or television, where available and. feasi-;
ble, depending on the nature of the bot-
tom and the type of disposal site. Each
type of sampling shall be replicated suf-
ficiently to obtain a representative set of
samples. The minimum-numbers of repli-
cates of successful samples at each conti-
nental shelf station for each type of
device mentioned above are as follows:
Cords 3.
Grabs 5.
Dredge _ 3.
Trawl 20-mln. tow.
Lesser numbers of replicates may be
allowed in water deeper than 200 meters,
at those sites where pollution Impacts on
the bottom are unlikely in the judgment
of the EPA management authority.
(ii) Selection of bottom station's will
be based to a large extent on the bot-
tom topography and hydrography as
determined by the bathymetric survey.
On the continental shelf, where the bot-
tom has no significant discontinuities, a
FEDEPAl 1>E<"-l, NO. 7—'
TUESDAY. JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
bottom station density of at least three
times the water column stations is rec-
ommended, depending on the type of
site being evaluated. Where there are
significant differences in bottom topog-
raphy, additional stations shall be oc-
cupied near the discontinuity and on
each side of It. Beyond the continental
shelf, lesser densities may be used.
(2) Bathymetric Survey. Sufficient
trackllnes shall be run to develop com-
plete bottom coverage of bathymetry
with reasonable assurance of accurate
coverage of bottom topography, with
trackline directiort and spacing as close
as available control allows! The site it-
self is to be developed at the greatest
density possible, with data to be collect-
ed to a suitable distance about the site
as is required to identify major changes
in bathymetry which might affect the
site. Specifications for each bathymetrlc
survey will vary, depending on control,
bottom complexity, depths, equipment,
and map scale required. In most cases,
a bathymetrlc map at a scale of 1:25,000
to 1:10,000 will be required, with a mini-
mum of 1-5 meter contour interval ex-
cept in very flat areas. When the fore-
going bathymetric- detail is available
from recent surveys of the disposal site,
bathymetry during a baseline or trend
assessment survey may be limited to
sonar profiles of bathymetry on transects
between sampling stations.
(3) Nature of Bottom. The size dis-
tribution of sediments, mineral charac-
ter and chemical quality of the bottom
will be determined to a depth appropri-
ate for the type of bottom. The follow-
ing parameters will be measured at all
stations: particle size distribution, ma-
jor mineral constituents, texture, settling
rate, and organic carbon.
(i) At several stations near the cen-
ter of the disposal site, samples of sedi-
ments shall be taken for the analysis of
the following parameters: mercury, cad-
mium, copper, chromium, zinc, lead,
arsenic, selenium, vanadium, beryllium,
nickel, pesticides, persistent organohal-
ogens, and petroleum hydrocarbons.
These samples shall be preserved for sub-
sequent analysis by or under the direct
supervision of EPA laboratories in ac-
cordance with the approved plan of
study.
(ii) These parameters are the basic
requirements for all sites. For the eval-
uation of any specific disposal site ad-
ditional measurements may be required,
depending on the present or intended
use of the site. Additional parameters
may be selected based on the materials
likely to be in wastes dumped at the site,
and on parameters likely to be affected
by constituents of such wastes. Such ad-
ditional parameters will be selected by
the EPA management authority .
(4) Benthic Biota. This shall consist
of a quantitative and qualitative evalu-
ation of benthic communities including
niacroinfauna and macroepifauna, mei-
obenthos, and microbenthos, and should
include an appraisal, based on existing
Information, of the sensitivity of in-
digenous species to the waste proposed to
RULES AND REGULATIONS
be discharged. Organisms shall be sorted.
and identified to taxonomic levels neces-
sary to identify dominant organisms,
sensitive or indicator organisms, and or-
ganism diversity. Tissue samples of the
following types of organisms shall be
analyzed for persistent organohalogens,
pesticides, and heavy metals:
(i) A predominant species of demer-
sal fish ;
(11) The most abundant macroin-
faunal species; and
(iil) A dominant epifaunal species,
with particular preference for a spe-
cies of economic importance.
(f) Other Measurements.
(1) Hydrodynamic Features. The di-
rection and speed of water movement
shall be characterized at levels appropri-
ate for the site and type of waste to be
dumped. Where depths and climatic con-
ditions are great enough for a thermo-
cline or halocllne to exist, the relation-
ship of water movement to such a fea-
ture shall be characterized.
(i) Current Measurements. When cur-
rent meters are used as the primary
source of hydrodynamic data, at least 4
current meter stations with at least 3
meters at depths appropriate for the ob-
served or expected discontinuities in the
water column should be operated for as
long as possible during the survey. Where
feasible, current meters should be de-
ployed at the initiation of the survey and
recovered after Its completion. Stations
should be at least .a mile apart, and
should be placed along the long axis of
the dumping site. For dumping sites more
than 10 miles along the long axis, one
current • meter station every 5 miles
should be operated. Where there are dis-
continuities in surface layers, e.g., due to
land runoff, stations should be operated
in each water mass.
(ii) Water Mass Movement. Acceptable
methods Include: dye, drogues, surface
drifters, side scan sonar, bottom drifters,
and bottom photography or television.
When such tecliniques are the primary
source of hydrodynamic data, coverage
should be such that all significant hydro-
dynamic features likely to affect waste
movement are measured.
<2) Sea State. Observations of sea
state and of standard meteorological
parameters shall be made at 8-hour In-
tervals.
(3) Surface Phenomena. Observations
shall be made of oil slicks, floating mate-
rials, and other visible evidence of pol-
lution; and, where possible, collections
of floating materials shall be made.
(g) Survey. Procedures and Tech-
niques. Tecliniques and procedures used
for sampling and analysis shall repre-
sent the state-of-the-art in ocean-
ographic survey and analytical practice.
Survey plans shall specify the methods
to be used and will be subject to approval
by EPA.
(h) Quality Assurance. The EPA man-
agement authority may require that cer-
tain samples be submitted on a routine
basis to EPA laboratories for analysis as
well as being analyzed by the surveyor,
and that EPA personnel participate la
some field survey.-,
29
2489
PART 229—GENERAL PERMITS
Sec.
229.1 Burial at sea.
229.2 Transport of target vessels.
229.3 Transportation and disposal of vessels.
AUTHORITY: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
§ 229.1 Buriul ut sea.
(a) All persons subject to Title I of
the Act are hereby granted a general
permit to transport human remains from
the United States and all persons own-
ing or operating a vessel or aircraft reg-
istered in the United States or flying the
United States flag and all departments,
agencies, or instrumentalities of the
United States are. hereby granted a gen-
eral permit to transport human remains
from any location for the purpose of
burial at sea and to bury such remains
at sea subject to the following conditions:
(1) Except as herein otherwise pro-
vided, human remains shall be prepared
for burial at sea and shall be buried in
accordance with accepted practices and
requirements as may be deemed appro-
priate and desirable by the United States
Navy. United States Coast Guard, or civil
authority charged with the responsibility
for making such arrangements;
(2) Burial at sea of human remains
which are not cremated shall take place
no closer than three nautical miles from
land and in water no less than one hun-
dred fathoms (six hundred feet). deep
and in no less than three hundred fath-
oms (eighteen hundred feet) from (i)
27°30'00" to SroO'OO" North Latitude
off St. Augustine arid Cape Canaveral,
Florida; (ii) 82°20'00" to84°00'00" West
Longitude off Dry Tortugas, Florida; and
(iil) 87°15'00" to 89"50'00" West Longi-
tude off the Mississippi River Delta, Lou-
isiana, to Pensacola, Florida. All neces-
sary measures shall be taken to ensure
that the remains sink to the bottom rap-
Idly and permanently; and
(3) Cremated remains shall be buried
In or on ocean waters without regard to
the depth limitations specified in para-
graph (a) (2) of this Section provided
that such burial shall take place no
closer than three nautical miles from
land.
(b) For purposes of this Section and
§§ 229.2 and 229.3, "land" means that
portion of the baseline from which the
territorial sea Is measured, as provided
for in the Convention on the Territorial
Sea and the Contiguous Zone, which is
In closest proximity to the proposed dis-
posal site.
(c) Flowers and wreaths consisting of
materials which are readily decomposable
In the marine environment may be dis-
posed of under the general permit set
forth In this Section at the site at which
disposal of human remains is authorized.
(d) All burials conducted under this
general permit shall be reported within
30 days to the Regional Administrator of
the Region from which the vessel carry-
ing the remains departed.
§ 229.2 Trm>*port of lurgot vessels.
(a) The United States Navy is hereby
granted a general permit to transport
vessels from the United States or from
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOt. 42, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY II, 1977
-------
2490
RULES AND REGULATIONS
any other location for the purpose of
sinking such vessels in ocean waters in
testing ordnance and providing related
data subject to the following conditions:
(1) Such vessels may be sunk at times
determined by the appropriate Navy
official;
(2) Necessary measures shall be taken
to ensure that the vessel sinks to the bot-
tom rapidly and permanently, and that
marine navigation is not otherwise im-
paired by the sunk vessel;
(3) All such vessel sinkings shall be
conducted in water at least 1000 fathoms
(6000 feet) deep and at least 50 nautical
miles from land, as denned in § 229.1 (b);
and
(4) Before sinking, appropriate meas-
ures shall be taken by qualified personnel
at a Navy or other certified facility to
remove to the maximum extent practi-
cable all materials which may degrade
the marine environment, including with-
out limitation, (i) emptying of all fuel
tanks and fuel lines to the lowest point
practicable, flushing of such tanks and
lines with water, and again emptying
such tanks and lines to the lowest point
practicable so that such tanks and lines
are essentially free of petroleum, and (11)
removing from the hulls other pollutants
and all readily detachable material capa-
ble of creating debris or contributing to
chemical pollution.
(b) An annual report will be made to
the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency setting forth the name
of each vessel used as a target vessel, Its
approximate tonnage, and the location
and date of sinking.
§ 229.3 Transportation and disposal of
vessels.
(a) All persons subject to Title I of
the Act are hereby granted a general per-
mit to transport vessels from the United
States, and all departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities of the United States are
hereby granted a general permit to trans-
port vessels from any location for the
purpose of disposal In the ocean subject
to the following conditions:
(1) Except In emergency situations, as
determined by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and/or the U.S. Coast Guard,
the person desiring to dispose of a vessel
under this general permit shall, no later
than one month prior to the proposed
disposal date, provide t!ie following infor-
mation in writing to the EPA Regional
Administrator for the Region in which
the proposed disposal will take place:
(i) A statement detailing the need for
the disposal of the vessel:
(ii) Type and description of vessel(s)
to be disposed of and type of cargo
normally carried;
(iii) Detailed description of the pro-
posed disposal procedures;
(iv) Information on the potential ef-
fect of the vessel disposal on the marine
environment; and
(v) Documentation of an adequate
evaluation of alternatives to ocean dis-
posal (i.e., scrap, salvage and reclama-
tion) .
(2) Transportation for the purpose of
ocean disposal may be accomplished
under the supervision of the District
Commander of the U.S. Coast Ouard or
his designee.
(3) Except hi emergency situations, as
determined by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and/or the District Com-
mander of the U.S. Coast Guard, ap-
propriate measures shall be taken, prior
to disposal, by qualified personnel to re-
move to the maximum extent practicable
all materials which may degrade the
marine environment, including without
limitation, (i) emptying of all fuel lines
and fuel tanks to the lowest point prac-
ticable, flushing of such lines and tanks
with water, and again emptying such
lines and tanks to the lowest point prac-
ticable so that such lines and tanks are
essentially free of petroleum, and (11) re-
moving from the hulls other pollutants
and all readily detachable material capa-
ble of creating debris or contributing to
chemical pollution.
(4) Except in emergency situations,
as determined by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and/or the U.S. Coast Guard,
the dumper shall, no later than 10 days
prior to the proposed disposal date, no-
tify the EPA Regional Administrator
and the District Commander of the UJS.
Coast Guard that the vessel has been
cleaned and is available for inspection;
the vessel may be transported for dump-
ing only after EPA and the Coast Guard
agree that the requirements of para-
graph (a) (3) of this Section have been
met.
(5) Disposal of these vessels shall take
place in a site designated on current nau-
tical charts for the disposal of wrecks
or no closer than twenty-two kilometers
(twelve miles) from the nearest land and
in water no less than fifty fathoms (three
hundred feet) deep, and all necessary
measures shall be taken to ensure that
the vessels sink to the bottom rapidly
and that marine navigation is not other-
wise impaired.
(6) Disposal shall not take place in es-
tablished shipping lanes unless at a des-
ignated wreck site, nor in a designated
marine sanctuary, nor In a location
where the hulk may present a hazard to
commercial trawling or national de-
fense (see 33 CFR 205).
(7) Except in emergency situations, as
determined by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and/or the U.S. Coast Guard,
disposal of these vessels shall be per-
formed during daylight hours only.
(8) Except in emergency situations, as
determined by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and/or the District Com-
mander of the U.S. Coast Guard, the
Captain-of-the-Port (COTP), U.S. Coast
Guard, and the EPA Regional Adminis-
trator shall be notified forty-eight (48)
hours in advance of the proposed dis-
posal. In addition, the COTP and the
EPA Regional Administrator shall be no-
tified by telephone at least twelve (12)
hours in advance of the vessel's depar-
ture from port with such details as the
.proposed departure time and place, dis-
posal site location, estimated time of ar-
rival on site, and the name and commu-
nication capability of the towing vessel.
Schedule changes are to be reported to
the COTP as rapidly as possible.
(9) The National Ocean Survey,
NOAA, 6010 Executive Blvd., Rockville,
MD 20852, shall be notified in writing,
within one week, of the exact coordinates
of the disposal site GO that it may be
marked on appropriate charts.
[PRDoc.77-900 Filed 1-10-77:8:46 am]
30
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 42, NO. 7—TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1977
-------
APPENDIX VII
Sludge Characteristics
-------
Sludge Characteristics
Tables 1 and 2 show a range of typical municipal sludge properties.
Sludges vary considerably from one plant to another and even from time
to time within a given plant. Table 3 shows the variation in amounts of
sludge for various wastewater treatment processes.
Another factor is the process used to treat the sludge once it is
separated from the wastewater. Chemicals may be added as conditioning
agents, thereby increasing the quantity of solids. Some processes, such
as digestion, solubilize a portion of the solids and the trace elements,
which can then be removed in a process-liquid sidestream, such as digester
supernatant, for separate treatment.
The quantities of trace elements present in the sludge can have a
significant effect on the options available for sludge use or disposal.
There is not an extensive amount of knowledge about these constituents
in the sludge, but representative data are given in Tables 4 thru 9.
Other constituents which may cause damage to the environment and
should be considered when characterizing municipal sludges include
organic chemicals known or suspected to be carcinogenic, organic chemicals
which tend to persist or bioaccumulate in the environment, and pathogenic
organisms.
Without pretreatment for removal of trace elements, industrial
users of publicly owned treatment works may be a major source of such
elements. Industrial users are not the only source, however, and it
should not be presumed that all trace elements will be removed by a
pretreatment program for industrial users.
Domestic wastes typically have significant quantities of trace
elements, probably from the use of chemical products in the home, from
exposure to metallic plumbing systems, and from street runoff. Additionally,
it has been found that human feces may contain some of these materials.
Sludge characteristics may vary for many other reasons. Wastewater
characteristics may change seasonally (because of industrial or recreational
uses), with corresponding changes in the sludge. Process upsets, equipment
malfunctions, or industrial spills also may change sludge properties.
In order to characterize a sludge, therefore, it is necessary to
test periodically rather than rely on one test result. A single grab
sample can be a valuable indicator, but a range in values is essential
to determine the sludge properties.
-------
Table 1. Typical chemical composition of raw and digested sludge1
Raw primary sludge
Item
Total dry solids (TS), %
Volatile solids (% of TS)
Grease and fats (ether
soluble, % of TS)
Protein (% of TS)
Nitrogen (N, % of TS)
Phosphorus (P205, % of TS)
Potash (K20, % of TS)
Cellulose (% of TS)
Iron (not as sulfide)(mg/l)
Silica (Si02, % of TS)
PH
Alkalinity (mg/1 as CaC03)
Organic acids (mg/1 as HAc)
Thermal content (Btu/lb)
Range
2.0-7.0
60-80
6.0-30.0
20-30
1.5-4.0
0.8-2.8
0-1.0
8.0-15.0
2.0-4.0
15.0-20.0
5.0-8.0
500-1,500
200-2,000
6,800-10,000
Typical
4.0
65
• • •
25
2.5
1.6
0.4
10.0
2.5
6.0
600
500
7,600*
Digested sludge
Range Typical
6.0-12.0 10.0
30-60 40.0
5.0-20.0
15-20 18
1.6-6.0 3.0
1.5-4.0 2.5
0.0-3.0 1.0
8.0-15.0 10.0
3.0-8.0 4.0
10.0-20.0
6.5-7.5 7.0
2,500-3,500 3,000
100-500 200
2,700-6,800 4,000**
**Based on 40 percent volatile matter.
-------
Table 2. Concentrations of organic C, total N, P and S, NH^ and N03 in
sewage sludge.2
Component
Organic C, %
Total N, %
NH^-N, ppm
NOa-N, ppm
Total P, %
Total S, %
Sample
Type*
Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Number
31
10
60
101
85
38
68
191
67
33
3
103
35
8
3
45
86
38
65
189
19
9
--
28
Range
18-
27-
6.5-
6.5-
0.5-
0.5-
<0.1-
<0.1-
120-67
30-11
5-12
5-67
2- 4
7-
_ _
2- 4
0.5-
1.1-
<0. 1-
<0. 1-
0.8-
0.6-
--
0.6-
39
37
48
48
17.6
7.6
10.0
17.6
,600
,300
,500
,600
,900
830
__ _
,900
14.3
5.5
3.3
14.3
1.5
1.1
—
1.5
Median
26.8
29.5
32.5
30.4
4.2
4.8
1.8
3.3
1,600
400
80
920
79
180
__ _
140
3.0
2.7
1.0
2.3
1.1
0.8
--
1.1
Mean
27.6
31.7
32.6
31.0
5.0
4.9
1.9
3.9
9,400
950
4,200
6,540
520
300
780
490
3.3
2.9
1.3
2.5
1.2
0.8
--
1.1
ULMcr I ML. I UUca layuuiicu, pr nuaijr, uci i-iaijr ai
"All" signifies data for all types of sludges.
-------
Table 3. Characteristics of sludges produced by various treatment processes3
Pounds dry solids Gallons per
Treatment processes per million gallons Percent water
million gallons sewage treated in sludge
Primary settling
Activated sludge
Trickling filters (low
loading
Trickling filters (high
loading)
Chemical precipitation of
raw sewage
900-1,200
600-900
400-500
600-900
3,000-4,500
2,500-3,500
15,000-20,000
400-700
1,200-1,500
4,000-6,000
93-95
98-99
93-95
96-98
90-93
-------
Table 4. Concentrations of K, Na, Ca, Mg, Ba, Fe and Al in sewage sludge2
Sample
Component Type*
K Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Na Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Ca Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Mg Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Ba Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Fe Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Al Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Number
86
37
69
192
73
36
67
176
87
37
69
193
87
37
65
189
27
10
23
60
96
38
31
165
73
37
23
133
Range
0.02- 2.64
0.08- 1.10
0.02- 0.87
0.02- 2.64
0.01- 2.19
0.03- 3.07
0.01- 0.96
0.01- 3.07
1.9- 20.0
0.6- 13.5
0.1- 25.0
0.1- 25.0
0.03- 1.92
0.03- 1.10
0.03- 1.97
0.03- 1.97
<0.01- 0.90
<0.01- 0.03
<0.01- 0.44
<0.01- 0.90
0.1 -15.3
0.1 - 4.0
<0.1 - 4.2
<0.1 -15.3
0.1- 13.5
0.1- 2.3
0.1- 2.6
0.1- 13.5
Median
1o
0.30
0.38
0.17
0.30
0.73
0.77
0.11
0.24
4.9
3.0
3.4
3.9
0.48
0.41
0.43
0.45
0.05
0.02
<0.01
0.02
1.2
1.0
0.1
1.1
0.5
0.4
0.1
0.4
Mean
0.52
0.46
0.20
0.40
0.70
1.11
0.13
0.57
5.8
3.3
4.6
4.9
0.58
0.52
0.50
0.54
0.08
0.02
0.04
0.06
1.6
1.1
0.8
1.3
1.7
0.7
0.3
1.2
"Other" includes lagooned, primary, tertiary and unspecified sludges.
"All" signifies data for all types of sludges.
-------
Table 5. Concentrations of Mn, B, As, Co, Mo and Hg in sewage sludge2
Sample
Component Type*
Mn Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
B Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
As Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Co Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Mo Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Hg Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Number
81
38
24
143
62
29
18
109
3
--
7
10
4
__
9
13
9
3
17
29
35
20
23
78
Ran
58- 7
55- 1
18- 1
18- 7
12-
17-
4-
4-
10-
--
6-
6-
3-
_-
1-
1-
24-
30-
5-
5-
0.5-10
1.0-
2.0- 5
0.2-10
ge
,100
,120
,840
,100
760
74
700
760
230
--
18
230
18
--
11
18
30
30
39
39
,600
22
,300
,600
Median
nig/ kg
280
340
118
260
36
33
16
33
116
--
9
10
7.0
__
4.0
4.0
30
30
30
30
5
5
3
5
Mean
400
420
250
380
97
40
69
77
119
—
11
43
8.8
--
4.3
5.3
29
30
27
28
1,100
7
810
733
\s i* i •%• i i 11 v< i M «<• v* *« lUNjwwil^viy Irf I I lliu ' JT 5 wCI U I U I V Ul
"All" signifies data for all types of sludges.
-------
Table 6. Concentrations of Pb, Zn, Cu, Ni, Cd and Cr in sewage sludge2
r . Sample
Component Type*
Pb Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Zn Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Cu Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Ni Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Cd Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Cr Anaerobic
Aerobic
Other
All
Number
98
57
34
189
108
58
42
208
108
58
39
205
85
46
34
165
98
57
34
189
94
53
33
180
Range
58-19,730
13-15,000
72-12,400
13-19,700
108-27,800
108-14,900
101-15,100
101-27,800
85-10,100
85- 2,900
84-10,400
84-10,400
2- 3,520
2- 1,700
15- 2,800
2- 3,520
3- 3,410
5- 2,170
4- 520
3- 3,410
24-28,850
10-13,600
22-99,000
10-99,000
Median
mg/kg
540
300
620
500
1,890
1,800
1,100
1,740
1,000
970
390
850
85
31
118
82
16
16
14
16
1,350
260
640
890
Mean
1,640
720
1,630
1,360
3,380
2,170
2,140
2,790
1,420
940
1,020
1,210
400
150
360
320
106
135
70
110
2,070
1,270
6,390
2,620
"Other" includes lagooned, primary, tertiary and unspecified sludges.
"All" signifies data for all types of sludges.
-------
Table 7. Typical metals in municipal sludges (mg/kg dry sludge)4
Range Mean Median
Ag, Silver
As, Arsenic
B. Boron
Ba, Barium
Be, Beryllium
Cd, Cadmium
Co, Cobalt
Cr. Chromium
Cu, Copper
Hg, Mercury
Mn, Manganese
Ni, Nickel
Pb, Lead
Sr, Strontium
Se, Selenium
V, Vanadium
Zn, Zinc
nda-960
10-50
200-1430
nd-3000
nd
nd-1100
nd-800
22-30,000
45-16,030
0.1-89
100-8800
nd-2800
80-26,000
nd-2230
10-180
nd-2100
51-28,360
225
9
430
1460
nd
87
350
1800
1250
7
1190
410
1940
440
26
510
3483
90
8
350
1300
nd
20
100
600
700
4
400
100
600
150
20
400
1800
Other possible contaminants: persistent organics, pathogens, radioactive
substances
and = not detected
Table 8. Metal content of digested municipal sludges5
Element
Zn,
Cu,
Ni,
Cd,
Pb,
Hg,
Cr,
"TXT
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
Ppm
ppm
ppm
r i
Purely
Domestic1
750
250
25
5
150
2
50
Controlled
Municipal2
2500
1000
200
25
1000
10
1000
Observed
Maximum
50,000
17,000
8,000
3,410
10,000
100
30,000
2Typical of sludges from communities without excessive
industrial waste sources or with adequate source
abatement. R. Chaney, 4/76
-------
Table 9. Variability of Cd, Cu and Ni in sewage sludges'
Metal
Cd
Cu
Ni
Sludge
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Range
109- 372
4- 39
483-1,177
3- 150
24- 756
12- 163
22- 256
11- 32
4,083- 7,174
5,741-11,875
2,081- 3,510
452- 802
391- 6,973
300- 1,800
422- 1,392
979- 1,475
1,932-4,016
663-1,351
468- 812
75- 219
40- 797
46- 92
47- 547
65- 93
Median
mg/kg
170
15
806
40
663
12
154
11
6,525
8,386
2,390
683
476
682
894
1,144
3,543
1,053
651
95
86
88
367
79
Mean
210
19
846
53
503
43
136
16
6,079
8,381
2,594
662
1,747
778
871
1,154
3,184
1,015
649
119
252
81
349
80
Coefficient
of Variation
%c
45
67
27
95
63
160
69
54
19
27
21
18
167
67
47
15
27
29
21
50
144
22
55
12
aAdapted from Sommers et al6
Oven-dry basis
GStandard deviation expressed as a percentage of the mean
-------
DATA SOURCES
1 Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.; Wastewater Engineering; Collection, Treatment,
and Disposal; McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y., 1972.
2 Somtners, L.E., "Chemical Composition of Sewage Sludges and Analysis
of Their Potential Use as Fertilizers" JEQ 6:225-239, 1977.
3 Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc.: Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant
Sludge and Liquid Sidestreams (EPA 430/9-76-007), June 1976.
Municipal Wastewater Systems Division, EPA, Washington, D.C.
k Municipal Sludge Management: EPA Construction Grants Program, An
Overview of the Sludge Management Situation. (EPA 430/9-76-009)
April 1976.
5 Chaney, R.L. and P.M. Giordano; "Microelements as related to plant
deficiencies and toxicities," Soils for Management and Utilization of
Organic Wastes and Wastewaters, (1976) L.F. Elliott and F.J. Stevenson
(eas); Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin.
5 Sommers, I.E., D.W. Nelson, and K.J. Yost, "Variable Nature of
Chemical Composition of Sewage Sludges" JEQ 5:303-306, 1976.
10
-------
APPENDIX VIII
Considerations for Applying Sewage Sludge
on Agricultural Land*
*adapted from: "Application of Sludges and Wastewater on Agricultural Land:
A Planning and Educational Guide" in Section 3 by L.E. Sommers and
D.W. Nelson. North Central Regional Committee (ND-118) and Wester Regional
Committee (W-124), North Central Regional Research Publication 235, October
1976
-------
This procedure for calculating sludge application rates is intended
SOT use on privately owned and managed agricultural land. On large-
soaue, mun^o^pally owned and managed systems, where monitoring is
reguiariij performed, the use of higher sludge loading rates may be
poss^bLe. Determination of such loading rates is site specific as
descwbed in the Bulletin.
The following information is needed prior to calculating the rate
of sludge application:
- Sludge composition
- Soil pH, cation exchange capacity, and lime requirement to
adjust soil to pH 6.5
- Soil test for available P and K; P and K fertilizer recommendation
for crop to be grown
- Crops to be grown
The rate of sludge application to land is based on the nitrogen
requirement of the crop grown and the metal content of the sludge. If
the sludge being applied has a low metal content, then it is possible to
use sludge as nitrogen fertilizer material. However, if the sludge
contains high concentrations of metals (i.e., Zn>5000ppm, Cu>1000ppm,
Ni>500ppm, or Cd>50ppm, all on a dry weight basis), then the sludge may
be used as a supplemental nitrogen source only. In either case, it may
be necessary to use commercial fertilizer materials to furnish potassium
for crop growth. The ranges of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium
contents found in anaerobically digested sewage sludges are shown in
Table 3.2.
TABLF 2.3--Composition of Representative Anaerobic Sewage Sludges
Component Range* Lb./Ton**
Organic nitrogen
Ammonium nitrogen
Total phosphorus
Total potassium
1% -
1% -
1.5% -
0.27%-
5%
3%
3%
0.8%
20 -
20 -
30 -
4 -
100
60
60
16
*Percent of oven-dry solids
**Lb./ton dry sludge
After addition to soil, sewage sludge is slowly decomposed, resulting
in release of nitrogen available for plant growth. Available data
suggest that 15-20% of the organic nitrogen is converted to plant available
forms the first year and that 3% of the remaining organic nitrogen is
-------
released each year for at least three subsequent years. Thus, plant
available nitrogen is released for several years after sludge has been
added to soils. For example, decomposition of a sludge containing 3%
organic nitrogen applied at 10 tons/acre/year for 3 years will release
41 Ibs. of nitrogen the fourth year. Thus, sludge application rates are
based on the quantity of readily available nitrogen in sludge (i.e.,
NHf and NO^) and on the amount of nitrogen released during sludge
decomposition in soil. Because of nitrogen losses from denitrification,
ammonia volatilization, etc., nitrogen from sludge approximately equal
to or 50% higher than the crop nitrogen requirement can be applied to
soils with minimal environmental risk. If sludge is incorporated
immediately (e.g., injected), then available nitrogen from sludge equal
to the crop nitrogen requirement should be added. Although phosphorus
toxicity to crops is not a problem in most cases, the level of available
phosphorus in soils receiving sludge should be checked and serious
consideration given to discontinuing sludge applications if available
phosphorus exceeds 1500 Ib/acre. The crop most susceptible to injury
from excess phosphorus appears to be soybeans.
The criteria used to prevent metal injury from sludge application
on land are based upon the total amount of Pb, Cu, Zn, Ni, and Cd added
in sludges. Whereas nitrogen commonly limits the annual application
rate of sludge, metals in sludge will determine the length of time a
given acreage can receive sludge. The upper limit for metal addition is
given in Table 3.3. In addition to the maximum accumulation of Cd
shown, the rates of sludge application should result in no more than 2
Ib of Cd per acre being applied on an annual basis.
TABLE 3.3—Total Amount of Sludge Metals Allowed on Agricultural Land
Soil Cation Exchange Capacity (meq/lOOg)*
Metal 0-5 5-15 >15
Maximum Amount of Metal (Lb/Acre)
Pb
Zn
Cu
Ni
Cd
500
250
125
50
5
1000
500
250
100
10
2000
1000
500
200
20
These values are the total amounts of metals which can be added to
soils. With metal contaminated sludges, one of the above criteria may
be met with a single application, whereas 5, 10, or 20 applications may
-------
be needed for "clean" domestic sludges. A soil pH >6.5 must be maintained
in all sites after sludge is applied to reduce the solubility and plant
uptake of these potentially toxic heavy metals.
Calculation of Annual Application Rate
0
Step 1. Obtain N requirement for the crop grown from Table 3.4.
Step 2. Calculate tons of sludge needed to meet crop's N requirement
a. Available N in sludge
% Inorganic N (H.) = (% NH4-N) + (% N03-N)
% Organic N (NQ) = (% total N) - (% inorganic N)
Lb available N/ton sludge = (% N., x 20) + (% NQ x 4)
b. Residual sludge N in soil
If the soil has received sludge in the past 3 years,
calculate residual N from Table 3.5.
c. Annual application rate
i) tons sludge/acre = crop N requirement - residual N
Ib available N/ton sludge
If sludge is surface applied this rate can be doubled
11) Tons sludge/acre = 2 1b Cd/acre
ppm Cd x .002
ill) The lower of the two amounts is applied.
-------
TABLE 3.4—Annual Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium Utilization
by Selected Crops.*
Crop Yield Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium
Lb per Acre
Corn
Corn silage
Soybeans
Grain sorghum
Wheat
Oats
Barley
Alfalfa
Orchard grass
Brome grass
Tall fescue
Bluegrass
150 bu.
180 bu.
32 tons
50 bu.
60 bu.
8,000 Ib.
60 bu.
80 bu.
100 bu.
100 bu.
8 tons
6 tons
5 tons
3.5 tons
3 tons
185
240
200
257+
336+
250
125
186
150
150
450+
300
166
135
200
35
44
35
21
29
40
22
24
24
24
35
44
29
29
24
178
199
203
100
120
166
91
134
125
125
398
311
211
154
149
^values reported above are from reports by the Potash Institute of America
and are for the total above-ground portion of the plants. Where only
grain is removed from the field, a significant proportion of the nutrients
is left in the residues. However, since most of these nutrients are
temporarily tied up in the residues, they are not readily available for
crop use. Therefore, for the purpose of estimating nutrient requirements
for any particular crop year, complete crop removal can be assumed.
+Legumes get most of their nitrogen from the air, so additional nitrogen
sources are not normally needed.
-------
Table 3.5—Release of Residual Nitrogen During Sludge Decomposition
in Soil.
Years After
oludye Application 2.0
1 1.0
2 0.9
3 0.0
Organic N Content of Sludge %
2
1
1
1
.b
Lb N
.2
.2
.1
. 3
.0
Released
1
1
1
.4
.4
.3
3.
per
1.
1.
1.
5
Ton
7
6
5
4.0
Sludge
1.9
1.8
1.7
4
.b
b
.U
Added
2
?
2
.2
.1
.0
2
2
2
.4
.3
.2
Step 3. Calculate total amount of sludge allowable.
a. Obtain maximum amounts of Pb, Zn, Cu, Ni, and Cd allowed for
CEC of the soil from Table 3.5 in Ib/acre.
b. Calculate amount of sludge needed to exceed Pb, Zn, Cu, Ni,
and Cd limits, using sludge analysis data.
Metal
Pb: Tons sludge/acre = Ib Pb/acre
ppm Pb x .002
Zn: Tons sludge/acre = Ib Zn/acre
ppm Zn x .002
Cu: Tons sludge/acre = Ib Cu/acre
ppm Cu x .002
Ni: Tons sludge/acre = Ib Ni/acre
ppm Ni x .002
Cd: Tons sludge/acre = 1b Cd/acre
ppm Cd x .002
(Note: Sludge metals should be expressed on a dry weight
ppm (mg/kg) basis.)
The lowest value is chosen from the above five calculations
as the maximum tons of sludge/acre which can be applied.
Step 4. Calculate amount of P and K added in sludge.
Tons of sludge x % P in sludge x 20 = Ib of P added
Tons of sludge x % K in sludge x 20 = Ib of K added
-------
Step 5. Calculate amount of P and K fertilizer needed.
(Ib P recommended for crop)* - (Ib P in sludge) = Ib P fertilizer
needed
(Ib K recommended for crop)* - (Ib K in sludge) = Ib K fertilizer
needed
*P~and K recommendations based on soil tests for available P and K
Lee E. Sommers and Darrell W. Nelson are Associate Professors,
Department of Agronomy, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
-------
APPENDIX IX
FDA Recommendations
-------
FDA Recommendations
Based upon comments made on the July 3, 1976, proposed version of
the Technical Bulletin that contained no suggested limitations for
annual or cumulative loading rates, FDA recommended the following
limitations on the application of sludge to land used to grow human and
animal food, in order to maximize the protection of public health:
(a) Sludges should not contain more than 20 ppm cadmium, 1000 ppm
lead or 10 ppm PCB's on the dry basis;
(b) In support of the limits proposed by the W 124/NC 118 Com-
mittees of Land Grant Colleges, the maximum total which should
ever be added to an average soil (cation exchange capacity of
5-15) is 9 pounds/acre of cadmium and 900 pounds/acre of lead;
(c) Crops which are customarily eaten raw should not be planted
within three years after the last sludge application;
(d) Crops such as green beans, corn, potatoes, etc., which may
contaminate other food in the kitchen before cooking, should
not be grown in sludge-treated land unless the sludge gives a
negative test for pathogens;
(e) Because sewage can be regarded as filth, food physically
contaminated with sludge can be considered adulterated even
though there is no direct health hazards. Sludge should not
be applied directly to growing or mature crops where sludge
particles may remain in or on the food;
(f) With commercial compost and bagged fertilizer products derived
from sludges, proper labeling should be provided to minimize
any contamination of crops in the human food chain which may
result from their use.
FDA further suggested that possible exceptions to the Cd and Pb levels
indicated above could involve carefully controlled and monitored practices
in which total and annual sludge and toxic metals application rates are
carefully limited.
These recommendations along with many others were utilized in the development
of the guidance provided by this Technical Bulletin.
-------
APPENDIX X
Sources of Data and Technical Assistance
on Applying Sludge to the Land
-------
SOURCES OF DATA AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
enm~ .* the evaluator and engineer in data-gathering and evaluation,
some major sources of data are listed for climate, topography, soil
characteristics, geologic formations, groundwater, and receiving water.
It must be stressed that these do not represent all the possible sources
of data.
CLIMATE
Information on precipitation, temperature, humidity, and winds may
be obtained from the following sources:
- National Weather Service, local offices
- Climatological Data, published by the National Weather Service,
Department of Commerce
- Airports
- Military installations
- Universities
Additionally, data on evapotranspiration can usually be obtained from
the following sources:
- Agricultural Extension Service
- Agricultural Experiment Stations
- Agencies managing large water reservoirs
The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration has prepared a
report for EPA on weather parameters that influence winter operations of
land application systems. This report, "Use of Climatic Data in Estimating
Storage Days for Soil Treatment Systems" EPA 600/2-76-250, and others
should be useful in designing land application systems.
TOPOGRAPHY
Topographic maps and aerial photographs can provide much of the
information needed to analyze the topography. Topographic maps are most
widely available from the U.S. Geological Survey in 7.5- and 15-minute
quadrangles. Aerial photographs, when they exist, may be located by
contacting the following sources:
-------
- U.S. Department of Agriculture, Commodity Stabilization program
- Local or county planning departments
- U.S. Corps of Engineers offices
- Private photogrammetry and mapping companies
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Consultation with the Soil Conservation Service (U.S. Department of
Agriculture) to obtain information on soil characteristics is highly
recommended. SCS offices exist in most counties; however, each county
office does not necessarily have a soil scientist. The state soil
scientists should therefore be contacted. Additionally, SCS has published
many soil maps with descriptions of soil characteristics to a depth of 5
feet. These descriptions include ground slopes, existing land use,
erosion potential, and surface drainage, which are also important
considerations. Agricultural Extension Service representatives, consulting
soil scientists, or agronomists may have additional information on soil
characteristics.
GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS
The U.S. Geological Service is the primary source of data on geological
formations. Geologic maps and investigative reports are available for
many areas. State mine and geology agencies may also have information
on geologic formations in terms of maps or reports.
GROUNDWATER
Data on groundwater may come from a number of different sources,
such as state water resource agencies, the U.S. Geological Service,
local or county water conservation districts, and users of groundwater
(municipalities, water companies, and individuals).
RECEIVING WATER
The U.S. Geological Service has monitoring gauges on most large
streams and many small ones. In addition to this flow data, data on
temperature and mineral quality area collected. The EPA has a computer
storage system (called STORET) that contains a great deal of water
quality data from one-time studies and continuous monitoring by federal,
state, and local agencies. STORET output can be obtained at Regional
EPA offices.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
US EPA
- Office of Water Program Operations, Washington, DC- 20460
- Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC 20460
- Office of Air, Land and Water Use, Washington, DC 20460
- Municipal Environmental Research Lab, Cincinnati, OH 45268
-------
FDA
- Bureau of Foods, Washington, DC 20204
USDA
- SJ;S (Assistant Administrator for Field Services), Washington,
UL* C, UU X O
States
- Agricultural Experiment Stations
- State Agriculture Departments
Universities
- Agriculture Extension Programs
- Departments of Crops and Soil Sciences
- Institutes for Water Research
»U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1977 — 777-066/1101 REGION NO. 8
------- |