PRETREATMENf PROGRAM
IMPLEMENTATION
t
GUIDANCE MANUAL
May 1984
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region X
Permits Branch M/S 521
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
' •
The EPA Region X, Permits Division, acknowledges the assistance of JRB
Associates, McLean, Virginia. JRB efforts were funded by the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency under contract number 68-01-6514, Work Assignment No.
34.
-------
B/Region 10/«1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
PREFACE
INTRODUCTION. . . . [[[ A
1 CLASSIFICATION OF INDUSTRIAL USERS .................................. B
2 STATUS OF PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS ...................... . ........... C
3 CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS .................................. D
4 APPLYING PRETREATMENT STANDARDS TO INDUSTRIAL USERS.... ......... *... E
5 USE OF THE COMBINED WASTESTREAM FORMULA .......................... . .. F
6 NOTIFICATION OF INDUSTRIAL USERS .................................... G
7 POTW INDUSTRIAL USER CONTROL MECHANISMS ............................. H
8 ACCIDENTAL SPILL PREVENTION PROGRAM ..................... . ........... I
9 INDUSTRIAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ............................. ...... J
10 ANNUAL POTW PRETREATMENT EVALUATION AND REPORT ...................... K
11 COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND INSPECTIONS OF INDUSTRIAL USERS ........... L
12 ANALYTICAL GUIDANCE ............................................. . . . . M
13 POTW ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ............................................ N
14 DATA MANAGEMENT ........................................... . ......... 0
15 REGULATION OF WASTE HAULERS UNDER THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM *^ ....... P
-------
ATTACHMENTS
CHAPTER TAB
2.1 GENERAL PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS C
2.2 REGULATORY UPDATES AND COURT DECISIONS C
3.1 STATUS OF CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS WITH BMR AND
COMPLIANCE DATES D
3.2 NATIONAL PROHIBITED DISCHARGE STANDARDS D
3.3 INDUSTRIES EXCLUDED FROM REGULATION BY PARAGRAPH 8 D
3.4 CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS' DEADLINES FOR REQUESTING
CATEGORY DETERMINATION, NET/GROSS ADJUSTMENT, AND FDF VARIANCE D
3.5 SUMMARIES OF CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS D
6.1 EXAMPLE DATA DISCLOSURE FORMS G
6.2 EXAMPLE NOTIFICATION PACKAGE FOR SUBMITTAL OF BMR DATA G
6.3 EXAMPLE INDUSTRIAL PERMIT APPLICATION G
7.1 TYPICAL PERMIT WITH STANDARD CONDITIONS H
7.2 PERMIT FOR NONCATEGORICAL USER DISCHARGING HIGH LOADING OF
CONVENTIONALS H
7.3 PERMIT FOR NONCATEGORICAL USER DISCHARGING HIGH LEVELS OF ZINC H
7.4 PERMIT FOR CATEGORICAL USER - FEDERAL STANDARDS NOT YET PROMULGATED. H
7.5 PERMIT FOR CATEGORICAL INTEGRATED USER WITH PROMULGATED FEDERAL
STANDARDS H
7.6 PERMIT FOR CATEGORICAL INTEGRATED USER - TWO SETS OF STANDARDS H
7.7 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON PERMITS
FOR NONMONITORING AND MONITORING INDUSTRIAL USERS H
7.8 INDUSTRIAL WASTE ACCEPTANCE FORMS (IWA) H
9.1 PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE J
9.2 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE PROGRESS REPORT J
9.3 INDUSTRIAL USER SELF-MONITORING REPORTS 0
10.1 NPDES PERMIT PRETREATMENT REQUIREMENTS K
-------
CHAPTER TAB
11.1 MUNICIPAL MONITORING OF INDUSTRIES DISCHARGING TO POTWS L
11.2 POTW MONITORING FREQUENCY L
11.3 SAMPLE INDUSTRIAL INSPECTION REPORT FORM L
11.4 PERTINENT QUESTIONS FOR INSPECTIONS OF SELECTED INDUSTRIAL GROUPS... L
11.5 SAMPLE TAG AND RECORD SHEETS L
11.6 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES, CONTAINERS, PRESERVATION AND HOLDING TIMES L
11.7 INSPECTION GUIDE AND PRETREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS L
11.8 ENTRY PROCEDURES FOR CONTROL AUTHORITY PERSONNEL L
13.1 NOTICE OF VIOLATION FORM N
13.2 EPA DRAFT ENFORCEMENT STRATEGY N
14.1 STANDARDIZED FORMS 0
INDUSTRIAL WASTE APPLICATION STATUS REPORT
INDUSTRIAL APPLICATION REVIEW - SUMMARY SHEET
INDUSTRIAL WASTE PROGRAM - SAMPLING DATA
INDUSTRIAL LOG
16.1 GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING SOLVENT MANAGEMENT PLANS IN LIEU OF TOTAL
TOXIC ORGANICS (TTO) MONITORING Q
16.2 EXAMPLE TOXIC ORGANIC/SOLVENT MANAGEMENT PLAN Q
-------
C/Region 10///2
INTRODUCTION
This document is a guide for POTWs implementing local pretreatment
programs. Each POTW has situations unique unto itself, resulting in consid-
erable variation in procedures from one POTW to another. This manual cannot
cover the full range of situations that may occur as a city or sanitary
district operates its program, but it does provide guidance for certain
fundamental activities.
Where possible, experience from other sources (POTWs, States, regional
EPA offices) has been utilized in preparing this document, especially in the
examples of standard forms. A loose leaf binder arrangement is utilized so
that additional information may be inserted as updates are received from the
States and Regional Offices.
This manual has been functionally organized by chapters which address the
basic pretreatment program procedures.
• Chapter 1 describes a method for classifying industrial users and
describing the criteria to consider when deciding which industries to
regulate under the pretreatment program.
Please note that this manual utilizes the term "industrial user"
throughout. This designation is also used in the General Pretreatment
Regulations (40 CFR 403) and all Categorical Pretreatment Standards.
It is equivalent to the term "significant industrial discharger (SID)"
frequently used in EPA Region X.
• Chapter 2 briefly discusses the background of pretreatment regulation.
• Chapter 3 discusses the concept of categorical standards and the
waiver regulations (removal credits, PDF variances) incorporated in
them.
• Chapter 4 explains the application of categorical standards to the
industrial users, with particular emphasis on the Electroplating
Regulations.
• Chapter 5 explains in detail how to apply the Combined Wastestream
Formula to a categorical industrial user, providing a sample calcula-
tion for this purpose.
• Chapter 6 outlines the POTW's responsibilities in providing notifica-
tion of categorical standards and requirements to affected industrial
users.
-------
C/Region 10///2
• Chapter 7 discusses the implementation of industrial user control
mechanisms with emphasis on permit systems.
• Chapter 8 explains the reasons for, and requirements of, the Acci-
dental Spill Prevention Program.
• Chapter 9 details reporting requirements for both categorical and
noncategorical industrial users.
• Chapter 10 details, the annual POTW evaluation and reporting require-
ments.
• Chapter 11 discusses issues relating to a POTW's monitoring and
inspection of its industrial users and includes recommended procedures
for both.
• Chapter 12 discusses procedures which a POTW should consider when
performing sample analyses such as chain-of-custody and QA/QC proce-
dures.
• Chapter 13 considers issues related to the enforcement of a POTW's
pretreatment program, including strategies and publication of signifi-
cant violators.
• Chapter 14 describes the organization of both manual and computerized
data management systems.
• Chapter 15 addresses the issue of waste haulers and their regulation
under a local pretreatment program.
• Chapter 16 briefly refers to considerations for a Toxic Organic
Management Plan (Solvent Management Plan).
-------
E/REG. X-l/#3
CHAPTER 1
CLASSIFICATION OF INDUSTRIAL USERS
A critical activity conducted by a POTW during its pretreatment program
development phase was the Industrial User Survey (IUS). The purpose of the
survey was to identify and locate all possible nondomestic users subject to
the pretreatment program, and to identify the volume and character of pollu-
tants discharged by these users.
The results of the survey were utilized as a basis for:
• Classifying industrial facilities
• Determining which facilities need to be regulated and what control
mechanism they will be regulated by (permit, contract, industrial
waste acceptance form, etc.)
• Developing a compliance monitoring program
• Determining data management needs, and
• Determining relative cost and resource needs.
In general, the classification of a POTW's industrial users will set the
tone for how the POTW's program will be implemented. The following is a
typical industrial classification scheme.
• Significant Industrial Discharger (SID) or Major User; An industrial
user of the municipality's wastewater disposal system who:
- is subject to or potentially subject to national categorical
pretreatment standards promulgated by EPA under Section 307(b) or
(c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA);
- has in its wastes toxic pollutants as defined pursuant to Section
307 and Section 502 of the CWA;
- has a nondomestic flow of 25,000 gallons or more per average work
day;
- has a nondomestic flow greater than 5 percent of the flow in the
municipality's wastewater treatment system; or
- is determined by the POTW to have a significant impact or potential
for significant impact, either singly or in combination with other
1-1
-------
D/REGION 10/03 s
contributing industries, on the wastewater treatment system, the
quality of sludge, the system's effluent quality, or air emissions
generated by the system.
• Minor Industrial Users; Small industries and some commercial users
(restaurants, auto repair shops, etc.) whose individual discharges do
not significantly impact the treatment system, degrade receiving water
quality, or contaminant sludge. Industries that have the potential to
discharge a nondomestic or process wastestream, but at the present
time discharge only sanitary waste, may also be included in this
group. However, this group does not contain any categorical indus-
tries. Industries in this classification may be included in a general
permit system and occasionally monitored and inspected to determine if
their status has changed. If wastestreams from any of these users or
a group of these industrial users becomes a problem, the POTW may
require a general permit for all industrial users in that group or may
wish to change their classification to a significant or major indus-
trial user.
• Insignificant Industrial Users; Nondomestic users that have been
eliminated from further consideration. These include industries that
do not discharge to the POTW, or do not have any reasonable chance of
discharging a nondomestic wastestream to the POTW.
The key group of industrial users is the Significant Industrial Dis-
charger (SID). Many sewer use ordinances enacted by municipalities contain a
definition of Significant Industrial Discharger (or major user, major dis-
charger), with the term utilized throughout the ordinance. Even though some
POTWs have not developed such a classification scheme, each Manager of a POTW
should recognize that the SIDs are those facilities which need to be regulated
and monitored on a routine basis. The framework for the implementation phase
should be based on regulating the SID. T_he_ major thrust of this guidance
document revolves around local control authorities prioritizing their efforts
toward controlling Significant Industrial Dischargers (SIDs).
Pretreatment programs implemented by POTWs should not be too narrow in
scope. Controlling wastewater discharges from categorical industries (indus-
tries listed in Attachment 3.1 for which the EPA is promulgating Federal
categorical pretreatment standards) is not the program's only objective. A
pretreatment program should protect the collection system, the treatment
facility, and the receiving waters from all potential impacts. As outlined in
the definition of Significant Industrial Discharger, other types of industrial
1-2
-------
D/REGION 10///3
facilities may need to be regulated to accomplish this objective. Examples of
significant industrial dischargers are presented below.
Group A: Categorical Industries Regulated by Federal Pretreatment
Standards.
• Electroplaters
• Metal finishers
• Pharmaceuticals
• Battery manufacturing, etc. (See Chapter 3, Attachment 3.1 for
complete list).
Group B: Industries Having Toxic Pollutants That May Need Regulating.
• Centralized treatment facilities (facilities which receive toxic
wastes from individual industrial facilities).
• Categorical industries for which the Federal regulations do not apply
because they are below a certain flow or production figure (e.g.,
electroplating-type facilities discharging less than 10,000 gals/day;
procelain enameling facilities discharging less than 60,000 liters/
day).
• Metal finishing facilities not covered by the Federal categorical
"metal finishing" regulation because they do not perform one of the
following operations: electroplating, electroless plating, anodizing,
coatings, etching and chemical milling, printed circuit board manu-
facturing) (e.g., facility only involved in galvanizing, or hot
dipping).
• Paragraph "8" exempted industries (see Chapter 3 Attachment 3.3 for
discussion of Paragraph "8" exempted industries). Example of indus-
trial categories would be adhesive and sealants, auto and other
laundries, printing and publishing, paint and ink formulation.
• Other industries (e.g., facility cleaning automobile engines or truck
engines where heavy metals could be discharged; radiator shops batch
discharging their caustic tanks, facilities who may mix pesticides
whereby the mixing tanks are washed and contents washed down floor
drains).
Group C: Industries With a Nondomestic Flow of 25,000 GPD or constitute
5 Percent of the Flow.
• Facilities generally discharging conventional type wastes BOD5 and oil
and grease (e.g., breweries, meat packers, slaughterhouses, food
products industries).
1-3
-------
D/REGION 10/03
Group D: Industries Determined by the City to Constitute a Potential
Problem.
• Concentration of restaurants discharging oil and grease causing
clogging of sewer lines
• Facilities discharging corrosive material or flammable material
• Research facilities
• Hospitals
• University laboratories.
Recommended control mechanisms for the industries described above are:
permits, contracts, or industrial waste acceptance forms whereby specific
effluent limitations, and monitoring and reporting requirements are individ-
ualized, based on the industrial user and its wastewaters.
Pretreatment standards that could apply to the above industrial groups:
Group A: Federal categorical limits or locally derived effluent limits
(e.g., heavy metals, cyanide, toxic organics), whichever are
more stringent, plus general prohibitive discharge standards
Group B: Locally derived effluent limits (e.g., heavy metals, cyanide,
toxic organics) plus general prohibitive discharge standards
Group C: Prohibitive discharge standards, plus any specific limit for
and conventional wastes (e.g., BOD,-, oil and grease)
Group D
All sewer use ordinances should contain the general prohibitive
discharge standards. A large majority of POTW ordinances
contain specific numerical effluent limits (heavy metals,
cyanide, phenolics, BOD., oil and grease) which were developed
to prevent pass-through, sludge contamination, and interference
of the POTW.
Chapters 4 and 7 describe in further detail how to apply the appropriate
limits to a significant industrial discharger and how to use a control
mechanism (permits) to convey limitations, monitoring and reporting require-
ments to industrial users.
1-4
-------
D/REG. 10/#18 -
CHAPTER 2
STATUS OF PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS
This chapter provides a brief history of the General Pretreatment
Regulations and a discussion of their current status. A copy of the regula-
tions as well as their amendments and a description of the 1983 court ruling
affecting the regulations are included as attachments to this chapter.
Regulatory Background
In 1972, Section 307(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments (Pub. L. 95-500) established the' first Federal pretreatraent
requirements. In response to these amendments EPA promulgated 40 CFR 128 at
the end of 1973. This regulation set forth pretreatraent standards concerned
primarily with protection of POTWs.
The Agency signed a Consent Decree in the case of Natural Resources
Defense Council, Inc. vs. Train in 1976. This decree required the promulga-
tion of national technology-based pretreatraent standards for twenty-one
priority industrial categories and focused control efforts on 129 toxic
priority pollutants.
In February, 1977, EPA published proposed General Pretreatraent regula-
tions. This package presented for public comment four major options for
creating the framework to deal with pollution problems from indirect dis-
chargers. The 1977 proposal generated extensive public and congressional
debate. EPA held numerous public meetings and hearings which produced
testimony or written comments from 400 individuals or groups. In the last
half of 1977, Congress considered pretreatment as it developed the Clean Water
Act Amendments of 1977. Congress amended the Clean Water Act to incorporate
many of the Consent Decree decisions including the emphasis on control of
toxics through national technology-based categorical standards. Additionally,
Congress decided that POTWs would be the level of government primarily
responsible for enforcing these standards and called for the development of
local pretreatraent programs [§402(b)(8) of the Clean Water Act],
2-1
-------
D/REG. 10/#18
On June 26, 1978, the Agency promulgated the General Pretreatraent
Regulations which established mechanisms and procedures for applying national
pretreatment standards and for establishing State and local programs. The
regulations complied with the new pretreatment mandates set forth in the Clean
Water Act Amendments. In the subsequent fiscal year, EPA, for the first time,
allocated significant Agency resources to implement the national pretreatment
program.
In August of 1978, the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA), the U.S.
Brewers Association, the Pacific Legal Foundation and the Natural Resources
Defense Council brought actions challenging various aspects of the regula-
tions. On May 31, 1979, EPA entered into an agreement with the industrial
petitioners which sought to settle most of the issues raised by these parties
in litigation. Accordingly, the Agency published proposed amendments to the
general pretreatment regulations on October 29, 1979. The parties to the
settlement agreed not to litigate the issues covered by the agreement if the
language of the final amended regulations did not differ significantly from
the October proposal.
The amendments centered on simplifying and easing the requirements for a
POTW to grant removal credits altering the categorical discharge limits
applicable to its industrial users. In addition to changes proposed pursuant
to the settlement agreement, the proposal included changes initiated by EPA to
resolve inconsistencies and clarify ambiguous provisions of the June 1978
regulations.
On January 28, 1981, EPA promulgated amendments to the General Pretreat-
ment Regulations which were to take effect March 13, 1981. The President's
regulation freeze issued January 29th delayed the effective date until
March 30, 1981. In April 2, 1981, a notice in the Federal Register indefi-
nitely postponed the effective date of the amendments pending a decision by
the President's Task Force on Regulatory Relief/The office of Management and
Budget.
On July 8, 1981, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
issued an opinion finding that the indefinite postponement of the amendments
2-2
-------
E/REG. X-1///18
to the general pretreatment regulations contravened the notice and comment
provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act. To remedy this violation,
the Court directed the Agency to retroactively reinstate all of the amend-
ments, effective March 30, 1981. A copy of the amended General Pretreatment
Regulations is provided in Attachment 2.1.
Various parties challenged the pretreatment regulations and the electro-
plating categorical pretreatment standards. All the cases were consolidated
in National Association of Metal Finishers (NAMF) et al. vs. EPA in the
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit. The pretreatment provisions challenged in the litiga-
tion were:
• The definitions of "new source", "interference", and "pass-through"
• The combined wastestream formula
• The removal credits provision
• the fundamentally different factors (FDF) variance provision.
In its ruling, issued on September 20, 1983, the Third Circuit Court of
Appeals upheld the electroplating standards, the combined wastestream formula,
and the removal credits provision. However, the court remanded to EPA the
challenged definitions and the FDF provision of the General Pretreatment
Regulations. As a result of these decisions, EPA has suspended the regulatory
definitions of the terms in question and has modified the FDF provision so
that an FDF variance is not available for toxic pollutants.
A more detailed description of the rulings of the Third Circuit Court of
Appeals is contained in Attachment 2.2, along with copies of the amendments to
the 1981 General Pretreatment Regulations. Also included in Attachment 2.2
are amendments that revise the authority citation for the regulations and the
definition of F_ as used in the Combined Wastestream Formula [40 CFR 403.6(e)].
2-3
-------
Attachment 2.1
General Pretreatment Regulations
-------
PART 403—GENERAL PRETREATMENT
REGULATIONS FOR EXISTING AND
NEW SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Sec.
403.1 Purpose and applicability.
403.2 Objective of general pretreatment
regulation.
403.3 Definitions.
403.4 State or local law.
403.9 National pretreatment standards:
prohibited discharges.
403.6 National pretreatment standards:
categorical standards.
403.7 Revision of categorical pretreatment
standards to reflect POTW removal of
pollutants.
403.8 POTW pretreatment programs: de-
velopment by POTW.
403.9 POTW pretreatment programs and/
or authorization to revise pretreatment
standards: submission for approval.
403.10 Development and submission of
NPDES State pretreatment programs.
-------
§403.1
Tiff* 40—Protection of Environment
See.
403.11 Approval procedures for POTW pro-
grams and revisions of categorical pre-
treaunent standards.
403.12 Reporting requirements for
POTWs and industrial users.
403.13 Variances from categorical pretreat-
ment standards for fundamentally dif-
ferent factors.
403.14 Confidentiality.
403.15 Net/Gross calculation.
403.16 Upset provision.
Ammnx A—PROGRAM OUTDANCE MTMORAJI-
OUM
Armnxx B—45 Toxic POLLUTANTS
Arranux C—34 ImnsTHiAL CATTGORIM
Ammnx D—SBXCTXB INDUSTRIAL SUBCATK-
ipimTW* FI»H»I»I» FROM RCOULATIOH PX7»-
SUAHT TO PARAGRAPH 8 or THS NRDC v.
Cattle CONSENT DCCRB
AUTHORITY: Sees. 301: 304 (b). (c). (e). and
(g): 306 (b) and (c): 307: 308 and 501 of the
Clean Water Act (the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act Amendments of 1972. as
amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977)
(the "Act"): 33 X7.S.C. 1311:1314 (b). (c). (e).
and (g): 1316 (b) and (c): 1317: 1318: and
1361: 86 Stat. 816. Pub. L. 92-500; 91 Stat,
1567: Pub. L. 95-217.
SOURCE: 46 FR 9439. Jan. 28. 1981. unless
otherwise noted.
9 403.1 Purpose and applicability.
(a) This part Implements sections
204(bXlXC). 208. 301(bX2XAXli).
301(hX5> and 301(1X2). 304 (e) and (g).
307. 308. 309. 402(b). 405. and 501(a) of
the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act as amended by the Clean Water
Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-217) or "The
Act." It establishes responsibilities of
Federal. State, and local government.
industry and the public to Implement
National Pretreatment Standards to
control pollutants which pass through
or interfere with treatment processes
in Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POTWs) or which may contaminate
sewage sludge.
(b) This regulation applies: (1) To
pollutants from non-domestic sources
covered by Pretreatment Standards
which are indirectly discharged Into or
transported by truck or rail or other-
wise introduced into POTWs as de-
fined below in I 403.3; (2) to POTWs
which receive wastewater from sources
subject to National Pretreatment
Standards: (3) to States which have or
are applying for National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) programs approved in ac-
cordance with section 402 of the Act;
and (4) to any new or existing source
subject to Pretreatment Standards.
National Pretreatment Standards do
not apply to sources which Discharge
to a sewer which is not connected to a
POTW Treatment Plant.
(c) The deadlines for submission of
category determination requests
(|403.6(a)), baseline monitoring re-
ports ({ 403.12). fundamentally differ-
ent factors variance requests
(§ 403.13). and applications for net/
gross adjustments (9403.15) are ex-
tended ninety days for integrated fa-
cilities subject to the electroplating
Pretreatment standards (40 CFR Part
413). Industrial users subject to the in-
organic chemicals pretreatment stand-
ards promulgated on June 29. 1982 (47
FR 28260; 40 CFR Part 415) and indus-
trial users subject to the iron and steel
pretreatment standards (40 CFR Part
420).
C46 FR 9439. Jan. 28.1981. aa amended at 48
FR 2778. Jan. 21. 1983)
8 403J Objectives of general pretreatment
regulations.
By establishing the responsibilities
of government and Industry to imple-
ment National Pretreatment Stand-
ards this regulation fulfills three ob-
jectives: (a) To prevent the introduc-
tlon of pollutants into POTWs which
will interfere with the operation of a
POTW. Including Interference with its
use or disposal of municipal sludge: (b)
to prevent the introduction of pollut-
ants Into POTWs which will pass
through the treatment works or other-
wise be incompatible with such works:
and (c) to Improve opportunities to re-
cycle and reclaim municipal and indus-
trial wastewaters and sludges.
0403.3 Definition*.
For the purpose of this regulation:
(a) Except as discussed below, the
general definitions, abbreviations, and
methods of analysis set forth in 40
CFR Part 401 shall apply to this regu-
lation.
(b-) The term "Act" means Federal
Water Pollution Control Act. also
known as the Clean Water Act. as
amended. 33 U.S.C. 1251. et seq.
10
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
(c) The term "Approval Authority"
means the Director in an NPDES
State with an approved State pretreat-
ment program and the appropriate
Regional Administrator in a non-
NPDES State or NPDES State with-
out an approved State pretreatment
program. __
(d) The term "Approved POTW Pre-
treatment Program" or "Program" or
"POTW Pretreatment Program"
means a program administered by a
POTW that meets the criteria estab-
lished in this regulation (§S 403.3 and
403.9) and which has been approved
by a Regional Administrator or State
Director in accordance with { 403.11 of
this regulation.
(e) The term "Director" means the
chief administrative officer of a State
or Interstate water pollution control
agency with an NPDES permit pro-
gram approved pursuant to section
402(b) of the Act and an approved
State pretreatment program.
(f) The term "Enforcement Division
Director" means one of the Directors
of the Enforcement Divisions within
the Regional offices of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency or this per-
son's delegated representative.
(g) The term "Indirect Discharge" or
"Discharge" means the introduction of
pollutants into a POTW from any
non-domestic source regulated under
section 307(b). (c) or (d) of the Act.
(h) The term "Industrial User" or
"User" means a source of Indirect Dis-
charge.
(i) The term "Interference" means
an inhibition or disruption of the
POTW. its treatment processes or op-
erations, or its sludge processes, use or
disposal which is a cause of or signifi-
cantly contributes to either a violation
of any requirement of the POTWs
NPDES permit (including an increase
in the magnitude or duration of a vio-
lation) or to the prevention of sewage
sludge use or disposal by the POTW in
accordance with the following statuto-
ry provisions and regulations or per-
mits issued thereunder (or more strin-
gent State or local regulations): Sec-
tion 405 of the Clean Water Act. the
Sohd Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) (in-
cluding title II more commonly re-
ferred to as the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act (RCRA) and In-
§403.3
eluding State regulations contained in
any State sludge management plan
prepared pursuant to Subtitle D of the
SWDA). the Clean Air Act. and the
Toxic Substances Control Act. An In-
dustrial User significantly contributes
to such a permit violation or preven-
tion of sludge use or disposal in ac-
cordance with above-cited authorities
whenever such User
(1) Discharges a daily pollutant load-
ing in excess of that allowed by con-
tract with the POTW or by Federal.
State or local law,
(2) Discharges wastewater which
substantially differs in nature or con-
stituents from the User's average Dis-
charge; or
(3) Knows or has reason to know
that its Discharge, alone or in con-
junction with Discharges from other
sources, would result in a POTW
permit violation or prevent sewage
sludge use or disposal in accordance
with the above-cited authorities as
they apply to the POTWs selected
method of sludge management.
(j) The term "National Pretreatment
Standard," "Pretreatment Standard."
or "Standard" means any regulation
containing pollutant discharge limits
promulgated by the EPA in accord-
ance with section 307 (b) and (c) of the
Act. which applies to Industrial Users.
This term includes prohibitive dis-
charge limits established pursuant to
§ 403.5.
(k) The term "New Source" means
any building, structure, facility, or in-
stallation from which there is or may
be a Discharge, the construction of
which commenced:
(1) After promulgation of Pretreat-
ment Standards under section 307(c)
of the Act which are applicable to
such source; or
(2) After proposal of Pretreatment
Standards in accordance with section
307(c) of the Act which are applicable
to such source, but only if the Stand-
ards are promulgated in accordance
with section 307(c) within 120 days of
their proposal.
(1) The terms "NPDES Permit" or
"Permit" means a permit issued to a
POTW pursuant to section 402 of the
Act.
(m) The term "NPDES State" means
a State (as defined in 40 CFR 122.3) or
11
-------
§403.4
Interstate water pollution control
agency with an NPDES permit pro-
gram approved pursuant to section
402(b) of the Act.
(n) The term "Pass Through" means
the Discharge of pollutants through
the POTW into navigable waters in
quantities or concentrations which are
a cause of or significantly contribute
to a violation of any requirement of
the POTWs NPDES permit (including
an increase in the magnitude or dura-
tion of a violation). An Industrial User
significantly contributes to such
permit violation where It:
(1) Discharges a daily pollutant load-
ing in excess of that allowed by con-
tract with the POTW or by Federal.
State, or local law:
(2) Discharges wastewater which
substantially differs in nature and
constituents from the User's average
Discharge;
(3) Knows or has reason to know
that its Discharge, alone or in con-
junction with Discharges from other
sources, would result in a permit viola-
tion; or
(4) Knows or has reason to know
that the POTW is. for any reason, vio-
lating its final effluent limitations in
its permit and that such Industrial
User's Discharge either alone or in
conjunction with Discharges from
other sources, increases the magnitude
or duration of the POTWs violations.
(o) The term "Publicly Owned
Treatment Works" or "POTW" means
a treatment works as defined by sec-
tion 212 of the Act. which is owned by
a State or municipality (as defined by
section 502(4) of the Act). This defini-
tion includes any devices and systems
used in the storage, treatment, recy-
cling and reclamation of municipal
sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid
nature. It also includes sewers, pipes
and other conveyances only if they
convey wastewater to a POTW Treat-
ment Plant. The term also means the
municipality as defined in section
502(4) of the Act. which has jurisdic-
tion over the Indirect Discharges to
and the discharges from such a treat-
ment works.
(p) The term "POTW Treatment
Plant" means that portion of the
POTW which is designed to provide
treatment (including recycling and
Titl* 40 ' Protection of Environment
reclamation) of municipal sewage and
industrial waste.
(q> The term "Pretreatment" means
the reduction of the amount of pollut-
ants, the elimination of pollutants, or
the alteration of the nature of pollut-
ant properties in wastewater prior to
or in lieu of discharging or otherwise
introducing such pollutants into a
POTW. The reduction or alteration
may be obtained by physical, chemical
or biological processes, process
changes or by other means, except as
prohibited by §403.6(d). Appropriate
pretreatment technology includes con-
trol equipment, such as equalization
tanks or facilities, for protection
against surges or slug loadings that
might interfere with or otherwise be
incompatible with the POTW. Howev-
er, where wastewater from a regulated
process is mixed in an equalization fa-
cility with unregulated wastewater or
with wastewater from another regulat-
ed process, the effluent from the
equalization facility must meet an ad-
justed pretreatment limit calculated in
accordance with { 403.6(e).
(r) The term "Pretreatment require-
ments" means any substantive or pro-
cedural requirement related to Pre-
treatment. other than a National Pre-
treatment Standard, imposed on an
Industrial User.
(s) The term "Regional Administra-
tor" means the appropriate EPA Re-
gional Administrator.
(t) The term "Submission" means:
(DA request by a POTW for approval
of a Pretreatment Program to the
EPA or a Director. (2) a request by a
POTW to the EPA or a Director for
authority to revise the discharge
limits in categorical Pretreatment
Standards to reflect POTW pollutant
removals: or (3) a request to the EPA
by an NPDES State for approval of its
State pretreatment program.
EDROUAX. NOTE At 49 PR 5132. Feb. 10.
1984. paragraphs (1). (k). and (n) were sus-
pended until further notice.
§ 403.4 State or local law.
Nothing in this regulation is intend-
ed to affect any Pretreatment Re-
quirements, including any standard]
or prohibitions, established by State
or local law as long as the State or
12
-------
Chop'*' '—Environmental Protection Agency
local requirements are not less strin-
gent than ***? set forth ta National
Pretreatment Standards, or any other
requirements or prohibitions estab-
lished under the Act or this regula-
tion. States with an NPDES permit
program approved in accordance with
section 402 (b) and (c) of the Act. or
States requesting NFDES programs.
are responsible for developing a State
pretreatment program in accordance
with i 403.10 of this regulation.
040X5 National pretreatment standard*:
prohibited discharge*.
(a) General prohibitions. Pollutants
introduced into POTW's by an non-do-
mestic source shall not Pass Through
the POTW or Interfere with the oper-
ation or performance of the works.
These general prohibitions and the
specific prohibitions in paragraph (b)
of this section apply to all non-domes-
tic sources introducing pollutants into
a POTW whether or not the source is
subject to other National Pretreat-
ment Standards or any national. State.
or local Pretreatment Requirements.
(b) Specific prohibitions. In addi-
tion, the following pollutants shall not
be introduced into a POTW:
(1) Pollutants which creat a fire or
explosion hazard in the POTW;
(2) Pollutants which will cause cor-
rosive structural damage to the
POTW. but in no case Discharges with
pH lower than 5.0. unless the works is
specifically designed to accommodate
such Discharges:
(3) Solid or viscous pollutants in
amounts which will cause obstruction
to the flow in the POTW resulting in
Interference;
(4) Any pollutant, including oxygen
demanding pollutants (BOD. etc.) re-
leased in a Discharge at a How rate
and/or pollutant concentration which
will cause Interference with the
POTW.
(5) Heat in amounts which will in-
hibit biological activity in the POTW
resulting in Interference, but in no
case heat in such quantities that the
temperature at the POTW Treatment
Plant exceeds 40'C (104'P) unless the
APProvalAuthority. upon request of
the POTW. approves alternate tem-
perature limits.
§403.6
(c) When specific limits must be de-
veloped by POTW. (1) POTW's devel-
oping POTW Pretreatment Programs
pursuant to § 403.8 shall develop and
enforce specific limits to implement
the prohibitions listed in paragraphs
(a) and (b) of this section.
(2) All other POTW's shall, in cases
where pollutants contributed by
Userts) result in Interference or Pass-
Through, and such violation is likely
to recur, develop and enforce specific
effluent limits for Industrial Userts).
and all other users, as appropriate.
which, together with appropriate
changes in the POTW Treatment
Plant's Facilities or operation, are nec-
essary to ensure renewed and contin-
ued compliance with the POTW's
NPDES permit or sludge use or dispos-
al practices.
(3) Specific effluent limits shall not
be developed and enforced without in-
dividual notice to persons or groups
who have requested such notice and
an opportunity to respond.
(d) Local limits. Where specific pro-
hibitions or limits on pollutants or pol-
lutant parameters are developed by a
POTW in accordance with paragraph
(c) above, such limits shall be deemed
Pretreatment Standards for the pur-
poses of section 307(d) of the Act.
(e) EPA and State enforcement ac-
tions. If. within 30 days after notice of
an Interference or Pass Through viola-
tion has been sent by EPA or the
NPDES State to the POTW. and to
persons or groups who have requested
such notice, the POTW fails to com-
mence appropriate enforcement action
to correct the violation. EPA or the
NPDES State may take appropriate
enforcement action.
(f) Compliance deadlines. Compli-
ance with the provisions of this sec-
tion is required beginning on C44 days
after publication in the FEDERAL REG-
isTERl. except for paragraph (b)(5) of
this section which must be complied
with by August 25.1981.
9403.6 National Pretreatment Standards:
Categorical standard*.
National Pretreatment Standards
specifying quantities or concentrations
of pollutants or pollutant properties
which may be Discharged to a POTW
13
-------
§403.6
by existing or new Industrial Users in
specific industrial subcategories will be
established as separate regulations
under the appropriate subpart of 40
CFR Chapter I. Subchapter N. These
Standards, unless specifically noted
otherwise, shall be in addition to the
general prohibitions established in
f 403.5 of this part.
(a) Category determination request-
ID Application deadline. Within 6O
days after the effective date of a Pre-
treatment Standard for a subcategory
under which an Industrial User may
be included, or within 60 days after
the FEDERAL Rxoisra notice announc-
ing the availability of the technical de-
velopment document for that subcate-
gory. whichever is later, the existing
Industrial User or POTW may request
that the Enforcement Division Direc-
tor or Director, as appropriate, provide
written certification on whether the
Industrial User falls within that par-
ticular subcategory. A new source
must request this certification prior to
commencing discharge. Where a re-
quest for certification is submitted by
a POTW. the POTW shall notify any
affected Industrial User of such sub-
mission. The Industrial User may pro-
vtde written comments on the POTW
submission to the Enforcement Divi-
sion Director or Director, as appropri-
ate, within 30 days of notification.
(2) Contents of application. Each re-
quest shall contain a statement:
(1) Describing which subcategories
might be applicable; and
(11) Citing evidence and reasons why
a particular subcategory is applicable
and why others are not applicable.
Each such statement shall contain an
oath stating that the facts contained
therein are true on the basis of the ap-
plicant's personal knowledge or to the
best of his information and belief. The
oath shall be that set forth in
S 403.7(b)(2)(il). except that the
phrase "} 403.7" shall be replaced
with "j 403.6(a>."
(3) Deficient request*. The Enforce-
ment Division Director or Director will
only act on written requests for deter-
minations that contain all of the Infor-
mation required. Persons who have
made incomplete submissions will be
notified by the Enforcement Division
Director or Director that their re-
Title <0 Protection of Environment
quests are deficient and. unless the
time period is extended, will be given
30 days to correct the deficiency. If
the deficiency is not corrected within
30 days or within an extended period
allowed by the Enforcement Division
Director or the Director, the request
for a determination shall be denied.
(4) Final decision. (1) When the En-
forcement Division Director or Direc-
tor receives a submlttal he or she will.
after determining that it contains all
of the information required by para-
graph (2) of this section, consider the
submission, any additional evidence
that may have been requested, and
any other available information rele-
vant to the request. The Enforcement
Division Director or Director will then
make a written determination of the
applicable subcategory and state the
reasons for the determination.
(11) Where the request is submitted
to the Director, the Director shall for-
ward the determination described in
this paragraph to the Enforcement Di-
vision Director who may make a final
determination. The Enforcement Divi-
sion Director may waive receipt of
these determinations. If the Enforce-
ment Division Director does not
modify the Director's decision within
60 days after receipt thereof, or if the
Enforcement Division Director waives
receipt of the determination, the Di-
rector's decision is f inaL
(ill) Where the request is submitted
by the Industrial User or POTW to
the Enforcement Division Director or
where the Enforcement Division Di-
rector elects to modify the Director's
decision, the Enforcement Division Di-
rector's decision will be f inaL
(iv) The Enforcement Division Di-
rector or Director, as appropriate.
shall send a copy of the determination
to the affected Industrial User and the
POTW. Where the final determination
is made by the Enforcement Division
Director, he or she shall send a copy
of the determination to the Director.
(5) Requests for hearing and/or legal
decision. Within 30 days following the
date of receipt of notice of the final
determination as provided for by para-
graph (a)(4)(iv) of this section, the Re-
quester may submit a petition to re-
consider or contest the decision to the
Regional Administrator who shall act
14
-------
I— Environmental Protection Agency
§403.6
on such petition expeditiously and
state the reasons for his or her deter-
mination in writing.
(b) Deadline for compliance With.
categorical standards. Compliance by
existing sources with categorical Pre-
treatment Standards shall be within 3
years of the date the standard is effec-
tive unless a shorter compliance time
is specified in the appropriate subpart
of 40 CFR Chapter I. Subchapter N
but in any case no later than July 1.
1984. Direct Discharges with NPDES
permits modified or reissued to pro-
vide a variance pursuant to section
301(1X2) of the Act shall be required
to meet compliance dates set forth in
any applicable categorical Pretreat-
ment Standard. Existing sources
which become Industrial Users subse-
quent to promulgation of an applica-
ble categorical Pretreatment Standard
shall be considered existing Industrial
Users except where such sources meet
the definition of a New Source as de-
fined in i 403.3(k). Compliance with
categorical Pretreatment Standards
for New Sources will be required upon
promulgation.
(c) Concentration and mass limits.
Pollutant discharge limits in categori-
cal Pretreatment Standards will be ex-
pressed either as concentration or
mass limits. Wherever possible, where
concentration limits are specified in
standards, equivalent mass limits will
be provided so that local. State or Fed-
eral authorities responsible for en-
forcement may use either concentra-
tion or mass limits. Limits in categori-
cal Pretreatment Standards shall
apply to the effluent of the process
regulated by the Standard, or as oth-
erwise specified by the standard.
(d) Dilution prohibited as substitute
for treatment. Except where expressly
authorized to do so by an applicable
categorical Pretreatment Standard, no
Industrial User shall ever increase the
use of process water or. in any other
way. attempt to dilute a Discharge as
a partial or complete substitute for
adequate treatment to achieve compli-
ance with a categorical Pretreatment
Standard. The Control Authority (as
defined in 5 403.12(a» may impose
mass limitations on Industrial Users
which are using dilution to meet appli-
cable Pretreatment Standards or in
other cases where the imposition of
mass limitations is appropriate.
(e) Combined wastestream formula.
Where process effluent is mixed prior
to treatment with wastewaters other
than those generated by the regulated
process, fixed alternative discharge
limits may be derived by the Control
Authority, as defined in $ 403.12(a). or
by the Industrial User with the writ-
ten concurrence of the Control Au-
thority. These alternative limits shall
be applied to the mixed effluent.
When deriving alternative categorical
limits, the Control Authority or Indus-
trial User shall calculate both an alter-
native daily maximum value using the
daily maximum value
-------
§403.6
TIM* 40—Protection of Environment
where
Cr-the alternative concentration limit (or
the combined wastestream.
G-the categorical Pretreatment Standard
concentration limit for a pollutant In
the regulated stream L
P,-the average dally flow (at least a 30-
day average) of stream 1 to the extent
that it la regulated for such pollutant.
Fo-the average daily flow (at least a 30-
day average) from (a) boiler blowdown
streams and non-contact cooling
streams; provided, however, that where
such streams contain a significant
amount of a pollutant, and the combina-
tion of such streams, prior to treatment.
with an Industrial Users regulated proc-
ess wastestream(s) will result in a sub-
stantial reduction of that pollutant, the
Control Authority, upon application of
the Industrial User, may exercise Its dis-
cretion to determine whether such
streamu) should be classified as diluted
or unregulated. In its application to the
Control Authority, the Industrial User
must provide engineering, production.
T* tripling and analysis and such other In-
formation so that the Control Authority
can make its determination, or (b) sani-
tary wastestreams where such streams
are not regulated by a categorical Pre-
treatment Standard, or (c) from any
process wastestreams which were or
could have been entirely exempted from
categorical Pretreatment Standards pur-
suant to paragraph 8 of the NRDC v.
Cattle Consent Decree (12 ERC 1833)
for one or more of the following reasons
(see Appendix O):
U) the pollutants of concern are not de-
tectable In the effluent from the Indus-
trial User (paragraph (BXaXlll)):
(2) the pollutants of concern are present
only In trace amounts and are neither
causing nor likely to cause toxic effects
(paragraph (SXaXlll)):
(3) the pollutants of concern are present
In amounts too small to be effectively
reduced by technologies known to the
Administrator (paragraph (SXaXlii)); or
(4) the wastestream contains only pollut-
ants which are compatible with the
POTW (paragraph (BxbXD).
PT-the average dally flow (at least a 30-
day average) through the combined
treatment facility (includes F,. F0 and
unregulated streams).
N~the total number of regulated streams.
(11) Alternative muss limit.
where
MT»the alternative mass limit for a pol-
lutant in the combined wastestream.
MI - the categorical Pretreatment Stand*
ard mass limit for a pollutant In the reg-
ulated stream 1 (the categorical pretreat*
ment mass limit multiplied by the ap-
propriate measure of production).
Fi»the average flow (at least a 30-day av-
erage) of stream 1 to the extent that It Is
regulated for such pollutant.
Fo-the average daily flow (at least a 30-
day average) from (a) boiler blowdown
streams and non-contact cooling
streams: provided, however, that where
such •+r**tn* contain a significant
amount of a pollutant, and the combina-
tion of such streams, prior to treatment.
with an Industrial Users regulated proc-
ess wastestream(s) will result in a sub-
stantial reduction of that pollutant, the
Control Authority, upon application of
the Industrial User, may exercise its dis-
cretion to determine whether such
atream(s) should be classified as diluted
or unregulated. In Its application to the
Control Authority, the Industrial User
must provide engineering, production.
sampling and analysis and such other In-
formation so that the Control Authority
can make its determination, or (b) sani-
tary wastestreams where such streams
are not regulated by a categorical Pre-
treatment Standard, or (c) from any
process wastestreams which were or
could have been entirely exempted from
categorical Pretreatment Standards pur-
suant to paragraph 8 of the NRDC v.
Cattle Consent Decree (12 ERC 1833)
for one or more of the following reasons
(see Appendix D>:
16
-------
I—environmental Protection Agoncy
§403.7
(i) the poUutmnta of concern are not de-
tectable In the effluent from the Indus-
trial User (paragraph (SXaXUl)):
(2) the pollutants of concern are present
only in trace amounts and are neither
causing nor likely to cause toxic effects
(paragraph (BXaXiil)):
<3) the pollutant! of concern are present
in amounts too small to be effectively
reduced by technologies known to the
Administrator (paragraph (8XaXlil»: or
(4) the wastestream contains only pollut-
ants which are compatible with the
POTW (paragraph (8XbXl».
FT.the average flow (at least a 30-day av-
erage) through the combined treatment
facility (Includes fu FD and unregulated
streams).
N-the total number of regulated streams.
(2) Alternate limit* below detection
limit An alternative pretreatment
limit may not be used if the alterna-
tive limit is below the analytical detec-
tion limit for any of the regulated pol-
lutants.
(3) Self-monitoring. Self-monitoring
required to insure compliance with the
alternative categorical limit shall be as
follows:
(I) The type and frequency of sam-
pling, analysis and flow measurement
shall be determined by reference to
the self-monitoring requirements of
the appropriate categorical Pretreat-
ment Standard(s);
(ii) Where the self-monitoring sched-
ules for the appropriate Standards
differ, monitoring shall be done ac-
cording to the most frequent schedule;
(ill) Where flow determines the fre-
quency of self-monitoring in a categor-
ical Pretreatment Standard, the sum
of all regulated flows (Ft) is the flow
which shall be used to determine self-
monitoring frequency.
[46 PR 9439. Jan. 28.1981. as amended at 49
FR 21037. May 17. 1984]
9403.7 Revision of categorical pretreat-
ment standards to reflect POTW re-
moral of pollutants.
This section provides the criteria
and procedures to be used by a POTW
In revising the pollutant discharge
limits specified In categorical Pretreat-
ment Standards to reflect Removal of
pollutants by the POTW.
(a) Definitions. For the purpose of
this section:
(1) "Removal" shall mean a reduc-
tion in the amount of a pollutant in
the POTW's effluent or alteration of
the nature of a pollutant during- treat-
ment at the POTW. The reduction or
alteration can be obtained by physical.
chemical or biological means and may
be the result of specifically designed
POTW capabilities or it may be inci-
dental to the operation of the treat-
ment system. Removal as used in this
subpart shall not mean dilution of a
pollutant in the POTW. The demon-
stration of Removal shall consist of
data which reflect the Removal
achieved by the POTW for those spe-
cific pollutants of concern included on
the list developed pursuant to section
307(a) of the Act. Each categorical
Pretreatment Standard will specify
whether or not a Removal Allowance
may be granted for indicator or surro-
gate pollutants regulated in that
Standard.
(2) "Consistent removal" shall mean
the average of the lowest 50 percent of
the removals measured according to
paragraph (d)(2) of this section. All
sample data obtained for the meas-
ured pollutant during the time period
prescribed in paragraph (d)(2) of this
section must be reported and used in
computing Consistent Removal. If a
substance is measurable in the influ-
ent but not in the effluent, the efflu-
ent level may be assumed to be the
limit of measurement, and those data
may be used by the POTW at its dis-
cretion and subject to approval by the
Approval Authority. If the substance
is not measurable in the influent, the
data may not be used. Where the
number of samples with concentra-
tions equal to or above the limit of
measurement is between 8 and 12, the
average of the lowest 6 removals shall
be used. If there are less than 8 sam-
ples with concentrations equal to or
above the limit of measurement, the
Approval Authority may approve al-
ternate means for demonstrating Con-
sistent Removal. The term "measure-
ment" refers to the ability of the ana-
lytical method or protocol to quantify
as well as identify the presence of the
substance in question.
(3) "Overflow" means the Intention-
al or unintentional diversion of How
from the POTW before the POTW
Treatment Plant.
17
-------
§40L7
(b) Revision of categorical Pretreat-
ment Standard* to reflect POTW pol-
lutant removal. Any POTW receiving
wastes from an Industrial User to
which a categorical Pretreatment
Standard applies may. subject to the
conditions of this section, revise the
discharge limits for a specific
pollutanUs) covered in the categorical
Pretreatment Standard applicable to
that User. Revisions will only be made
where the POTW demonstrates Con-
sistent Removal of each pollutant for
which the discharge limit in a categor-
ical Pretreatment Standard is to be re-
vised at a level which justifies the
amount of revision to the discharge
limit. In addition, revision of pollutant
discharge limits in categorical Pre-
treatment Standards by a POTW may
only be made Provided that:
(1) Application. The POTW applies
for. and receives, authorization from
the Regional Administrator and/or Di-
rector to revise the discharge limits in
Pretreatment Standards, for specific
pollutants, in accordance with the re-
quirements and procedures set out In
this section and 11403.9 and 403.11;
and
(2) POTW Pretreatment Programs.
The POTW has a Pretreatment Pro-
gram approved in accordance with
11403.8. 403.9. and 403.11; Provided.
however, a POTW may conditionally
revise the discharge limits for specific
pollutants, even though a Pretreat-
ment Program has not been approved.
in accordance with the following terms
and conditions. These provision also
govern the issuance of provisional au-
thorizations under 1403.7(dX2Xvii);
(1) All Industrial Users who wish to
receive a conditional or provisional re-
vision of categorical Pretreatment
Standards must submit to the POTW
the information required in
§403.12(6X1) through (7) pertaining
to the categorical Pretreatment Stand-
ard as modified by the conditional or
provisional removal allowance, except
that the compliance schedule required
by i 403.12(bM7) is not required where
a provisional allowance is requested.
The submission shall indicate what ad-
ditional technology, if any. will be
needed to comply with the categorical
Pretreatment Standards as revised by
the POTW;
THto 40 Protection of Environment
(11) The POTW must compile and
submit data demonstrating removal in
accordance with the requirements of
paragraphs (dXl) through (7) of this
section. The POTW shall submit to
the Approval Authority a removal
report which comports with the signa-
tory and certification requirements of
i 403.12 (1) and (m). This report shall
contain a certification by any of the
persons specified In { 403.12(1) or by
an independent engineer containing
the following statement: "I have per-
sonally examined •"** am familiar
with the information submitted in the
attached document, and I hereby cer-
tify under penalty of law that this in-
formation was obtained in accordance
with the .requirements of paragraph
(d) of this section. Moreover, based
upon my inquiry of those individuals
immediately responsible for obtaining
the information reported herein. I be-
lieve that the submitted information is
true, accurate and complete. I am
aware that there are significant penal-
ties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment.";
(Ill) The POTW must submit to the
Approval Authority an application for
Pretreatment program approval meet-
ing the requirements of SJ 403.8 and
403.9(a) or (b) in a timely manner, not
to exceed the time limitation set forth
in a compliance schedule for develop-
ment of a pretreatment program in-
cluded in the POTWs NPDES permit;
(Iv) If a POTW grants conditional or
provisional revislon(s) and the Approv-
al Authority subsequently makes a
final determination, after notice and
an opportunity for a hearing, that the
POTW failed to comply with the con-
ditions in paragraphs (b)(2Xii) or (ill)
of this section, or that its sludge use or
disposal practices are not in compli-
ance with the provisions of paragraph
(b)(4) of this section, the revision shall
be terminated by the Approval Au-
thority and all Industrial Users to
whom the revised discharge limits had
been applied shall achieve compliance
with the applicable categorical Pre-
treatment Standard(s) within a rea-
sonable time (not to exceed the period
of time prescribed in the applicable
categorical Pretreatment Standard(s))
as specified by the Approval Author-
18
-------
I — Environmental Protection Agoncy
itv However, the revisions) shall not
be 'terminated where the POTW has
not made a timely application for pro-
jjjani approval if the POTW has made
demonstrable progress towards and
has demonstrated and continues to
demonstrate an intention to submit an
aoprovable pretreatment program as
expeditiously as possible within an ad-
ditional period of time, not to exceed
one year, established by the Approval
Authority; _
(v) If a POTW grants conditional or
provisional revision(s) and the POTW
or Approval Authority subsequently
makes a final determination, after
notice and an opportunity for a hear-
ing. that the Industrial Userts) failed
to comply with conditions in para-
graph (b)(2)(i) of this section, includ-
ing in the case of a conditional revi-
sion. the dates specified in the compli-
ance schedule required by
] 403.12(b)<7), the revision shall be ter-
minated by the POTW or the Approv-
al Authority for the non-complying In-
dustrial Users and all non-complying
Industrial Users to whom the revised
discharge limits had been applied shall
achieve compliance with the applica-
ble categorical Pretreatment
Standard^) within the time period
specified in such Standard(s). The
revislon(s) shall not be terminated
where a violation of the provisions of
this subparagraph results from causes
entirely outside of the control of the
Industrial User or the Industrial User
has demonstrated substantial compli-
ance: and
The POTW shall submit to the
Approval Authority by December 31 of
each year the name and address of
each Industrial User that has received
a conditionally or provisionally revised
discharge limit. If the revised dis-
charge limit is revoked, the POTW
must submit the Information in para-
graph (b)(2)(i) above to the Approval
Authority;
(3) Compensation for overflow.
POTW's which at least once annually
Overflow untreated wastewater to re-
ceiving waters may claim Consistent
Removal of a pollutant only by com-
plying with either paragraphs (b)(3)(l)
or
-------
§403J
which an Overflow event was reason-
ably expected to occur; or
(iiXA) The Consistent Removal
claimed is reduced pursuant to the fol-
lowing equation:
8760-Z
8760
Where:
r.-POTWs Consistent Removal rate for
that pollutant at established under
paragraphs (aXl) and (dX2> of this sec-
tion
r.- removal corrected by the Overflow
factor
Z- hours per year that Overflow occurred
between the Industrial Userts) and the
POTW Treatment Plant, the hours
either to be shown in the POTWs cur-
rent NPDES permit application or the
hours, as demonstrated by verifiable
techniques, that a particular Industrial
User's Discharge Overflows between the
Industrial User and the POTW Treat-
ment Plant: and
(BXJ) After July 1. 1983. Consistent
Removal may be claimed only where
efforts to correct the conditions result-
ing In untreated Discharges by the
POTW are underway in accordance
with the policy and procedures set
forth in "FRM 75-34" or "Program
Guidance Memorandum-61" (same
document) published on December 16.
1975 by EPA Office of Water Program
Operations (WH-546). (See Appendix
A.) Revisions to discharge limits in
categorical Pretreatxnent Standards
may not be made where efforts have
not been committed to by the POTW
to minimize pollution from Overflows.
At minimum by July 1. 1983. the
POTW must have completed the anal-
ysis required by PRM 75-34 and be
making an effort to Implement the
plan.
(2) If. by July 1. 1983. a POTW has
begun the PRM 75-34 analysis but due
to circumstances beyond its control
has not completed it. Consistent Re-
moval, subject to the approval of the
Approval Authority, may continue to
be claimed according to the formula in
paragraph (bX3Xli)(A) above so long
as the POTW acts in a timely fashion
to complete the analysis and makes an
effort to implement the non-structural
cost-effective measures identified by
Title 40 Protection of Environment
the analysis: and so long as the POTW
has expressed its willingness to apply,
alter completing the analysis, for a
construction grant necessary to imple-
ment any other cost-effective Over-
flow controls identified in the analysis
should federal funds become available,
so applies for such funds, and proceeds
with the required construction in an
expeditious manner. In addition. Con-
sistent Removal may. subject to the
approval of the Approval Authority.
continue to be claimed according to
the formula in paragraph (bX3XilXA)
above where the POTW has completed
and, the Approval Authority has ac-
cepted the analysis required by PRM
75-34 and the POTW has requested in-
clusion In its NPDES permit of an ac-
ceptable compliance schedule provid-
ing for timely implementation of cost-
effective measures identified in the
analysis. (In considering what is
timely implementation, the Approval
Authority shall consider the availabil-
ity of funds, cost of control measures,
and seriousness of the water quality
problem.); and
(4) Compliance with applicable
sludge requirements. Such revision will
not contribute to the POTWs inabil-
ity to comply with its NPDES permit
or with the following statutory provi-
sions and regulations or permits issued
thereunder (or more stringent State 01
local regulations) as they apply to th«
sludge management methods beini
used: section 405 of the Clean Water
Act; the Solid Waste Disposal Act
(SWDA) (including Title H. more com-
monly referred to as the Resource
Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA)
and Including State regulations con-
tained in any State sludge manage-
ment plan prepared pursuant to Sub-
title D of SWDA)). the Clean Air Act
and the Toxic Substances Control Act
The POTW will be authorized to
revise discharge limits only for those
pollutants that do not contribute to
the violation of its NPDES permit or
any of the above statutes.
(c) POTW application for authoriza-
tion to revise discharge limits. (1) Ap-
plication for authorization to revise
discharge limits for Industrial Users
who are or in the future may be sub-
ject to categorical Pretreatment
Standards, or approval of. discharge
20
-------
Chop**' I—Environmental Protection Agoney
limits conditionally or provisionally re-
vised for Industrial Users by the
POTW pursuant to paragraphs (b)(2)
and (d)(2)(vii) shall be submitted by
the POTW to the Approval Authority.
(2) Each POTW may submit such an
application no more than once per
year with respect to either
(1) Any categorical Pretreatment
Standard promulgated in the prior 18
months:
(ii) Any new or modified facilities or
production changes resulting in the
Discharge of pollutants which were
not previously discharged and which
are subject to promulgated categorical
Standards; or
(ill) Any significant increase in Re-
moval efficiency attributable to specif-
ic identifiable circumstances or correc-
tive measures (such as improvements
in operation and maintenance prac-
tices, new treatment or treatment ca-
pacity, or a significant change in the
influent to the POTW Treatment
Plant).
(3) The Approval Authority may.
however, elect not to review such
appUcatlon(s) upon receipt, in which
case the POTWs conditionally or pro-
visionally revised discharge limits will
remain in effect until reviewed by the
Approval Authority. This review may
occur at any time in accordance with
the procedures of {403.11. but in no
event later than the time of any pre-
treatment program approval or any
NPDES permit reissuance thereafter.
(4) If the Consistent Removal
claimed is based on an analytical tech-
nique other than the technique speci-
fied for the applicable categorical Pre-
treatment Standard, the Approval Au-
thority may require the POTW per-
form additional analyses.
(d) Contents of application to revise
discharge limits. Requests for authori-
zation to revise discharge limits in cat-
egorical Pretreatment Standards must
be supported by the following infor-
mation:
U> List of pollutants. A list of pollut-
ants for which discharge limit revi-
siona are proposed.
<2) Consistent Removal data. Influ-
ent and effluent operational data dem-
onstrating Consistent Removal or
other information, as provided for in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section, which
§403.7
demonstrates Consistent Removal of
the pollutants for which discharge
limit revisions are proposed. This data
shall meet the following requirements:
(1) Representative data: Seasonal
The data shall be representative of
yearly and seasonal conditions to
which the POTW is subjected for each
pollutant for which a discharge limit
revision is proposed.
(11) Representative data: Quality and
quantity. The data shall be represent-
ative of the quality and quantity of
normal effluent and influent flow if
such data can be obtained. If such
data are 'Unobtainable, alternate data
or information may be presented for
approval to demonstrate Consistent
Removal as provided for in paragraph
(a)(2) of this section.
(ill) Sampling procedures: Compos-
ite. (A) The influent and effluent
operational data shall be obtained
through 24-hour flow-proportional
composite samples. Sampling may be
done finft^tiaiiy or automatically, and
discretely or continuously. For dis-
crete sampling, at least 12 aliquots
shall be composited. Discrete sampling
may be flow-proportioned either by
varying the time interval between
each aliquot or the volume of each ali-
quot. All composites must be flow-pro-
portional to either stream flow at time
of collection of Influent aliquot or to
the total influent flow since the previ-
ous influent aliquot. Volatile pollutant
allquots must be combined in the labo-
ratory immediately before analysis.
(B)U> Twelve samples shall be taken
at approximately equal Intervals
throughout one full year. Sampling
must be evenly distributed over the
days of the week so as to include non-
workdays as well as workdays. If the
Approval Authority determines that
this schedule will not be most repre-
sentattve of the actual operation of
the POTW Treatment Plant, an alter-
native sampling schedule will be ap-
proved.
(2) In addition, upon the Approval
Authority's concurrence, a POTW
may utilize an historical data base
amassed prior to the effective date of
this section provided that such data
otherwise meet the requirements of
this paragraph. In order for the his-
torical data base to be approved it
21
-------
Till* 40— 'Protection of Environment
must present a statistically valid de-
scription of daily, weekly and seasonal
sewage treatment plant loadings and
performance for at least one year.
(C) Effluent sample collection need
not be delayed to compensate for hy-
draulic detention unless the POTW
elects to include detention time com-
pensation or unless the Approval Au-
thority requires detention time com-
pensation. The Approval Authority
may require that each effluent sample
be taken approximately one detention
time later than the corresponding in-
fluent sample when failure to do so
would result In an unrepresentative
portrayal of actual POTW operation.
The detention period is to be based on
a 24-hour average daily flow value.
The average daily flow used will be
based upon the average of the daily
flows during the same month of the
previous year.
(iv) Sampling procedures.* Grab.
Where composite sampling is not an
appropriate sampling technique, a
grab sampleCa) shall be taken to obtain
influent and effluent operational data.
Collection of influent grab samples
should preceed collection of effluent
samples by approximately one deten-
tion period. The detention period is to
be based on a 24-hour average daily
flow value. The average daily flow
used will be based upon the avenge of
the daily flows during the same month
of the previous year. Grab samples
will be required, for example, where
the parameters being evaluated are
those, such as cyanide and phenol,
which may not be held for any ex-
tended period because of biological.
chemical or physical interactions
which take place after sample collec-
tion and affect the results. A grab
sample is an individual sample collect-
ed over a period of time not exceeding
15 minutes.
(v) Analytical methods. The sam-
pling referred to in paragraphs
(dX2Xi) through (iv) and (d)(S> of this
section and an analysis of these sam-
ples shall be performed in accordance
with the techniques prescribed in 40
CPR Part 136 and amendments there-
to. Where 40 CFR Part 136 does not
contain sampling or analytical tech-
niques for the pollutant in question, or
where the Administrator determines
that the Part 136 sampling and analyt-
ical techniques are inappropriate for
the pollutant In question, sampling
and analysis shall be performed using
validated analytical methods or any
other applicable sampling and analyti-
cal procedures, including procedures
suggested by the POTW or other par-
ties, approved by the Administrator.
(vi> Calculation of removal. All data
acquired under the provisions of this
section must be submitted to the Ap-
proval Authority. Removal for a spe-
cific pollutant shall be determined
either, for each sample, by measuring
the difference between the concentra-
tions of the pollutant in the influent
and effluent of the POTW and ex-
pressing the difference as a percent of
the influent concentration, or. where
such data cannot be obtained. Remov-
al may be demonstrated using other
data or procedures subject to concur-
rence by the Approval Authority as
provided for in paragraph (a)<2) of
this section.
(vii) Exception to sampling data re-
yuii'ement: provisional removal dem-
onstration. For pollutants which are
not currently being discharged (new or
modified facilities, or production
changes) application may be made by
the POTW for provisional authoriza-
tion to revise the applicable categori-
cal Pretreatment Standard prior to
initial discharge of the pollutant. Con-
sistent Removal may be based provi-
sionally on data from treatability stud-
ies or demonstrated removal at other
treatment facilities where the quality
and quantity of influent are similar. In
calculating and applying for provision-
al removal allowances, the POTW
must comply with the provisions of
paragraphs (b)(l) through (4) of this
section. Within 18 months after the
commencement of Discharge of the
pollutants in question. Consistent Re-
moval must be demonstrated pursuant
to the requirements of paragraph]
(a)(2) and (d)(2)(i) through (vi) of this
section.
(3) List of industrial subcategoria.
A list of the Industrial subcategoria
for which discharge limits in categori-
cal Pretreatment Standards will be re-
vised. including the number of Indus-
trial Users in each such subcategon
and an Identification of which of the
22
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
nollutants on the list prepared under
{jaragraph (d)U) of this section are
Discharged by each subcategory.
(4) Calculation of revised, discharge
limits. Proposed revised discharge
limits for each of the subcategortes of
Industrial Users identified in para-
graph (d)(3) of this section calculated
in the following manner.
(i) The proposed revised discharge
limit for a specified pollutant shall be
derived by use of the following formu-
la:
§403.7
where:
x.pollutant discharge limit specified in
the applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard
r-POTWs Consistent Removal rate (or
that pollutant as established under
paragraphs (aX2), (dX2) and. if appro-
priate. (bXSXUKA) of this section, (per-
centage expressed as a decimal)
Y- revised discharged limit for the speci-
fied pollutant (expressed in same units
MX)
(11) In calculating revised discharge
limits, such revision for POTW Re-
moval of a specified pollutant shall be
applied equally to all existing and new
Industrial Users in an industrial sub-
category subject to categorical Pre-
treatment Standards which Discharge
that pollutant to the POTW.
(5) Data on sludge characteristics.
Data showing the concentrations and
amounts in the POTW's sludge of the
pollutants for which discharge limit
revisions are proposed and for which
EPA. the State or locality have pub-
lished sludge disposal or use criteria
applicable to the POTWs current
method of sludge use or disposal.
These data shall meet the following
requirements.
(i) The data shall be obtained
through a composite sample taken
during the same sampling periods se-
lected to measure Consistent POTW
Removals in accordance with the re-
quirements of paragraph (d)<2) of this
section. Each composite sample will
contain a minimum of 12 discrete sam-
ples taken at equal time intervals over
a 24 hour period. Where a composite
sample is not an appropriate sampling
technique, grab samples shall be
taken.
(ii) Sampling and analysis of the
samples referred to in paragraph
(d)(5)(l) of this section shall be per-
formed in accordance with the sam-
pling and analytical techniques de-
scribed previously in paragraph
(d)(2)(v) of this section.
(6) Description of sludge manage-
ment. A specific description of the
POTW's current methods of use or
disposal of its sludge and data demon-
strating that the current sludge use or
disposal methods comply and will con-
tinue to comply with the requirements
of paragraph (b)(4) of this section.
(7) Certification statement. The cer-
tification statement required by para-
graph (b)(2)(ii) of this section stating
that the pollutant Removals and asso-
ciated revised discharged limits have
been or will be calculated in accord-
ance with this regulation and any
guidelines issued by EPA under Sec-
tion 304(g) of the Act.
(e) Procedure for authorizing modifi-
cation of standards. (1) Application
for authorization to revise National
Pretreatment Standards shall comply
with S 403.9
-------
§40&7
pretreatment program approval or
NPDES permit reissuance thereafter,
authorize the POTW to revise Indus-
trial User discharge limits, as submit-
ted pursuant to paragraph (d)(4) of
this section, which comply with the
provisions of this section.
(4) Nothing in these regulations pre-
cludes an Industrial User or other in-
terested party from assisting the
POTW in preparing and presenting
the information necessary to apply for
authorization to revise categorical Pre-
treatment Standards.
(f) Continuation and withdrawal of
authorization-41) Monitoring and re-
porting of consistent removal Follow-
ing authorization to revise the di*r'
charge limits In Pretreatment Stand-
ards, the POTW shall continue to
monitor and report on (at such fre-
quencies and over such intervals as
may be specified by the Regional Ad-
ministrator, but in no case leas than
two times per year) the POTWs Re-
moval capabilities for all pollutants
for which authority to revise the
Standards was granted. Such monitor-
ing and reporting shall be in accord*
ance with } 403.12 (i) and (j) pertain-
ing to pollutant removal capability re-
ports.
(2) Re-evaluation of revisions. Ap-
proval of authority to revise Pretreat-
ment Standards will be re-examined
whenever the POTWs NPDES Permit
is reissued, unless the Regional Ad-
ministrator determines the need to re-
evaluate the authority pursuant to
paragraph (fXS) of this section. In
order to maintain a removal allow-
ance, the POTW must comply with all
Federal. State and local statutes, regu-
lations and permits applicable to the
POTWs selected method of sludge use
or disposal. In addition, where Over-
flows of untreated waste by the
POTW continue to occur the Regional
Administrator may condition contin-
ued authorization to revise discharge
limits upon the POTW performing ad-
ditional analysis and/or implementing
additional control measures as is con-
sistent with EPA policy on POTW
Overflows.
(3) Inclusion in POTW permit. Once
authority to revise discharge limits for
a specified pollutant is granted, the re-
vised discharge limits for Industrial
Title 40—Protection of Environment
Users of the system as well as the Con.
slstent Removal documented by the
POTW for that pollutant and the
other requirements of paragraph (t»
of this section, shall be included in the
POTW's NPDES Permit upon the ear-
liest reissuance or modification (at or
following Program approval) and shall
become enforceable requirements of
the POTWs NPDES Permit.
(4) EPA review of state removal al-
lowance approvals. Where the NPDES
State has an approved pretreatment
program, the Regional Administrator
may agree, in the Memorandum of
Agreement under 40 CFR 123.7. to
waive the right to review and object to
Submissions for authority to revise
discharge limits under this section.
Such an agreement shall not restrict
the Regional Administrator's right to
comment upon or object to permits
issued to POTWs except to the extent
permitted under 40 CFR
123.7(b)(3Xi)(D).
(5) Modification or withdrawal of re-
vised limits-il) Notice to POTW. The
Approval Authority shall notify the
POTW if. on the basis of pollutant re-
moval capability reports received pur-
suant to paragraph (f)(l) of this sec-
tion or other information available to
It. the Approval Authority determines:
(A) That one or more of the dis-
charge limit revisions made by the
POTW. or the POTW Itself, no longer
meets the requirements of this section,
or
(B) That such discharge limit revi-
sions are causing or significantly con-
tributing to a violation of any condi-
tions or limits contained in the
POTWs NPDES Permit. A revised dis-
charge limit is significantly contribut-
ing to a violation of the POTWi
permit If It satisfies the definition set
forth in § 40.33 (1) or (n).
(11) Corrective action. If appropriate
corrective action is not taken within i
reasonable time, not to exceed 60 days
unless the POTW or the affected In-
dustrial Users demonstrate that i
longer time period is reasonably neces-
sary to undertake the appropriate cor-
rective action, the Approval Authority
shall either withdraw such discharge
limits or require modifications in the
revised discharge limits.
24
-------
I—Environmental Protection Agency
§403.8
(ill) Public notice of withdrawal or
modification. The Approval Authority
shall not withdraw or modify revised
discharge limits unless it shall first
have notified the POTW and all In-
dustrial Users to whom revised dis-
charge limits have been applied, and
made public, in writing, the reasons
for such withdrawal or modification.
and an opportunity is provided for a
hearing. Following such notice and
withdrawal or modification, all Indus-
trial Users to whom revised discharge
limits had been applied, shall be sub-
ject to the modified discharge limits or
the discharge limits prescribed in the
applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standards, as appropriate, and shall
achieve compliance with such limits
within a reasonable time (not to
exceed the period of time prescribed in
the applicable categorical Pretreat-
ment Standard(s) as may be specified
by the Approval Authority.
(g) Removal allowances in State-run
pretreatment programs under
$403.1(X.e). Where an NPDES State
with an approved pretreatment pro-
gram elects to implement a local pre-
treatment program in lieu of requiring
the POTW to develop such a program
(see i 403.10(e)) the POTW shall nev-
ertheless be responsible for demon-
strating Consistent Removal asprpvid-
ed for in this section. The POTW will
not, however, be required to develop a
pretreatment program as a precondi-
tion to obtaining approval of the al-
lowance as required by paragraph
(b)(2) of this section. Instead, before a
removal allowance is approved, the
State will be required to demonstrate
that sufficient technical personnel and
resources are available to ensure that
modified discharge limits are correctly
applied to affected Users and that
Consistent Removal is maintained.
9 40X8 POTW pretremtment program* de-
velopment by POTW.
(a) POTW's required to develop a
pretreatment program. Any POTW (of
combination of POTW's operated by
the same authority) with a total
design How greater than 5 million gal-
lons per day (mgd) and receiving from
industrial Users pollutants which Pass
Through or Interfere with the oper-
ation of the POTW or are otherwise
subject to Pretreatment Standards
will be required to establish a POTW
Pretreatment Program unless the
NPDES State exercises its option to
assume local responsibilities as provid-
ed for in i 403.10(e). The Regional Ad-
ministrator or Director may require
that a POTW with a design flow of 5
mgd or less develop a POTW Pretreat-
ment Program if he or she finds that
the nature or volume of the industrial
influent, treatment process upsets, vio-
lations of POTW effluent limitations.
contamination of municipal sludge, or
other circumstances warrant in order
to prevent Interference with the
POTW or Pass Through, In addition.
any POTW desiring to modify categor-
ical' Pretreatment Standards for pol-
lutants Removed by the POTW (as
provided for by 8 403.7) must have an
approved POTW Pretreatment Pro-
gram prior to obtaining final approval
of a removal allowance. POTW's may
receive conditional approval of a re-
moval allowance, as provided for by
S 403.7(b)(2). prior to obtaining POTW
Pretreatment Program Approval. A
POTW may receive } 403.7(g) author-
ity to revise Pretreatment Standards
without being required to develop a
POTW Pretreatment Program where
the NPDES State has assumed respon-
sibility for running a local program in
lieu of the POTW in accordance with
§ 403.10(e).
(b) Deadline for Program approval
A POTW which meets the criteria of
paragraph (a) of this section must re-
ceive approval of a POTW Pretreat-
ment Program no later than 3 years
after the reissuance or modification of
its existing NPDES permit but in no
case later than July 1. 1983. POTW's
whose NPDES permits are modified
under section 301(h) of the Act shall
have a Pretreatment Program within
less than 3 years as provided for in 40
CFR Part 125. Subpart G (44 FR
34783 (1979)). The POTW Pretreat-
ment Program shall meet the criteria
set forth in paragraph (f) of this sec-
tion and will be administered by the
POTW to ensure compliance by Indus-
trial Users with applicable Pretreat-
ment Standards and Requirements.
(c) /ncorporotton of approved pro-
grams in permits. A POTW may devel-
op an approvable POTW Pretreatment
25
-------
§403.8
Program any time before the time
limit set forth in paragraph (b) of this
section. If (1) the POTW is located in
a State which has an approved State
permit program under section 402 of
the Act and an approved State pre-
treatment program in accordance with
8 403.10: or (2) the POTW is located in
a State which does not have an ap-
proved permit program under section
402 of the Act: the POTW's NPDES
Permit will be reissued or modified by
the NPDEs State or EPA. respectively.
to incorporate the approved Program
conditions as enforceable conditions of
the Permit If the POTW is located in
an NPDES State which does not have
an approved State pretreatment pro-.
gram, the approved POTW Pretreat-
ment Program shall be incorporated
Into the POTWs NPDES Permit as
provided for in 8 403.1(Xd).
(d) Incorporation of compliance
schedules in permits. If the POTW
does not have an approved Pretreat-
ment Program at the time the
POTWs existing Permit is reissued or
modified, the reissued or modified
Permit will contain the shortest rea-
sonable compliance schedule, not to
exceed three years or July 1. 1983.
whichever is sooner, for the approval
of the legal authority, procedures and
funding required by paragraph (f) of
this section. Where the POTW is lo-
cated in an NPDES State currently
without authority to require a POTW
Pretreatment Program, the Permit
shall incorporate a modification or ter-
mination clause as provided for in
1403.1(Kd) and the compliance sched-
ule shall be incorporated when the
Permit is modified or reissued pursu-
ant to such clause.
(e) Cause for reisauance or modifica-
tion of Permits. Under the authority
of section 402(b)(l)(C) of the Act. the
Approval Authority may modify, or al-
ternatively, revoke and reissue a
POTWs Permit in order to:
(1) Put the POTW on a compliance
schedule for the development of a
POTW Pretreatment Program where
the addition of pollutants into a
POTW by an Industrial User or com-
bination of Industrial Users presents a
substantial hazard to the functioning
of the treatment works, quality of the
Title 40—Protection of Environment
receiving waters, human health, or the
environment;
(2) Coordinate the issuance of a sec-
tion 201 construction grant with the
incorporation into a permit of a com-
pliance schedule for POTW Pretreat-
ment Program:
(3) Incorporate a modification of the
permit approved under sections 301(h)
or 301(1) of the Act;
(4) Incorporate an approved POTW
Pretreatment Program in the POTW
permit; or
(5) Incorporate a compliance sched-
ule for the development of a POTW
pretreatment program in the POTW
permit
(f) POTW pretreatment proffram re-
quirement*. A POTW Pretreatment
Program shall meet the following re-
quirements:
(1) Legal authority. The POTW
shall operate pursuant to legal author-
ity enforceable in Federal. State or
local courts, which authorizes or en-
ables the POTW to apply and to en-
force the requirements of sections 307
(b) and (c). and 402(b)(8) of the Act
and any regulations implementing
those sections. Such authority may be
contained in a statute, ordinance, or
series of contracts or Joint powers
agreements which the POTW is au-
thorized to enact enter into or imple-
ment, and which are authorized by
State law. At a mtnimmn, this legal
authority shall enable the POTW to:
(1) Deny or condition new or in-
creased contributions of pollutants, or
changes in the nature of pollutants, to
the POTW by Industrial Users where
such contributions do not meet appli-
cable Pretreatment Standards and Re-
quirements or where such contribu-
tlons would cause the POTW to vio-
late its NPDES permit:
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
pretreatmeat Standards and Require-
ments and (B) the submission of all
notices and self-monitoring reports
from Industrial Users as are necessary
to assess and assure compliance by In-
dustrial Users with Pretreatment
Standards and Requirements, includ-
ing but not limited to the reports re-
quired in S 403.1%
(v) Carry out all inspection, surveil-
lance and monitoring procedures nec-
essary to determine, independent of
information supplied by Industrial
Users, compliance or noncompliance
with applicable Pretreatment Stand-
ards and Requirements by Industrial
Users. Representatives of the POTW
shall be authorized to enter any prem-
ises of any Industrial User in which a
Discharge source or treatment system
is located or in which records are re-
quired to be kept under } 403.12(m> to
assure compliance with Pretreatment
Standards. Such authority shall be at
least as extensive as the authority pro-
vided under section 308 of the Act:
(viXA) Obtain remedies for noncom-
pliance by any Industrial User with
any Pretreatment Standard and Re-
quirement All POTWs shall be able
to seek injuctive relief for noncompli-
ance by Industrial Users with Pre-
treatment Standards and Require-
ments. In cases where State law has
authorized the municipality or POTW
to pass ordinances or other local legis-
lation, the POTW shall exercise such
authorities in passing legislation to
seek and assess civil or criminal penal-
ties for noncompliance by Industrial
Users with Pretreatment Standards
and Requirements. POTWs without
such authorities shall enter Into con-
tracts with Industrial Users to assure
compliance by Industrial Users with
Pretreatment Standards and Require-
ments. An adequate contract will pro-
vide for liquidated damages for viola-
tion of Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements and will include an
agreement by the Industrial User to
submit to the remedy of specific per-
formance for breach of contract.
(B) Pretreatment Requirements
which will be enforced through the
remedies set forth in paragraph
fHIXviXA) will include but not be
limited to. the duty to allow or carry
out inspections, entry, or monitoring
§403.8
activities; any rules, regulations, or
orders issued by the POTW: or any re-
porting requirements imposed by the
POTW or these regulations. The
POTW shall have authority and pro-
cedures (after informal notice to the
discharger) immediately and effective-
ly to halt or prevent any Discharge of
pollutants to the POTW which reason-
ably appears to present an imminent
endangerment to the health or wel-
fare of persons. The POTW shall also
have authority and procedures (which
shall include notice to the affected In-
dustrial Users and an opportunity to
respond) to halt or prevent any Dis-
charge to the POTW which presents
or may present an endangerment to
the 'environment or which threatens
to interfere with the operation of the
POTW. The Approval Authority shall
have authority to seek judicial relief
for noncompliance by Industrial Users
when the POTW has acted to seek
such relief but has sought a penalty
which the Approval Authority finds to
be insufficient. The procedures for
notice to dischargers where the
POTW is seeking ex parte temporary
judicial injunctive relief will be gov-
erned by applicable state or federal
law and not by this provision: and
-------
§403.9
204(t» and 405 of the Act and Subti-
tles C and D of the Resource Conser-
vation and Recovery Act.
(iv) Receive and analyze self-moni-
toring reports and other notices sub-
mitted by Industrial Users in accord-
ance with the self-monitoring require-
ments in { 403.12;
(v) Randomly sample and analyze
the effluent from Industrial Users and
conduct surveillance and inspection ac-
tivities in order to identify, independ-
ent of information supplied by Indus-
trial Users, occasional and continuing
noncompliance with Pretreatment
Standards. The results of these activi-
ties shall be made available to the Re-
gional Administrator or Director upon
request;
(vl) Investigate instances of noncom-
pliance with Pretreatment Standards
and Requirements, as indicated in the
reports and notices required under
1403.12, or indicated by analysis. In-
spection, and surveillance activities de-
scribed in paragraph (f)(2)(v) of this
section. Sample taking and analysis
and the collection of other informa-
tion shall be performed with sufficient
care to produce evidence admissible in
enforcement proceedings or in judicial
actions: and
(vil) Comply with the public partlci-
pation requirements of 40 CFR Part
25 In the enforcement of National Pre-
treatment Standards. These proce-
dures shall include provision for at
least annually providing public notifi-
cation, in the largest daily newspaper
published in the municipality in which
the POTW is located, of Industrial
Users which, during the previous 12
months, were significantly violating
applicable Pretreatment Standards or
other Pretreatment Requirements,
For the purposes of this provision, a
significant violation is a violation
which remains uncorrected 45 days
after notification of noncompliance:
which is part of a pattern of noncom-
pliance over a twelve month period:
which involves a failure to accurately
report noncompliance: or which result-
ed in the POTW exercising its emer-
gency authority under paragraph
(fXIXivKB).
(3) Funding. The POTW shall have
sufficient resources and qualified per-
sonnel to carry out the authorities and
Till* 40—Protection of Environment
procedures described in paragraphs (f)
(1) and (2) of this section. In some lim-
ited circumstances, funding and per-
sonnel may be delayed where (1) the
POTW has adequate legal authority
and procedures to carry out the Pre-
treatment Program requirements de-
scribed in this section, and (11) a limit-
ed aspect of the Program does not
need to be implemented immediately
(see | 403.9(b)).
9403.9 POTW pretreatment program*
and/or authorization to reris* pre-
treatment standards: submission for
approval.
(a) Who approves Program. A POTW
requesting approval of a POTW Pre-
treatment Program shall develop a
program description which Includes
the information set forth in para-
graphs (bXl) through (4) of this sec-
tion. This description shall be submit-
ted to the Approval Authority which
will make a determination on the re-
quest for program approval in accord-
ance with the procedures described in
§ 403.11.
(b) Contents of POTW program sub-
mission. The program description
must contain the following informa-
tion:
(1) A statement from the City Solici-
tor or a city official acting in a compa-
rable capacity (or the attorney for
those POTWa which have independ-
ent legal counsel) that the POTW has
authority adequate to carry out the
programs described in i 403.8. This
statement shall:
(i) Identify the provision of the legal
authority under S403.8(f)(l> which
provides the basis for each procedure
under 1403.8(1X2):
(11) Identify the manner in which
the POTW will Implement the pro-
gram requirements set forth in § 403.8.
including the means by which Pre-
treatment Standards will be applied to
individual Industrial Users (e.g.. by
order, permit, ordinance, contract
etc.): and.
(ill) Identify how the POTW intends
to ensure compliance with Pretreat-
ment Standards and Requirements.
and to enforce them In the event of
noncompliance by Industrial Users:
28
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agoncy
(2) A copy of any statutes, ordi-
nances, regulations, contracts, agree-
ments, or other authorities relied
upon by the POTW for its administra-
tion of the Program. This Submission
shall include a statement reflecting
the endorsement or approval of the
local boards or bodies responsible for
supervising and/or funding the POTW
Pretreatment Program if approved:
(3) A brief description (including or-
ganization charts) of the POTW orga-
nization which will administer the
Pretreatment Program. If more than
one agency is responsible for adminls-
tration of the Program the responsible
agencies should be identified, their re-
spective responsibilities delineated.
and their procedures for coordination
set forth: and
(4) A description of the funding
levels and full- and part-time manpow-
er available to implement the Pro-
§403.9
gram;
(c) Conditional POTW program ap-
proval The POTW may request condi-
tional approval of the Pretreatment
Program pending the acquisition of
funding and personnel for certain ele-
ments of the Program. The request for
conditional approval must meet the re-
quirements set forth in paragraph (b)
of this section except that the require-
ments of paragraph (b) may be re-
laxed if the Submission demonstrates
that
(1) A limited aspect of the Program
does not need to be Implemented im-
mediately;
(2) The POTW had adequate legal
authority and procedures to carry out
those aspects of the Program which
will not be implemented Immediately;
and
(3) Funding and personnel for the
Program aspects to be implemented at
a later date will be available when
needed. The POTW will describe in
the Submission the mechanism by
which this funding will be acquired.
Upon receipt of a request for condi-
tional approval, the Approval Author-
ity will establish a fixed date for the
acquisition of the needed funding and
S*™?nn*L M funding is not acquired
°-( ,thta *£*•*"« conditional approval
of the POTW Pretreatment Program
and any removal allowances granted
to the POTW, may be modified or
withdrawn.
(d) Content of removal allowance
submission. The request for authority
to revise categorical Pretreatment
Standards must contain the informa-
tion required in § 403.7.
(e) Approval authority action. Any
POTW requesting POTW Pretreat-
ment Program approval shall submit
to the Approval Authority three
copies of the Submission described in
paragraph (b). and, if appropriate, (d)
of this section. Upon a preliminary de-
termination that the Submission
meets the requirements of paragraph
(b) and. if appropriate, (d), of this sec-
tion, the Approval Authority shall:
(1) Notify the POTW that the Sub-
mission has been received and is under
review, and
(2) Commence the public notice and
evaluation activities set forth in
S 403.11.
(f) Notification where submission is
defective. If. after review of the Sub-
mission as provided for in paragraph
(e) of this section, the Approval Au-
thority determines that the Submis-
sion does not comply with the require-
ments of paragraphs (b) or (c), and. if
appropriate, (d), of this section, the
Approval Authority shall provide
notice in writing to the applying
POTW and each person who has re-
quested individual notice. This notifi-
cation shall identify any defects in the
Submission and advise the POTW and
each person who has requested indi-
vidual notice of the means by which
the POTW can comply with the appli-
cable requirements of paragraphs (b).
(c), and. if appropriate, (d) of this sec-
tion.
(g) Consistency with water quality
management plans. (1) In order to be
approved the POTW Pretreatment
Program shall be consistent with any
approved water quality management
plan developed in accordance with 40
CFR Parts 130, 13 i. as revised, where
such 208 plan includes Management
Agency designations and addresses
Pretreatment in a manner consistent
with 40 CFR Part 403. In order to
assure such consistency the Approval
Authority shall solicit the review and
comment of the appropriate 208 Plan-
ning Agency during the public com-
29
-------
§403.10
ment period provided for in
$ 403.11(b)(l)(ii) prior to approval or
disapproval of the Program.
(2) Where no 208 plan has been ap-
proved or where a plan has been ap-
proved but lacks Management Agency
designations and/or does not address
pretreatment in a manner consistent
with this regulation, the Approval Au-
thority shall nevertheless solicit the
review and comment of the appropri-
ate 208 planning agency.
9403.10 Development and •ubmtMion of
NPDES State pretreatment program.
(a) Approval of State Program*. No
State NPDES program shall be ap-
proved under section 402 of the Act
after the effective date of these regu-
lations unless it is determined to meet
the requirements of paragraph (f) of
this section. Notwithstanding any
other provision of this regulation, a
State will be required to act upon
those authorities which it currently
possesses before the approval of a
State Pretreatment Program.
(b) Deadline for requesting approval.
Any NPDES State with a permit pro-
gram approved under section 402 of
the Act prior to December 27. 1977.
which requires modification to con-
form to the requirements set forth in
paragraph (f) of this section will be re-
quired to submit a request for approv-
al of a modified program (hereafter
State Pretreatment Program approv-
al) by March 27. 1979 unless an
NPDES State must amend or enact a
law to make required modifications, in
which case the NPDES State shall re-
quest State Pretreatment Program ap-
proval by March 27.1980.
(c) Failure to request approval The
EPA shall exercise the authorities
available to It to apply and enforce
Pretreatment Standards and Require-
ments until the necessary Implement-
ing action is taken by the State. Fail-
ure of a State to seek approval of a
State Pretreatment Program as pro-
vided for in paragraph (b) and failure
of an approved State to administer its
State Pretreatment Program in ac-
cordance with the requirements of
this section constitutes grounds for
withdrawal of NPDES program ap-
proval under section 402(c)(3) of the
Act.
Title 40 Protection of Environment
(d) Modification clause in POTW
permits prior to submission deadline.
(1) Before the submission deadline for
State Pretreatment Program approval
set forth in paragraph (b) of this sec-
tion. any Permit issued to a POTW
which meets the requirements of
§ 403.8(a) by an NPDES State without
an approved State pretreatment pro-
gram shall Include a modification
clause. This clause will require that
such Permits be promptly modified or.
alternatively, revoked and reissued
after the submission deadline for
State Pretreatment Program approval
set forth in (b) of this section to incor-
porate into the POTWs Permit an ap-
proved POTW Pretreatment Program
or a compliance schedule for the de-
velopment of a POTW Pretreatment
Program according to the require-
ments of Si 403.8 (b) and (d) and
403.12(h). The following language is
an acceptable clause for the purposes
of this paragraph:
This permit shall be modified, or altema-
lively, revoked and reissued, by September
27.1979 (or September 37.1980. as appropri-
ate) to incorporate an approved POTW Pre-
treatment Program or a compliance sched-
ale for the development of a POTW Pre-
treatment Program ai required under sec-
tion 402(bX8) of the Clean Water Act and
implementing regulations or by the require-
ment! of the approved State Pretreatment
Program, at appropriate.
(2) All Permits subject to the re-
quirements of paragraph (dXl) of this
section which do not contain the modi-
fication clause referred to in that
paragraph will be subject to objection
by EPA under section 402(d) of the
Act as being outside the guidelines and
requirements of the Act.
(3) Permits issued by an NPDES
State after the Submission deadline
for State Pretreatment Program ap-
proval (set forth in paragraph (b) of
this section) shall contain conditions
of an approved Pretreatment Program
or a compliance schedule for develop-
ing such a program in accordance with
§§ 403.8 (b) and (d) and 403.12(h).
(e) State Program in lieu of POTW
Program. Notwithstanding the provi-
sion of S 403.8(a), a State with an ap-
proved Pretreatment Program may
assume responsibility for implement-
ing the POTW Pretreatment Program
30
-------
Chap*" I—Environmental Protection Agency
reauirements set forth in 5 403.8(f) in
lieu of requiring the POTW to develop
« pretreatment Program. However.
this does not preclude POTWs from
independently developing Pretreat-
ment Programs.
-------
§ 403.10
(B) The contents of sludge from the
POTW and methods of sludge disposal
and use to identify, independent of in-
formation supplied by the POTW.
compliance or noncompliance with re-
quirements applicable to the selected
method of sludge management:
(v) Investigate evidence of violations
of pretreatment conditions set forth in
the POTW Permit by taking samples
and acquiring other information as
needed. This data acquisition shall be
performed with sufficient care as to
produce evidence admissible in an en-
forcement proceeding or in court;
(vi) Review and approve requests for
approval of POTW Pretreatment Pro-
grams and authority to modify cate-
gorical Pretreatment Standards sub-
mitted by a POTW to the Director:
and
(vil) Consider requests for Funda-
mentally Different Factors variances
submitted by Industrial Users in ac-
cordance with the criteria and proce-
dures set forth in S 403.13.
(3) Funding. The Director shall
assure that funding and qualified per-
sonnel are available to carry out the
authorities and procedures described
in paragraphs (f)(l) and (2) of this sec-
tion.
(g) Content of State Pretreatment
Program submission. The request for
State Pretreatment Program approval
will consist of:
(IXi) A statement from the State At-
torney General (or the Attorney for
those State agencies which have inde-
pendent legal counsel) that the laws of
the State provide adequate authority
to implement the requirements of this
part. The authorities cited by the At-
torney General in this statement shall
be in the form of lawfully adopted
State statutes or regulations which
shall be effective by the time of ap-
proval of the State Pretreatment Pro-
gram; and
(U) Copies of all State statutes and
regulations cited in the above state-
ment;
(iii) Notwithstanding paragraphs
(gXIXi) and (U) of this section, if the
State has the statutory authority to
implement the requirements of this
pan. and if the State at the time of
submission of this request has an ap-
proved NPDES Program, then regula-
TltU 40—Protection of Environment
tions setting forth the requirements of
this section need not be promulgated
by the State if the Administrator finds
that the State has submitted a com-
plete description of procedures to ad-
minister its program in conformance
with the requirements of this section.
States without an approved NPDES
program will be required to comply
with the requirements of paragraphs
(gXIXi) and (ii) of this section.
(2) A description of the funding
levels and full- and part-time person-
nel available to Implement the pro-
gram; and
(3) Any'modifications or additions to
the Memorandum of Agreement (re-
quired by 40 CFR 123.6) which may be
necessary for EPA and the State to
implement the requirements of this
part.
(h) EPA Action. Any approved
NPDES State requesting State Pre-
treatment Program approval shall
submit to the Regional Administrator
three copies of the Submission de-
scribed in paragraph (g) of this sec-
tion. Upon a preliminary determina-
tion that the Submission meets the re-
quirements of paragraph (g) the Re-
gional Administrator shall:
(1) Notify the Director that the Sub-
mission has been received and is under
review; and
(2) Commence the program revision
process set out in 40 CFR 123.13. For
purposes of that section all request*
for approval of State Pretreatment
Programs shall be deemed substantial
program modifications. A comment
period of at least 30 days and the op-
portunity for a hearing shall be af-
forded the public on all such proposed
program revisions.
(1) Notification where submission it
defective. If. after review of the Sub-
mission as provided for in paragraph
(h) of this section. EPA determines
that the Submission does not comply
with the requirements of paragraphs
(f) or (g) of this section EPA shall so
notify the applying NPDES State in
writing. This notification shall identi-
fy any defects in the Submission and
advise the NPDES State of the means
by which it can comply with the re-
quirements of this part,
32
-------
I — Environmental Protection Agency
§403.11
§403.11 Approvml Procedure* for POTW
Pretreatment Program* and POTW Re-
*iiion of Categorical Pretreatment
Standard*.
The following procedures shall be
adopted in approving or denying re*
quests for approval of POTW Pre-
treatment Programs and revising Cate-
gorical Pretreatment Standards. In-
cluding requests for authorization to
grant conditional revised discharge
limitations and provisional limitations:
(a) Deadline for review of submis-
sion. The Approval Authority shall
have 90 days from the date of public
notice of any Submission complying
with the requirements of J403.9(b)
and. where removal allowance approv-
al is sought, with §S403.7(d) and
403.9(d). to review the Submission.
The Approval Authority shall review
the Submission to determine compli-
ance with the requirements of
i 403.8(b) and (f ). and. where removal
allowance approval is sought, with
1 403.7(a) through (e) and (g). The Ap-
proval Authority may have up to an
additional 90 days to complete the
evaluation of the Submission if the
public comment period provided for in
paragraph (bXIXll) of this section is
extended beyond 30 days or if a public
hearing is held as provided for In para-
graph (b)(2) of this section. In no
event, however, shall the time for eval-
uation of the Submission exceed a
total of 180 days from the date of
public notice of a Submission meeting
the requirements of } 403.9(b) and. in
the case of removal allowance applica-
tion. H 403.7(d) and 403.9(d).
(b) Public notice and opportunity
for hearing. Upon receipt of a Submis-
sion the Approval Authority shall
commence its review. Within S days
after making a determination that a
Submission meets the requirements of
5403.9. or at such later time
under 1 403.7(c) that the Approval Au-
thority elects to review the removal al-
lowance Submission, the Approval Au-
thority shall:
(1) Issue a public notice of request
fo.r.fPPfoval of the Submission;
i tUP* Dubllc notlce shau ^ drcu-
n»- ^ 5 mann«r designed to Inform
interested and potentially interested
persons of the Submission. Procedures
for the circulation of public notice
shall Include:
(A) Mailing notices of the request
for approval of the Submission to des-
ignated 208 planning agencies. Federal
and State fish, shellfish, and wildlife
resource agencies; and to any other
person or group who has requested in-
dividual notice, including those on ap-
propriate mailing lists; and
(B) Publication of a notice of request
for approval of the Submission in the
largest daily newspaper within the
jurisdiction(s) served by the POTW.
(il) The public notice shall provide a
period of not less than 30 days follow-
ing, the date of the public notice
during which time interested persons
may submit their written views on the
Submission.
(ill) All written comments submitted
during the 30 day comment period
shall be retained by the Approval Au-
thority and considered in the decision
on whether or not to approve the Sub-
mission. The period for comment may
be extended at the discretion of the
Approval Authority; and
(2) Provide an opportunity for the
applicant, any affected State, any in-
terested State or Federal agency.
person or group of persons to request
a public hearing with respect to the
Submission.
(1) This request for public hearing
shall be filed within the 30 day (or ex-
tended) comment period described in
paragraph (bXD(ii) of this section and
shall indicate the interest of the
person filing such request and the rea-
sons why a hearing is warranted.
(il) The Approval Authority shall
hold a hearing if the POTW so re-
quests. In addition, a hearing will be
held if there is a significant public in-
terest in issues relating to whether or
not the Submission should be ap-
proved. Instances of doubt should be
resolved in favor of holding the hear-
ing.
(ill) Public notice of a hearing to
consider a Submission and sufficient
to inform interested parties of the
nature of the hearing and the right to
participate shall be published in the
same newspaper as the notice of the
original request for approval of the
Submission under paragraph
33
-------
§403.12
(bXIKiXB) of this section. In addition.
notice of the hearing shall be sent to
those persons requesting individual
notice.
(3) Whenever the approval authority
elects to defer review of a submission
which authorizes the POTW to grant
conditional revised discharge limits
under §403.7(b)(2) and (c). the Ap-
proval Authority shall publish public
notice of its election in accordance
with paragraph (b)(l) of this section.
(c) Approval authority decision. At
the end of the 30 day (or extended)
comment period and within the 90 day
(or extended) period provided for in
paragraph (a) of this section, the Ap-
proval Authority shall approve or
deny the Submission based upon the
evaluation in paragraph (a) of this sec-
tion and taking into consideration
comments submitted during the com-
ment period and the record of the
public hearing, if held. Where the Ap-
proval Authority makes a determina-
tion to deny the request, the Approval
Authority shall so notify the POTW
and each person who has requested in-
dividual notice. This notification shall
include suggested modifications and
the Approval Authority may allow the
requestor additional time to bring the
Submission into compliance with ap-
plicable requirements.
(d) EPA objection to Director's deci-
sion. No POTW pretreatment program
or authorization to grant removal al-
lowances shall be approved by the Di-
rector if following the 30 day (or ex-
tended) evaluation period provided for
in paragraph (bXIXil) of this section
and any hearing held pursuant to
paragraph (bX2) of this section the
Regional Administrator sets forth in
writing objections to the approval of
such Submission and the reasons for
such objections. A copy of the Region-
al Administrator's objections shall be
provided to the applicant, and each
person who has requested individual
notice. The Regional Administrator
shall provide an opportunity for writ-
ten comments and may convene a
public hearing on his or her objec-
tions. Unless retracted, the Regional
Administrator's objections shall con-
stitute a final ruling to deny approval
of a POTW pretreatment program or
authorization to grant removal allow-
TiHe 40—Protection of Environment
ances 90 days after the date the objec-
tions are issued.
(e) Notice of decision. The Approval
Authority shall notify those persons
who submitted comments and partici-
pated in the public hearing, if held, of
the approval or disapproval of the
Submission. In addition, the Approval
Authority shall cause to be published
a notice of approval or disapproval in
the same newspapers as the original
notice of request for approval of the
Submission was published. The Ap-
proval Authority shall identify in any
notice of POTW Pretreatment Pro-
gram approval any authorization to
modify categorical Pretreatment
Standards which the POTW may
make, in accordance with 8 403.7. for
removal of pollutants subject to Pre-
treatment Standards.
(f) Public access to submission. The
Approval Authority shall ensure that
the Submission and any comments
upon such Submission are available to
the public for inspection and copying.
0 403.12 Reporting requirements for
POTWt and industrial men.
(a) Definition. The term "Control
Authority" as it is used in this section
refers to: (1) The POTW if the
POTWs Submission for its pretreat-
ment program (§ 403.3(t)(D) has been
approved in accordance with the re-
quirements of ; 403.11; or (2) the Ap-
proval Authority if the Submission
has not been approved.
(b) Reporting requirement for indus-
trial users upon effective date of cate-
gorical pretreatment standard—base-
line report. Within 180 days after the
effective date of a categorical Pre-
treatment Standard, or 180 days after
the final administrative decision made
upon a category determination sub-
mission under i 403.6(a)(4). whichever
is later, existing Industrial Users sub-
ject to such categorical Pretreatment
Standards and currently discharginc
to or scheduled to discharge to a
POTW shall be required to submit to
the Control Authority a report which
contains the information listed in
paragraphs (b)(l) through (7) of this
section. Where reports containing this
information already have been submit-
ted to the Director or Regional Ad-
34
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
minjstrator in compliance with the re-
quirements of 40 CFR 128.140(b). the
Industrial user will not be required to
submit this information again. New
sources shall be required to submit to
the Control Authority a report which
contains the information listed in
paragraphs (b)(l> through (5) of this
section:
(1) Identifying information. The
User shall submit the name and ad-
dress of the facility including the
name of the operator and owners:
(2) Permits. The User shall submit a
list of any environmental control per-
mits held by or for the facility:
(3) Description of operations. The
User shall submit a brief description
of the nature, average rate of produc-
tion, and Standard Industrial Classifi-
cation of the operation(s) carried out
by such Industrial User. This descrip-
tion should Include a schematic proc-
ess diagram which indicates points of
Discharge to the POTW from the reg-
ulated processes.
(4) Flow measurement. The User
shall submit information showing the
measured average daily and maximum
daily flow, in gallons per day. to the
POTW from each of the following:
(i) regulated process streams; and
(11) other streams as necessary to
allow use of the combined wastes-
tream formula of § 403.6(e). (See para-
graph (bXSXv) of this section.)
The Control Authority may allow for
verifiable estimates of these flows
where justified by coat or feasibility
considerations.
(5) Measurement of pollutant*. (1)
The user shall identify the Pretreat-
ment Standards applicable to each
regulated process:
(il) In addition, the User shall
submit the results of sampling and
analysis identifying the nature and
concentration (or mass, where re-
quired by the Standard or Control Au-
thority) of regulated pollutants in the
Discharge from each regulated proc-
ess. Both daily maximum and average
concentration (or mass, where re-
?if n J shau be reported. The sample
snau be representative of daily oper-
ations;
J/iV ^ere fe"lble. samples must be
obtained through the flow-proportion-
« composite sampling techniques
§403.12
specified in the applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standard. Where com-
posite sampling is not feasible, a grab
sample is acceptable;
(iv) Where the flow of the stream
being sampled is less than or equal to
950.000 liters/day (approximately
250.000 gpd), the User must take three
samples within a two-week period.
Where the flow of the stream being
sampled is greater than 950.000 liters/
day (approximately 250.000 gpd). the
User must take six samples within a
two-week period;
(v) Samples should be taken immedi-
ately downstream from pretreatment
facilities if such exist or immediately
downstream from the regulated proc-
ess if no pretreatment exists. If other
wastewaters are mixed with the regu-
lated wastewater prior to pretreat-
ment the User should measure the
flows and concentrations necessary to
allow use of the combined wastes-
tream formula of J 403.6(e) in order to
evaluate compliance with the Pre-
treatment Standards. Where an alter-
nate concentration or mass limit has
been calculated in accordance with
5403.6(e) this adjusted limit along
with supporting data shall be submit-
ted to the Control Authority;
(vi) Sampling and analysis shall be
performed in accordance with the
techniques prescribed in 40 CFR Part
136 and amendments thereto. Where
40 CFR Part 136 does not contain sam-
pling or analytical techniques for the
pollutant in question, or where the
Administrator determines that the
Part 136 sampling and analytical tech-
niques are inappropriate for the pol-
lutant in question, sampling and anal-
ysis shall be performed by using vali-
dated analytical methods or any other
applicable sampling and analytical
procedures. Including procedures sug-
gested by the POTW or other parties.
approved by the Administrator
(vil) The Control Authority may
allow the submission of a baseline
report which utilizes only historical
data so long as the data provides infor-
mation sufficient to determine the
need for industrial pretreatment meas-
ures;
(viii) The baseline report shall indi-
cate the time, date and place, of sam-
pling, and methods of analysis, and
35
-------
§403.12
shall certify that such sampling and
analysis is representative of normal
work cycles and expected pollutant
Discharges to the POTW;
(6) Certification. A statement, re-
viewed by an authorized representa-
tive of the Industrial User (as defined
in paragraph
-------
Chap**' I—Environmental Protection Agency
Requirements. This statement shall be
signed by an authorized representative
of the Industrial User, as defined in
Daragraph (k) of this section, and cer-
tified to by a qualified professional.
-------
§403.12
nine months elapse between such
progress reports to the Approval Au-
thority.
(!) Initial POTW report on compli-
ance with approved removal allow-
ance. A POTW which has received au-
thorization to modify categorical Pre-
treatment Standards for pollutants re-
moved by the POTW in accordance
with the requirements of } 403.7 must
submit to the Approval Authority
within 60 days after the effective date
of a Pretreatment Standard for which
authorization to modify has been ap-
proved, a report which contains the in-
formation required by J403.7(dX2).
(d)(5) and (dX6). A nM«<»nm« of one
sample per month during the report-
ing period is required.
(j) Periodic reports by POTW to
demonstrate continued compliance
with removal allowance. The reports
referred to in paragraph (i) of this sec-
tion will be submitted to the Approval
Authority at 6-month intervals begin-
ning with the submission of the initial
report referred to in paragraph (i) of
this section unless required more fre-
quently by the Approval Authority.
(k) Signatory requirements for in-
dustrial user reports. The reports re-
quired by paragraphs (b). (d). and (e).
of this section must be signed by an
authorized representative of the In-
dustrial User. An authorized repre-
sentative may be:
(DA principal executive officer of at
least the level of vice president, if the
Industrial User submitting the reports
required by paragraphs (b). (d) and (e)
of this section is a corporation.
(2) A general partner or proprietor if
the Industrial User submitting the
report required by paragraphs (b). (d)
and (e) of this section is a partnership
or sole proprietorship respectively.
(3) A duly authorized representative
of the individual designated in para-
graph (k)(l) or (2) of this section if
such representative Is responsible for
the overall operation of the facility
from which the Indirect Discharge
originates.
(1) Siynatory requirements for
POTW reports. Reports submitted to
the Approval Authority by the POTW
in accordance with paragraphs (h). (I)
and (j) of this section must be signed
by a principal executive officer, rank-
TW« 40—Protection of Environment
ing elected official or other duly au-
thorized employee if such employee is
responsible for overall operation of
the POTW.
(m) Provisions governing fraud and
false statements. The reports required
by paragraphs (b). (d). (e). (h). (1) and
(J) of this section shall be subject to
the provisions of 18 U.S.C. section
1001 relating to fraud and false state-
ments and the provisions of section
309(0(2) of the Act governing false
statements, representations or certifi-
cations in reports required under the
Act
(n) Aecord-fceepino requirements. (1)
Any Industrial User and POTW sub-
ject to the reporting requirements es-
tablished in this section shall maintain
records of all information resulting
from any monitoring activities re-
quired by this section. Such records
shall Include for all samples:
(1) The date, exact place, method.
and time of sampling and the names
of the person or persons taking the
samples;
(ii) The dates analyses were per-
formed;
(ill) Who performed the analyses;
(iv) The analytical techniques/meth-
ods use; and
(v) The results of such analyses.
(2) Any Industrial User or POTW
subject to the reporting requirements
established in this section shall be re-
quired to retain for a minimum of 3
years any records of monitoring activi-
ties and results (whether or not such
monitoring activities are required by
this section) and shall make such
records available for Inspection and
copying by the Director and the Re-
gional Administrator (and POTW In
the case of an Industrial User). This
period of retention shall be extended
during the course of any unresolved
litigation regarding the Industrial
User or POTW or when requested by
the Director or the Regional Adminis-
trator.
(3) Any POTW to which reports are
submitted by an Industrial User pursu-
ant to paragraphs (b), (d). and (e) of
this section shall retain such reports
for a minimum of 3 years and shall
make such reports available for inspec-
tion and copying by the Director and
the Regional Administrator. This
38
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
neriod of retention shall be extended
during the course of any unresolved
litigation regarding the discharge of
oollutants by the Industrial User or
the operation of the POTW Pretreat-
ment Program or when requested by
the Director or the Regional Adminis-
trator.
§403.13
0403.13 Variance* from categorical pre-
tremUncnt standards for fundamentally
different factors.
(a) Definition. The term "Request-
er" means an Industrial User or a
POTW or other interested person
seeking a variance from the limits
specified in a categorical Pretreatment
Standard.
(b) Purpose and scope. (1) In estab-
lishing categorical Pretreatment
Standards for existing sources, the
EPA will take into account all the in-
formation it can collect, develop and
solicit regarding the factors relevant
to pretreatment standards under sec-
tion 307(b). In some cases, information
which may affect these Pretreatment
Standards will not be available or. for
other reasons, will not be considered
during their development. As a result.
It may be necessary on a case-by-case
basis to adjust the limits in categorical
Pretreatment Standards, making them
either more or less stringent, as they
apply to a certain Industrial User
within an industrial category or sub-
category. This will only be done if data
specific to that Industrial User Indi-
cates it presents factors fundamental-
ly different from those considered by
EPA in developing the limit at issue.
Any interested person believing that
(actors relating to an Industrial User
are fundamentally different from the
factors considered during development
of a categorical Pretreatment Stand-
ard applicable to that User and fur-
ther, that the existence of those fac-
tors justifies a different discharge
limit than specified in the applicable
categorical Pretreatment Standard.
may request a fundamentally different
factors variance under this section or
such a variance request may be initiat-
ed by the EPA.
<2) A fundamentally different fac-
tors variance is not available for any
toxic pollutant controlled in a categor-
ical Pretreatment Standard.
(c) Criteria—(1) General criteria. A
request for a variance based upon fun-
damentally different factors shall be
approved only if:
(i) There is an applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standard which specifi-
cally controls the pollutant for which
alternative limits have been requested;
and
(11) Factors relating to the discharge
controlled by the categorical Pretreat-
ment Standard are fundamentally dif-
ferent from the factors considered by
EPA in establishing the Standards;
and
(111) The request for a variance is
made in accordance with the procedur-
al requirements in paragraphs (g) and
(h) of this section.
(2) Criteria applicable to less strin-
gent limits. A variance request for the
establishment of limits less stringent
than required by the Standard shall
be approved only if:
(i) The alternative limit requested is
no less stringent than justified by the
fundamental difference;
(11) The alternative limit will not
result in a violation of prohibitive dis-
charge standards prescribed by or es-
tablished under 8 403.5;
(ill) The alternative limit will not
result in a non-water quality environ-
mental impact (including energy re-
quirements) fundamentally more ad-
verse than the impact considered
during development of the Pretreat-
ment Standards; and
(iv) Compliance with the Standards
(either by using the technologies upon
which the Standards are based or by
using other control alternatives)
would result in either
(A) A removal cost (adjusted for in-
flation) wholly out of proportion to
the removal cost considered during de-
velopment of the Standards; or
(B) A non-water quality environmen-
tal Impact (Including energy require-
ments) fundamentally more adverse
than the impact considered during de-
velopment of the Standards.
(3) Criteria applicable to more strin-
gent limits. A variance request for the
establishment of limits more stringent
than required by the Standards shall
be approved only if:
39
0-x.i 4
-------
§403.13
(i) The alternative limit request is no
more stringent than justified by the
fundamental difference; and
(ii) Compliance with the alternative
limit would not result in either
(A) A removal cost (adjusted for in-
flation) wholly out of proportion to
the removal cost considered during de-
velopment of the Standards: or
(B) A non-water quality environmen-
tal impact (including energy require-
ments) fundamentally more adverse
than the impact considered during de-
velopment of the Standards.
(d) factors considered fundamental-
ly different Factors which may be con-
sidered fundamentally different are:
(1) The nature or quality of pollut-
ants contained in the raw waste load
of the User's process wastewater
(2) The volume of the User's process
wastewater and effluent discharged:
(3) Non-water quality environmental
Impact of control and treatment of the
User's raw waste load;
(4) Energy requirements of the ap-
plication of control and treatment
technology;
(5) Age. size, land availability, and
configuration as they relate to the
User's equipment or facilities; process-
es employed; process changes; and en-
gineering aspects-of the application of
control technology;
(6) Cost of compliance with required
control technology.
(e) Factors which will not be consid-
ered fundamentally different. A vari-
ance request or portion of such a re-
quest under this section may not be
granted on any of the following
grounds:
(1) The feasibility of installing the
required waste treatment equipment
within the time the Act allows;
(2) The assertion that the Standards
cannot be achieved with the appropri-
ate waste treatment facilities Installed.
If such assertion is not based on fac-
tors listed In paragraph (d) of this sec-
tion:
(3) The User's ability to pay for the
required waste treatment: or
(4) The impact of a Discharge on the
quality of the POTWs receiving
waters.
(f) State or local law. Nothing in this
section shall be construed to impair
the right of any state or locality under
Title 40—Protection of Environment
section 510 of the Act to impose more
stringent limitations than required by
Federal law.
(g) Application deadline. (1) Re-
quests for a variance and supporting
information must be submitted in
writing to the Director or to the En-
forcement Division Director, as appro-
priate.
(2) In order to be considered, request
for variances must be submitted
within 180 days after the effective
date of the categorical Pretreatment
Standard unless the User has request-
ed a categorical determination pursu-
ant to § 403.6(a).
(3) Where the User has requested a
catergorical determination pursuant to
, { 403.6(a>, the User may elect to await
the results of the category determina-
tion before submitting a variance re-
quest under this section. Where the
User so elects, he or she must submit
the variance request within 30 days
after a final decision has been made
on the categorical determination pur-
suant to J 403.6(a)(4).
(h) Contents of submission. Written
Submissions for variance request,
whether made to the'Enforcement Di-
vision Director or to the Director must
include:
(1) The name and address of the
person making the request:
(2) Identification of the interest of
the Requester which is affected by the
categorical Pretreatment Standard for
which the variance is requested:
(3) Identification of the POTW cur-
rently receiving the waste from the In-
dustrial User for which alternative dis-
charge limits are requested:
(4) Identification of the categorical
Pretreatment Standards which are ap-
plicable to the Industrial User.
(5) A list of each pollutant or pollut-
ant parameter for which an alterna-
tive discharge limit Is sought:
(6) The alternative discharge limits
proposed by the Requester for each
pollutant or pollutant parameter iden-
tified in paragraph (h)(5) of this sec-
tion:
(7) A description of the Industrial
User's existing water pollution control
facilities:
(8) A schematic flow representation
of the Industrial User's water system
including water supply, procesi
40
-------
Chapter I—Environmental Protection Agency
wastewater systems, and points of Dis-
charge; and
(9) A Statement of facts clearly es-
tablishing why the variance request
should be approved, including detailed
support data, documentation, and evi-
dence necessary to fully evaluate the
merits of the request, e.g.. technical
and economic data collected by the
EPA and used in developing each pol-
lutant discharge limit in the Pretreat-
ment Standard.
-------
§403.14
rector's recommended alternative dis-
charge limits were derived;
(C) The supporting evidence submit-
ted to the Enforcement Division Direc-
tor and
(D) Other information considered by
the Enforcement Division Director in
developing the recommended alterna-
tive discharge limits;
(ill) Notify the Director and the
POTW of his or her determination:
and
(iv) Send the information described
in paragraphs (1X2) (i) and (ii) of this
section to the Requestor (and to the
Industrial User where they are not the
same).
(m) Request for hearing. (1) Within
30 days following the date of receipt of
notice of the Enforcement Division Di-
rector's decision on a variance request.
the Requester or any other interested
person may submit a petition to the
Regional Administrator for a hearing
to reconsider or contest the decision.
If such a request is submitted by a
person other than the Industrial User
the person shall simultaneously serve
a copy of the request on the Industrial
User.
(2) If the Regional Administrator de-
clines to hold a hearing and the Re-
gional Administrator affirms the En-
forcement Division Director's findings,
the Requester may submit a petition
for a hearing to the Administrator
within 30 days of the Regional Admin-
istrator's decision.
[46 PR 0439. Jan. 28.1981. M amended at 49
PR 5132. Feb. 10.1984]
9403,14 Confidentiality.
(a) EPA authorities. In accordance
with 40 CFR Part 2. any information
submitted to EPA pursuant to these
regulations may be claimed as confi-
dential by the submitter. Any such
claim must be asserted at the time of
submission in the manner prescribed
on the application form or Instruc-
tions, or. in the case of other submis-
sions, by stamping the words "confi-
dential business information" on each
page containing such information. If
no claim is made at the time of sub-
mission. EPA may make the informa-
tion available to the public without
further notice. If a claim is asserted.
the information will be treated in ac-
40— Protection of Environment
cordance with the procedures in 40
CFR Part 2 (Public Information).
(b) Effluent data. Information and
data provided to the Control Author-
ity pursuant to this part which is ef-
fluent data shall be available to the
public without restriction.
-------
Chapt*r I—Environmental Protection Agency
shall be given only to the extent that
oollutants in the intake water which
are limited by the Standard are not re-
moved by the treatment technology
employed by the User.
(c) Notice. The User shall notify the
Regional Enforcement Officer if there
are any significant changes in the
Quantity of the pollutants in the
Intake water or in the level of treat-
ment provided.
(d) EPA decision. The Enforcement
Division Director shall require the
User to conduct additional monitoring
(1 e.. for flow and concentration of pol-
lutants) as necessary to determine con-
tinued eligibility for and compliance
with any adjustments. The Enforce-
ment Division Director shall consider
all timely applications for credits for
Intake pollutants plus any additional
evidence that may have been submit-
ted in response to the EPA's request.
The Enforcement Division Director
shall then make a written determina-
tion of the applicable credit(s). If any.
state the reasons for its •determina-
tion, state what additional monitoring
is necessary, and send a copy of said
determination to the'applicant and
the applicant's POTW. The decision of
the Enforcement Division Director
shall be final
9 403.16 Up*et provision.
(a) Definition. For the purposes of
this section. "Upset" means an excep-
tional incident in which there is unin-
tentional and temporary noncompli-
ance with categorical Pretreatment
Standards because of factors beyond
the reasonable control of the Industri-
al User. An Upset does not include
noncompliance to the extent caused
by operational error. Improperly de-
signed treatment facilities, inadequate
treatment facilities, lack of preventive
maintenance, or careless or improper
operation.
Cb) Effect of an upset An Upset shall
constitute an affirmative defense to an
action brought for noncompliance
with categorical Pretreatment Stand-
ards it the requirements of paragraph
are met.
Conditions necessary for a dem-
owntion of upset. An Industrial User
HV ^hes to establish the affirma-
nce defense of Upset shall demon-
§ 403.16
strate. through properly signed, con-
temporaneous operating logs, or other
relevant evidence that:
(1) An Upset occurred and the In-
dustrial User can Identify the specific
cause(s) of the Upset:
(2) The facility was at the time being
operated in a prudent and workman-
like manner and in compliance with
applicable operation and maintenance
procedures;
(3) The Industrial User has submit-
ted the following information to the
POTW and Control Authority within
24 hours of becoming aware of the
Upset (if this information is provided
orally, a written submission must be
provided within five days):
(I) A description of the Indirect Dis-
charge and cause of noncompliance;
(11) The period of noncompliance. in-
cluding exact dates and times or. if not
corrected, the anticipated time the
noncompliance is expected to contin-
ue:
(ill) Steps being taken and/or
planned to reduce, eliminate and pre-
vent recurrence of the noncompliance.
(d) Burden of proof. In any enforce-
ment proceeding the Industrial User
seeking to establish the occurrence of
an Upset shall have the burden of
proof.
(e) Reviewabiltty of agency consider-
ation of claims of upset In the usual
exercise of prosecutorial discretion.
Agency enforcement personnel should
review any claims that non-compliance
was caused by an Upset. No determina-
tions made in the course of the review
constitute final Agency action subject
to judicial review. Industrial Users will
have the opportunity for a Judicial de-
termination on any claim of Upset
only in an enforcement action brought
for noncompliance with categorical
Pretreatment Standards.
(f) User responsibility in case of
upset The Industrial User shall con-
trol production or all Discharges to
the extent necessary to maintain com-
pliance with categorical Pretreatment
Standards upon reduction, loss, or fail-
ure of its treatment facility until the
facility is restored or an alternative
method of treatment is provided. This
requirement applies in the situation
where, among other things, the pri-
43
-------
Part 403, App. A
Title 40—Protection ef Environment
mary source of power of the treatment
facility is reduced, lost or fails.
APPENDIX A—U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
December 16.1979.
Program Outdance Memorandum—61
Subject: OrsnU for Treatment and Control
of Combined Sewer Overflow* and
Stonnwater Discharges.
From: John T. Rhett. Deputy Assistant Ad-
ministrator for Water Program Oper-
ations (WH-548).
To: Regional Administrators. Regions I-X.
This memorandum summarizes the Agen-
cy's policy on the use of construction grants
for treatment and control of combined
sewer overflows and stormwater discharges
during wet-weather conditions. The purpose
Is to assure that projects are funded only
when careful planning has demonstrated
they are cost-effective.
I. CoiannD Szwn Ovnnows
A. Background
The costs and benefits of control of vari-
ous portions of pollution due to combined
sewer overflows and by-passes vary greatly
with the characteristics of the sewer and
treatment system, the duration. Intensity.
frequency and areal extent of precipitation.
the type and extent of development In the
service area, and the characteristics, uses
and water quality standards of the receiving
waters. Decisions on grants for control of
combined sewer overflows, therefore, must
be made on a case-by-case basis after de-
tailed planning at the local level
Where detailed planning has been com-
pleted, treatment or control of pollution
from wet-weather overflows and bypasses
may be given priority for construction grant
funds only after provision has been made
for secondary treatment of dry-weather
flows in the area. The detailed planning re-
quirements and criteria for project approval
follow.
B. Planning Requirement*
Construction grants may be approved for
control of pollution from combined sewer
overflows only if planning for the project
was thoroughly analyzed for the 20 year
planning period:
1. Alternative control techniques which
might be utilized to attain various levels of
pollution control (related to alternative ben-
eficial uses. If appropriate), including at
least Initial consideration of all the alterna-
tives described In the section on combined
sewer and stormwater control In "Alterna-
tive Waste Management Techniques ana
Best Practicable Waste Treatment" (Section
C of Chapter III of the information pro.
posed for comment in March 1974).
2. The costs of achieving the various levels
of pollution control by each of the tech-
niques appearing to be the most feasible
and cost-effective after the preliminary
analysis.
3. The benefits to the receiving waters of a
range of levels of pollution control during
wet-weather conditions. This analysis wtu
normally be conducted as part of State
water quality management planning, 208
areawide management planning, or other
State, regional or local planning effort.
4. The costs and benefits of addition of ad-
vanced waste treatment processes to dry.
weather flows in the i
C. Criteria for Project Approval
' The final alternative selected shall meet
the following criteria:
1. The analysis required above has demon-
strated that the level of pollution control
provided will be necessary to protect a bene-
ficial use of the receiving water even after
technology based standards required by Sec-
tion 301 of P.L. 92-500 are achieved by in-
dustrial point sources and at least secondary
treatment Is achieved for dry-weather mu-
nicipal flows In the area.
2. Provision has already been made for
funding of secondary treatment of dry-
weather flows in the area.
3. The pollution control technique pro-
posed for combined sewer overflow is a more
cost-effective means of protecting the bene-
ficial use of the receiving waters than other
combined sewer pollution control tech-
niques and the addition of treatment higher
than secondary treatment for dry-weather
municipal flows in the area.
4. The marginal costs are not substantial
compared to marginal benefits.
Marginal costs and benefits for each alter-
native may be displayed graphically to
assist with determining a project's accept-
ability under this criterion. Dollar cosu
should be compared with quantified pollu-
tion reduction and water quality improve-
ments. A descriptive narrative should also
be Included analyzing monetary, social and
environmental costs compared to benefitt
particularly the significance of the benefi-
cial uses to be protected by the project.
n. STCRMWATW DISCKAXGCS
Approaches for reducing pollution from
separate stormwater discharges are now in
the early stages of development and evalua-
tion. We anticipate, however, that In many
cases the benefits obtained by construction
of treatment works for this purpose will be
small compared with the costs, and other
44
-------
I— Environmental Protection Agency
Part 403, App. B
of control and prevention will be
cost-effective. The policy of the
/uency is- therefore, that construction
zrants shall not be used for construction of
treatment works to control pollution from
separate discharges of stormwater except
under unusual conditions where the project
clearly has been demonstrated to meet ttie
alarming requirements and criteria de-
scribed above for combined sewer overflows.
III. MULTI-PURPOSK PROJECTS
Projects with multiple purposes, such as
flood control and recreation In addition to
pollution control, may be eligible for an
amount not to exceed the cost of the most
cost-effective single purpose pollution
abatement system. Normally the Separable
Costs-Remaining Benefits (SCRB) method
should be used to allocate costs between pol-
lution control and other purposes, although
In unusual cases another method may be ap-
propriate. For such cost allocation, the cost
of the least cost pollution abatement alter-
native may be used as a substitute measure
of the benefits for that purpose. The
method Is described in "Proposed Practices
for Economic Analysis of River Basin
Projects." OPO. Washington. D.C.. 1958.
and "Efficiency In Government through
Systems Analysis." by Roland N. McKean.
John Wiley If Sons. Inc.. 1958.
Enlargement of or otherwise adding to
combined sewer conveyance systems Is one
means of reducing or eliminating flooding
caused by wet-weather conditions. These ad-
ditions may be designed so as to produce
some benefits in terms of reduced discharge
of pollutants to surrounding waterways.
The pollution control benefits of such flood
control measures, however, are likely to be
small compared with the costs, and the
measures therefore would normally be Ineli-
gible for funding under the construction
grants program.
All multi-purpose projects where less than
100% of the costs are eligible for construc-
tion grants under this policy shall contain a
special grant condition precluding EPA
funding of non-pollution control elements.
This condition should, as a minimum, con-
tain a provision similar to the following:
"The grantee explicitly acknowledges and
agrees that costs are allowable only to the
extent they are incurred for the water pol-
lution control elements of this project."
Additional special conditions should be In-
cluded as appropriate to assure that the
grantee clearly understands which elements
of the project are eligible for construction
«ranu under Public Law 92-500.
APPENDIX B-65 Toxic POLLUTANTS
Acenaphthene
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin/Dieldrin
Antimony and compounds'
Arsenic and compounds
Asbestos
Benzene
Benzidine
Beryllium and compound;
Cadmium and compounds
Carbon tetrachlorlde
Chlordane (technical mixture and metabo-
lites)
Chlorinated benzenes (other than dichloro-
benzenes)
Chlorinated ethanes (including 1.2-dichlor-
oethane. 1.1,1-trichloroethane. and hexa-
chloroethane)
Chloralkyl ethers (chloromethyl. chlor-
oethyl. and mixed ethers)
Chlorinated naphthalene
Chlorinated phenols (other than those
listed elsewhere; Includes trichlorophenols
and chlorinated cresols)
Chloroform
2-chlorophenol
Chromium and compounds
Copper and compounds
Cyanides
DOT and metabolites
Dlchlorobenzenes (1.2-, 1,3-. and 1,4-dlchlor-
obenzenes)
Dlchlorobenzidlne
Dlchloroethylenes (1.1- and 1.2-dlchloroeth-
ylene)
2.4-dichlorophenol
Dichloropropane and dichloropropene
2.4-dimethylphenol
Dlnitro toluene
Oiphenylhydrazine
Endosulf an and metabolites
Endrin and metabolites
Ethylbenzene
Fluoroanthene
Haloethers (other than those listed else-
where: Includes chlorophenylphenyl
ethers. bromophenylphenyl ether.
bis(dlschloroisopropyl) ether. bls-< chlor-
oethoxy) methane and polychlorlnated dl-
phenyl ethers)
Halomethanes (other than those listed else-
where: Includes methylene chloromethyl-
chloride, methylbromide. bromoform.
dichlorobromomethane. trichlorofluoro-
methane, dlchlorodlfluoromethane)
Heptachlor and metabolites
Hexachlorobutadlene
Hexachlorocyclonexane (all isomers)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Isophorone
Lead and compounds
'As used throughout this appendix the
term "compounds" shall Include organic and
inorganic compounds.
45
-------
Part 403, App. C
Mercury and compounds
Naphthalene
Nickel uid compound!
Nitrobenzene
Nltrophenols (Including 2.4-dlnitrophenol.
dlnitrocresol)
Nltrosamlnes
Penuchlorophenol
Phenol
Phthalate esters
Polychlorinated blphenyU (PCBs)
Polynuclemr aromatic hydrocarbons (includ-
ing benzanthracenes,
benzopyrenes.benzofluroranthene. chry-
senes. dlbenzanthracenes. and indenopyr-
enes)
Selenium and compounds
Silver *nd compounds
2.3.7.8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dloxffi (TCDD)
Tetrachloroethylene
Thallium and compounds
Toluene
Toxaphene
Trlchloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
/.in" and compounds
APPENDIX C—34 INDUSTRIAL
CATEGORIES
Adhesives and Sealants
Aluminum Ev»">ii*g
Auto and Other Laundries
Battery
Coal Mining
Coil Coating
Copper Forming
Electrical and Electronic Component*
Electroplating
Explosives Manufacturing
Foundries
Oum and Wood Chemicals
Inorganic Chemicals ^^
Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Leather Tanning and Finishing
Mechanical Products Manufacturing
Nonferrou* Metals Manufacturing
Ore Mining
Organic Chemicals Manufacturing
Paint and Ink Formulation
Pesticides
Petroleum Refining
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Photographic Equipment and Supplies
Plastics Processing
Plastic and Synthetic Materials Manufac-
turing
Porcelain Enameling
Printing and Publishing
Pulp and Paper Mills
Rubber Processing
Soap and Detergent Manufacturing
Steam Electric Power Plants
Textile Mills
Timber Products Processing
Titl* 40 "Protection of Environment
APPENDIX O—SELECTED INDUSTRIAL
S0BCATEGORICS EXEMPTED FROM
REGULATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH a
OP THE NRDC V. COSTLE CONSENT
DECREE
The following Industrial subcategories
have been excluded from further rulemak-
ing pursuant to paragraph 8 of the Natural
Resources Defense Council v. Cattle Consent
Decree for one or more of the following rea-
sons: (1) The pollutants of concern are not
detectable In the effluent from the Industri-
al User (paragraph ttaXili)); (2) the pollut-
ants of concern are present only in trace
amounts and are neither causing nor likely
to cause toxic effects (paraorpah ttaXiii));
(3) the pollutants of concern are present in
amounts too small to be effectively reduced
by technologies known to the Administrator
(paragraph KaXlil)): or (4) trie wastestream
contains only pollutants which are compati-
ble with the POTW (paragraph 8. In
some instances, different rationale were
given for exclusion under paragraph 8. How-
ever. EPA has reviewed these subcategories
and has determined that exclusion could
have occurred due to one of the four rea-
sons listed above.
This list includes all subcategories that
have been excluded for the above-listed rea-
sons as of (date of publication in the FKDKB-
At Rnuml. This list will be updated peri-
odically for the convenience of the reader.
Auto and Other Laundries Industry
Carpet Cleaners
Coin Operated Laundries
Diaper Services
Dry Cleaners
Power Laundries
Batten Manufacturing Industry
Carbon Zinc Air Cell Batteries
Lithium Batteries
Magnesium Carbon Batteries
Magnesium Cell Batteries
Miniature Alkaline Batteries
Nickel Zinc Batteries
Electrical and Electronic Components
Carbon and Graphite Products
Fixed Capacitors
Fluorescent Lamps
Incandescent Lamps
Magnetic Coatings
Mica Paper
Electroplating
Alkaline Cleaning
Bright Dipping
Chemical Machining
Galvanizing
46
-------
gl,apt*r I—Environmental Protection Agency
Part 403, App. 0
•nunersion Plating
Iridite Dipping
Pickling
Explosives Industry
Military Explosive Manufacturing
Foundries Industry
Nickel Casting
Tin Casting
Titanium Casting
Gum and Wood Chemicals
Char and Charcoal Briquets
Gum Resin, Turpentine and Essential Oils
Iron and Steel Industry
Basic Oxygen Furnace (Semlwet)
Beehive Coke Process
Electric Arc Furnace (Semiwet)
Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing
Industry
Aluminum Sulfate
Ammonium Chloride
Ammonium Hydroxide
Barium Carbonate
Borax
Boric Acid
Bromine
Calcium Carbide
Calcium Carbonate
Calcium Chloride
Calcium Hydroxide
Calcium Oxide
Carbon Dioxide
Carbon Monoxide
Chromic Acid
Cuprous Oxide
Ferric Chloride
Ferrous Sulfate
Fluorine
Hydrogen
Hydrochloric Acid
Hydrogen Peroxide
Iodine
Lead Monoxide
Lithium Carbonate
Manganese Sulfate
Nitric Acid
Oxygen and Nitrogen
Potassium Chloride
Potassium Dichromate
Potassium Iodide
Potassium Metal
Potassium Permanganate
Potassium Sulfate
Sodium Bicarbonate
Sodium Carbonate
Sodium Chloride
Sodium Fluoride
Sodium Hydrosulfide
Sodium Metal
Sodium Silicate
Sodium Sulflte
Sodium Thiosulfate
Stannic Oxide
Sulfur Dioxide
Sulf uric Acid
Zinc Oxide
Zinc Sulfate
Leather Industries
Gloves
Luggage
Shoes and Related Footwear
Personal Goods
Non Ferrous Metals Industry
Primary Arsenic
Primary Antimony
Secondary Babbitt
Primary Barium
Secondary Beryllium
Primary Bismuth
Primary Boron
Secondary Boron
Bauxite
Secondary Cadmium
Primary Calcium
Primary Cesium
Primary Chromium
Primary Cobalt
Secondary Cobalt
Secondary Columbium
Primary Gallium
Primary Germanium
Primary Gold
Secondary Precious Metals
Primary w»fni»m
Primary and Secondary Indium
Primary Lithium
Primary Manganese
Primary M^grmntiim
Secondary Mngn»«tin>i
Primary Mercury
Secondary Mercury
Primary Molybdenum
Secondary Molybdenum
Primary Nickel
Secondary Nickel
Secondary Plutonium
Primary Potassium
Primary Rare Earths
Primary Rhenium
Secondary Rhenium
Primary Rubidium
Primary Platinum Group
Primary Silicon
Primary Sodium
Secondary Tantalum
Primary Tin
Secondary Tin
Primary Titanium
Secondary Titanium
Secondary Tungsten
Primary Uranium
Secondary Uranium
Secondary Zinc
Primary Zirconium
47
-------
Paint and Ink Industry
Solvent Base Process
Solvent Wash Process
Paring and Roofing Industry
Asphalt Concrete
Asphalt Emulsion
Linoleum
Printed Asphalt Felt
Roofing
Pulp, Paper, Paperboard, and Converted
Paper Industry
Converted Paper Industry
Rubber Procetting Industry
Latex-Dipped, Latex-Extruded, and Latex
Molded Goods
Latex Foam
Small-sized Qeneral' Molded. Extruded
and Fabricated Rubber Plants
Medium-sized Qeneral Molded. Extruded
and Fabricated Rubber Plants
Large-sized General Molded. Extruded
and Fabricated Rubber Plants
Synthetic Crumb Rubber Production-
Emulsion Polymerization
Synthetic Crumb Rubber Production— So-
lution Polymerization
Synthetic Latex Rubber Production
Tire Ac Inner Tube Production
Textile Industry
Apparel ^^
Cordage and Twine
Low Water Use Processing (Grelge Mills)
Padding ""* Upholstery Filling
Timber Products Processing
Barking Process
Finishing Processes
Hardboard— Dry Process
Log Washing
Partlcleboard
Planing Mills
Sawmills
Veneer
Wet Storage
Wood Preserving (Inorganics) Process
48
-------
Attachment 2.2
Regulatory Updates and Court Decisions
-------
r
Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 133 / Tuesday. July 10. 1984 / Rules and Regulations 28059
the definition because of the 120 day
limit for promulgating final new source
standards. On February 10.1984. EPA
suspended the regulatory definition of
"new source" (49 FR 5131).
To further clarify the status of new
and existing sources under the NAMF
decision. EPA is today promulgating a
revised definition of "new source" that
if essentially a restatement of the
statutory definition. It is substantively
the same as the previous regulatory
definition except that consistent with
the Court's construction of the statutory
definition, it classifies any source
commencing construction after the
proposal of an applicable PSNS as a
new source.
EPA plans to conduct a rulemaking in
the future to provide criteria for
determining when modification of an
existing source would be considered
construction of a new source for
purposes of the General Pretreatment
Regulations. EPA is finalizing such
criteria in the NPDES permit regulations
as applied to direct dischargers (40 CFR
122.29). It is. however, a separate issue
from the issue resolved today and will
be addressed in a separate rulemaking.
Executive Order 12291
Under Executive Order 12291. EPA
must judge whether a regulation is
"major" and therefore subject to the
requirement of a Regulatory Impact
Analysis. This change does not satisfy
any of the criteria specified in { l(b) of
the Executive Order and. as such, does
not constitute a major rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980. 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.. EPA must submit a copy of any rule
that contains a collection of information
requirements to the Director of OMB for
review and approval. These changes
contain no additional information
collection requests and. therefore, the
Paperwork Reduction Act is not
applicable.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 4
U.S.C. 6Oi.e/ seq.. EPA is required to
prepare a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis to assess the impact of all
proposed rules on small entities.
Although this rule is not subject to this
requirement because it is not being
proposed. EPA has determined that the
rule will not have significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Final Agency Action and Effective Date
Today's action constitutes final
Agency action. EPA has determined that
this action does not necessitate notice
and comment under the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA). 5 U.S.C 551 et
seq.. because it is being taken to
respond to the Court's decision in
NAMF v. EPA. Delay in compliance
with the court's ruling would not be in
the public interest Therefore, good
cause exists for taking this final action
without providing for notice and
comment as prescribed by the APA. For
the same reason, the Agency has
determined that good cause exists for
the final action taken today to become
effective immediately.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 403
Confidental business information.
Reporting and recordkeeping .
requirements. Waste treatment and
disposal. Water pollution control.
Dated: July 3.1984.
Alvin L. Aim.
Deputy Administrator.
PART 403—GENERAL
PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS FOR
EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES
For the reason set out in the preamble.
40 CFR Part 403 is amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for Part 403
reads as follows:
Authority: Sec. 54(c)(2) of the Clean Water
Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-217). section
204(b)(l)(c). 208(b)(2)(C)(iii). 301(b)(l)(A)(ii).
301(b)(2)(C). 301(h)(5). 301(i)(2). 304(e). 304{g).
307. 308. 309. 402(b). 405 and 5OT(a) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Pub. L.
92-500). as amended by the Clean Water Act
of 1977).
2. On February 10.1984 (49 FR 5131).
paragraph (k) of 9 403.3 was suspended
until further notice. The suspension is
lifted and paragraph (k) is revised to
read as follows:
§ 403.3 Definitions.
(k) The term "New source" means
any building, structure, facility, or
installation from which there is or may
be a Discharge of pollutants, the
construction of which commenced after
the publication of proposed
Pretreatment Standards under section
307(c) of the Act which will be
applicable to such source if such
Standards are thereafter promulgated in
accordance with that section.
• • • • •
(FR Doc M-iaiiS Filed 7-O-M: ft43 «m|
•IUJNQ COOf •MO-iO M
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 658
[Docket No. 30519-89)
Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico;
Adjustment to Texas Closure
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS). NOAA. Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of adjustment to Texas
closure.
SUMMARY: NOAA opens the fishery
conservation zone off Texas /to trawl
fishing for shrimp at 30 minutes after
sunset on July 8.1984. earlier than that
scheduled by the Texas closure
provisions (May 16.1984. through July
14.1984). This action is prescribed by
existing regulations, and its intended
effect is to allow harvest of brown
shrimp at optimal commercial size.
EFFECTIVE DATE The opening is
effective at 30 minutes after sunset on
July 6.1984. Public notice has been
issued at least 24 hours prior to the
opening as required under 50 CFR
658.24.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edward E. Burgess. National Marine
Fisheries Service. Southeast Regional
Office. Fishery Operations Branch. 9450
Koger Boulevard. St. Petersburg. Florida
33702; telephone number 813-893-3723.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Fishery Management Plan for the
Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico
provides for adjustments to the closing
and opening dates for the seasonal
closure of the fishery conservation zone
off Texas. Implementing rules at 50 CFR
658.24 describe the Texas closure and
specify that these adjustments be made
by the Regional Director under criteria
set out in that section. NOAA adjusted
the Texas closure on May 16.1984 (49
FR 20710) based upon these specified
criteria.
Available information and estimates
indicate that an early opening is
warranted and desirable. Biological data
collected by the Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department on the size of
shrimp indicate that shrimp within the
closed area have reached an average
size which supports the early opening.
and a period of strong tidal activity
begins on July 6.
Other Matters
This action is taken under the
authority of 50 CFR 658.24. and is taken
in compliance with Executive Order
12291.
-------
%
Federal Register / Voi 49; No. 133 / Tuesday. July 10. 1984 / Rules and-Regulation
approved program at the earliest
possible date.
List of Subjects In 40 CFR Part 147
Incorporation by reference. Indians-
lands. Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Intergovernmental
regulations. Penalties. Confidential
business information. Water Supply.
OMB Review
The Office of Management and Budget
has exempted this rule from the
requirements of Section 3 of Executive
Order 12291.
Certification Under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the provisions of S U.S.C.
605(b). I certify that approval by EPA
under section 1422 of the Safe Drinking
Water Act of the application by the
South Carolina Department of Health
and Environmental Control will not
have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
since this rule only approves State
actions. It imposes no new requirements
on small entities.
Authority: SDWA Section 1422. U.S.C. 300.
Dated: July 3.1984.
Alvin L. Aba.
Assistant Administrator.
Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 147—STATE UNDERGROUND
INJECTION CONTROL PROGRAMS
Subpart PP—South Carolina
Amend 40 CFR Part 147 by revising
i 147.2050 to read as follows:
§ 147.2050 State-edmlnisterwi program—
Ctase I, II. Ill, IV.and V wella.
The U1C program for Class I. n. IE. IV,
and V wells in the State of South
Carolina is the program administered by
the South Carolina Department of
Health and Environmental Control.
approved by EPA pursuant to section
1422 of the SDWA. Notice of this
approval was published in the Federal
Register on July 10,1984; the effective
date of this program is July 24,1984. This
program consists of the following
elements, as submitted to EPA in the
State's program application.
(a) Incorporation by reference. The
requirements set forth in the State
statutes and regulations cited in this
paragraph are hereby incorporated by
reference and made a part of the
applicable UTC program under the
SDWA for the State of South Carolina.
This incorporation by reference was
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register.effective July 24,1984.
(1) Pollution Control Act S.C. Code
Ann, Sections 48-1-10,48-1-80.48-1-
100,48-1-110 (Law. Co-op. 1978 and
Supp. 1983).
(2) South Carolina Department of
Health and Environmental Control,
Ground-Water Protection Division,
Underground Injection Control
Regulations, R-61-87. Effective Date:
June 24.1983 Published in South
Carolina State Register. Volume 7. Issue
8: Amended Date: March 23.1984. as
amended by notice in South Carolina
State Register. Volume 8. Issue 3.
(b) Other Laws. The following statutes
and regulations although not
incorporated by reference, also are part
of the approved State-Administered
program:
(1) Pollution Control Act S.C. Code
Ann. Sections 48-1-10 to 48-1-350 (Law.
Co-op. 1978 and Supp. 1983).
(2) State Safe Drinking Water Act.
S.C. Code Ann. Sections 44-55-10 to 44-
55-100 (Law. Co-op. 1976 and Supp.
1983).
(3) Administrative Procedures Act
S.C. Code Ann. Sections 1-23-10 et seq.,
and 1-23-310 to 1-23-400 (Law. Co-op.
1978 and Supp. 1983).
(4) S.C. Code Ann. Sections 15-5-20.
15-5-200 (Law. Co-op. 1978 and Supp.
1983).
(c](l) The Memorandum of Agreement
between EPA Region IV and the South
Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control signed by the
EPA Regional Administrator on May 29,
1984.
(d) Statement of Legal Authority. (1)
"Underground Injection Control
Program, Attorney General's Statement
for Class L 0. HLIV and V A and VB
Wells." signed by the Attorney General
of South Carolina on April 27.1984.
(e) The Program Description and any
other materials submitted as part of the
original application or as supplements
thereto.
IF» Dec. M-lllSe Fited 7-O-H; *«* am)
MUMO COM (MO-tt-M
40 CFR Part 403
[FRL-2621-4]
General Pretreatment Regulations for
Existing and New Sources
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMAHV: On September 20.1983. the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit issued an order holding
that EPA's regulatory definition of "new
source." as applied to indirect
dischargers regulated under the Clean
Water Act (GWA). was invalid and
remanded the definition to EPA. On
February 10,1984. EPA suspended the
definition (49 FR 5131). Today. EPA is
promulgating a revised definition
consistent with the Court's decision. No
other substantive changes have been
made to the definition.
DATE The effective date of this action is
July 10,1984.
KM FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Craig lakubowics. Permits Division (EN-
338). U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401M Street SW., Washington.
D.C. 20460, (202) 428-4793.
SUFFtCMCMTARV INFORMATION: On June
26,1978, EPA promulgated the General
Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR Part
403) establishing mechanisms and
procedures for controlling the
introduction of wastes from industry
and other non-domestic sources into
publicly owned treatment works
(POTWs) (43 FR 27738). EPA amended
these regulations on January 28,1981 (46
FR 9404). Included in the regulation was
a definition of "new source" (40 CFR
403.300) to be used for determining
whether a source is subject to the
pretreatment standards for new sources
(PSNS) or pretreatment standards for
existing sources (PSES).
A "new source" is defined in section
306(a) of the Clean Water Act as "any
source, the construction of which is
commenced after the publication of
proposed regulations prescribing a [new
source performance standard] which
will be applicable to such source, if such
standard is thereafter promulgated in
accordance with this section." Section
307(c) of the Act directs EPA to define
the category of new sources for indirect
dischargers in an equivalent manner.
EPA interpreted this statutory
provision to mean that a source would
be a "new source" if its discharge is
commenced (1) after promulgation of a
pretreatment standard under section
307(c) of the Act applicable to such
source, or (2} after proposal of a
standard, but only if the standard was
promulgated within 120 days of its
proposal. This approach was based
upon EPA's reading of section
306(b)(l)(B). which contemplates that
EPA would promulgate standards for
new sources within 120 days of
proposal.
In National Association of Metal
Finishers v. EPA. 719 F.2d 624 (3rd Cir.
1983). the United States Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit held that
EPA's definition of "new source" was
contrary to the plain meaning of the
OVA and remanded the definition to
EPA. Essentially, the Court struck down
-------
1/5
Friday
August 3, 1984
Part IV .
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 403
General Pretreatment Regulations for
Existing and New Sources; Removal
Credits; Final Rule
-------
31212 Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENT AL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 403
IFRL 2557-7]
General Pretreatment Regulations (or
Existing and New Sources; Removal
Credits
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: On September 28,1982. the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
proposed extensive revisions to the
removal credits section of the General
Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR Part
403). EPA proposed these changes to
make the removal credits provision
simpler and more workable. After
considering all significant comments
submitted on the proposed changes. EPA
is today promulgating in final form the
revised removal credits section of the
pretreatmeht regulations.
DATES: This regulation shall become
effective September 17.1984. For
purposes of judicial review, this
regulation is issued at 1:00 PM eastern
time on August 19,1984.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Craig Jakubowics, Permits Division (EN-^
336), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401M St. SW, Washington.
D.C 20460. (202) 428-4793.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
L Background
On June 28,1978. EPA promulgated, in
40 CFR Part 403. the General
Pretreatment Regulations which
established mechanisms and procedures
for controlling the introduction of
wastes from industry and other non-
domestic sources into publicly owned
treatment works (POTWs) (43 FR 27736).
Following promulgation, several parties
brought actions in Federal court
challenging these regulations. Pursuant
to the terms of a settlement agreement
entered into by EPA and some of the
parties to the litigation, the Agency
promulgated amendments to the General
Pretreatment Regulations for Existing
and New Sources on January 28.1981 (46
FK 9404). These amendments were
originally scheduled to take effect on
March 13.1981. However, acting under
the President's memorandum of January
29.1981, EPA postponed the effective
date until March 30.1981 (46 FR 11972,
February 12,1981). On March 27,1981.
the Agency indefinitely suspended the
effective date of the amendments
pursuant to Executive Order 12291 (48
FR 19936. April 2.1981).
On October 13,1981, EPA terminated
the indefinite postponement of the
January 1981 amendments and
established January 31.1982. aa their
effective date (46 FR 50502). On the
same day, EPA invited comment on a
proposal that the effective date of the
amendments be further postponed (40
FR 50503). Most of the 1981 amendments
were allowed to go into effect on
January 31.1982. However, a few of the
amendments, including the removal
credits provision, were further
postponed (47 FR 4518. February 1,
1982). On July 8.1982. the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
held that EPA's original indefinite
suspension violated the Administrative
Procedure Act and directed EPA to put
all the pretreatment amendments,
including the removal credits.section.
into effect retroactive to March 30,1981
(Natural Resources Defense Council v.
EPA. 683 F. 2d 752 (3d Cir. 1902]).
An important part of the June 1978
General Pretreatment Regulations and
the January 1981 amendments was the
section governing removal credits
(section 403.7). That section was '
designed to implement a 1977
amendment to section 307(b)(l) of the
Clean Water Act (CWA). which allows
a POTW to provide industrial users with
. a "credit" (in the form of reduced
pretreatment requirements) for removal
of pollutants by the POTW. Industrial
users which qualify for such a credit are
allowed to discharge larger quantities of
regulated pollutants to the POTW than
would otherwise be allowed by the
applicable categorical pretreatment
standard. The removal credits section
established the conditions under which
POTWs would obtain authority to grant
removal credits and provided the means
by which these removal credits should
be determined.
Notwithstanding the streamlining
included in the 1981 amendments, the
removal credits provision was still
criticized by some as being so
burdensome and unworkable as to
discourage POTWs from applying for
removal credit authority. In fact this
removal credit rule was one of the
provisions of the General Pretreatment
Regulations challenged, albeit
unsuccessfully, in the pretreatment
litigation (National Association of Metal
Finishers (NAMF) et al. v. EPA. 719 F.
2d 624 (3d Cir. 1983)). In addition to the
* general allegation of ^workability,
several specific aspects of the regulation
were attacked. Industry groups and
some POTWs were critical of the
requirement that a POTW have an
approved pretreatment program, arguing
that this condition for removal credit
authority went beyond any requirement
specified in 5 307(b)(l) of the Clean
Water Act These groups also asserted
that unless a POTW maintained its
initially approved removal rates, the
ongoing POTW monitoring and reporting
of its removals could result in a change
of its removal rates and the industries
adjusted discharge limits every six
months, thus creating a "moving target"
that would make continuing compliance
for industrial users difficult if not
impossible, to achieve. The overflow
requirements also were objected to as
impossible to comply with. All these
arguments were rejected by the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in
upholding the 1981 removal credits
provision.
In response to the criticisms of past
removal credits rules, on September 28.
1982. EPA proposed further
modifications to the removal credits
section to create a clearer, more flexible
and workable provision. EPA today is
promulgating in final form a revised
removal credit regulation, incorporating
some of the modifications proposed in
September 1982.
IL National Removal Rates
The most controversial proposed
change to the removal credits section
was the provision for "national removal
rates." This would have permitted a
qualified POTW to rely on national
removal rates developed by EPA. rather
than on rates established through the
collection of data by the POTW to
demonstrate its actual removal
performance. Some commenters
responding to the September 28,1982.
proposal supported the proposed
national removal rates. Some of these
commenters contended that the
proposed national credits concept was
too restrictive in its application because
it only applied to certain eligible
POTWs (i.e., those achieving secondary
treatment levels and fulfilling certain
other requirements). Other commenters
argued that the proposed national rates
were too low. and thus would not grant
adequate relief to a POTWs industrial
users. Another group of commenters
argued that the proposed national
removal credits approach was illegal.
These commenters also argued that the
national credits concept was unsound as
a matter of policy because the proposed
removal rates exceeded the actual
removal capability at approximately*
50% of the eligible POTWs.
Because of the controversy over the
national removal credits policy issue
and the challenge to the legality of this
approach, EPA has reevaluated the
national removal credits concept The
Agency has concluded, upon
-------
s
Federal Register / Vol 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations 31213
^consideration, that Congress intended
it a removal credit be granted for a
.articular pollutant only to the extent
that a particular POTW can
demonstrate that it removes the
pollutant The language of the statute,
buttressed by the legislative history.
indicates that removal credits are to be
based upon case-by-case removal
determinations, rather than upon a
nationally determined rate. Moreover.
EPA has concluded upon
reconsideration that on balance, policy
considerations in implementing the
pretreatment program envisioned by
Congress favor the case-by-case
determination of removal credits rather
than reliance upon national credits.
' Under section 307 (b) and (c) of the
CWA. EPA is required to promulgate
pretreatment standards for the
introduction of toxic pollutants into a
POTW. These standards must be
designed to prevent the discharge of any
pollutant which interferes with, passes
through or otherwise is incompatible
with a POTW.
In 1977, Congress amended section
307(b)(l) of the CWA to specifically
provide for removal credits. The
relevant language of section 307(b)(l] is
as follows:
IL in the case of any toxic pollutant • • •
'-•reduced by a source into a (POTW], the
itment by such works removes all or any
t of such toxic pollutant and the discharge •
am such works doe* not violate that
effluent limitation or standard which would
be applicable to such toxic pollutant If it
were discharged by such source other than
through a (POTW]. and does not prevent
sludge use or disposal by such works in
accordance with section 405 of this Act then
the pretreatment requirements for the sources
•actually discharging such toxic pollutants
into sach [POTW]. may be revised by the
owner or operator of such works to reflect the
removal of such toxic pollutant by such
works.
(Emphasis added). As the highlighted
language indicates, Congress intended
that a removal credit be granted only
where some removal, whether by
treatment or incidentally, by a particular
POTW is actually achieved at the
POTW.
A clear indication of this statutory
intent is found in the legislative history
of the Clean Water Act In the House
debate on the conference report
accompanying the Act Congressman
Roberts stated that any credit to an
industrial user of a POTW must "reflect
the degree reduction of * * * [a]
pollutant achieved by the treatment
works." (A Legislative History of the
Clean Water Act of 1977 (hereinafter
••d as Legis. H/si, vol. 3. p. 343)].
hermore. in the Senate debate on
Conference report. Senator Muskie
stated that "EPA and the permitting
States may approve case-by-case
modifications of the national ' •
pretreatment standards—or local
credits—for documented pollutant
removals attained by a [POTW]." (Ligis.
Hist., vol. 3, p. 461). In fact Congress
rejected the idea of establishing a
national credit due to the variability
among POTWs' abilities to remove a
particular pollutant As stated in the
Senate report on the 1977 proposed
amendments to the Act
Another reason for minimizing the
consideration of removals in the development
of national pretreatment standards is that the
performance of treatment works on industrial
waste, except in those few cases where the
system is specifically designed to treat a
certain type of Industrial waste, is.extremely
variable. Data that have been presented to
this committee indicate that secondary
treatment removal efficiency for metals
varies between 10 and 70 percent Variability
of such magnitude makes the assumption of
specific levels of removal, when setting .
national standards, almost impossible.
(Leg"- HilL. roL 4, p. 091).
Finally, in the recent decision of the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit in the pretreatment
litigation (NAMFet al. v. EPA. supra),
the court stated that section 307 (b) (1)
of the Act allows for a removal credit
only in those instances in which a
POTW is actually removing a pollutant
The court also cited and assigned
significance to the legislative history
discussed above in support of its
reading of the statute. Based on the
statutory language, legislative history.
and recent court decision hist discussed.
EPA believes it lacks legal authority to
establish national removal credits.
Equally important EPA has carefully
reconsidered national removal credits in
light of the statutory policy underlying
the general requirements to promulgate
pretreatment standards to prevent
interference, pass through and sludge
problems. While EPA continues to
recognize the administrative advantage
inherent in the use of national removal
credits, the Agency believes that case-
by-case determinations of actual POTW
removals is the only reliable means to
assure that credits granted are
consistent with actual POTW removals.
This in turn will assure that removal
credits will not result in a net reduction
of treatment by the POTW and its
. regulated industrial users.
Based upon all the above
consideration. EPA has decided not to
promulgate national removal credits.
EPA has retained the basic regulatory
approach embodied in previous removal
credits provisions that authorize
POTWs to apply for removal credits
based upon case-by-case
demonstrations. However, as discussed
below, the Agency has modified the
regulation in some respects to make the
program more efficient and to grant as
much certainty as possible to POTWs
that are granted removal credit
authority and industrial users that rely
upon removal credits.
HL Discussion of the Final Removal
Credit Provision
Today's final rule requires POTWs to
demonstrate consistent removal by
sampling their actual individual plant
performance, as was required under the
1978 and 1981 regulations. However,
POTWs may use historical sampling
data or use sampling schemes other than
the 12 month sampling scheme generally
prescribed. Important changes to the
regulation are the elimination of the
complicated adjustment for combined
sewer overflows and the simplification
of approval procedures, including the
addition of a provision that allows a
POTW to apply for removal credit
authority at any time. A detailed
discussion of all the changes is provided
below.
Section 403.7(a)—Introduction
This introductory paragraph remains
almost the same as in the September 28,
1982, proposal. For the reasons
discussed above, however, the
provisions pertaining to POTWs
applying for the national removal rates
have been omitted. In addition, the
definition of "Sludge Requirements" in
S 403.7(a)(l](ii) now includes a reference
to the Marine Protection. Research and
Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA). which was
inadvertently omitted in the proposal
Otherwise, the introduction is the same
as at proposal
Section 403.7(a) sets out the
definitions and ground rules under
which POTWs can obtain authorization
to give removal credits. Paragraph (a)(2)
makes it clear that the POTW has
complete discretion in deciding whether
to award removal credits. A POTW
qualifying for removal credit authority
may decline to give removal credits at
all to a certain industrial category or to
one or more industrial users in a
category, or it may award a lower
removal credit than it is authorized to
give. In addition, paragraph (a)(2) now
stipulates that once a POTW has been
authorized to grant removal credits and
has extended those credits to the
appropriate industrial users, it will be
the industrial users that actually will
calculate their revised discharge limits.
As proposed, the POTW was obligated
to perform this task for all its industrial
-------
4
31214 Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations
users receiving removal credits. Because
calculating revised limits merely
requires inserting the authorized
removal credit and applicable
categorical pretreatment standard into
the mathematical formula specified at
paragraph (a)(4) of the regulation, the
Agency believes that it will be simpler
and less administratively burdensome if
each affected industrial user performs
this function for itself rather than relying
on its POTW to do so. This also applies
if. at some future time, the removal
credits • POTW is authorized to grant
are modified.
Paragraph (a)(3) outlines the five
prerequisites for a POTW to obtain
authorization to give removal credits.
The POTW must (1) Apply for and
receive authorization to grant removal
credits: (2) demonstrate consistent
removal; (3] have an approved local
pretreatment program or qualify for the
exception to this requirement; (4) meet
all applicable sludge requirements; and
(5) continue to comply with all its
NPDES permit limits and conditions.
Paragraph (a)(4) identifies the basic
equation from which one calculates the
revised discharge limits. This equation
is the same as the one contained in the
1978 regulations and the 1981
amendments.
Paragraph (a)(3)(lv) also advises
POTWs that if granting removal credits
forces them to incur greater sludge
management costs than they would
incur in the absence of granting removal
credits and the POTW is eligible for
Federal construction grant funding
under the Clean Water Act EPA will not
pay for the additional sludge
management costs. The final removal
credits section, like the 1981
amendments, also provides that the
POTW must remain in compliance with
local state and Federal requirements
applicable to the sludge management
method employed by the POTW after
granting removal credits. The following
table, reprinted from the September 28,
1982. proposal, summarizes the EPA
regulations which potentially apply, at
present to sludge disposal
MAJOR FEDERAL REGULATIONS RELATING To SEWAGE SLUDGE DISPOSAL
•utnontj
•.SoWi
b-H.
CFCB'I
40 CFR Pvtt 260 « I
01 era KM M
APCB-tdtaaool.
4. Com Owvra
40CFR Hit 220Mi
t/79 RCRA/CWA.
9/79 RCRA/CWA.
tm RCRA/CWA.
S/MRCRA.
s^grscA.
lO^SCAA.
10/7SCAA.
S/8a 1/81 ROTA.
S/79TSCA.
1/77MFRSA.
PCTA«ni«jUL« CononMan ind Pimmr)
CWA.OMK W«MT Act
TSCA-Tone Sumanm Contel Act
CAA-OwnAiAo.
«nd S»ic»ah«« Act
Only rarely will POTW sludge be
considered a hazardous waste subject to
the requirements of 40 CFR Part 260, at
teg, or exhibit a sufficiently high
concentration of PCBs to become
subject to the requirements of 40 CFR
Part 781. EPA anticipates, therefore, that
POTWs applying for removal credits •.
will usually by subject only to the
landspreading and land application
requirements of 40 CFR Part 257; the
sludge incineration requirements of 40
CFR Parts 60 and 61; or the ocean
disposal requirements of 40 CFR Part
220 et seq. (in addition to State and local
requirements).
Also included in the final regulation,
at 8 403.7(a)(3)(iv). Is a provision
designed to accommodate POTWs that
are not presently in compliance with
sludge requirements applicable to their
chosen sludge disposal practice but will
be in compliance when the industrial
users install the technology needed to
comply with their categorical
pretreatment standard(s) (as adjusted
by the removal credit). The provision is
intended to benefit industrial users who
otherwise would be unable to get a
removal credit until after they had
already installed the technology
necessary to meet the full pretreatment
standard. A POTW that can
demonstrate that it will be compliance
with any applicable sludge requirements
when the industrial users meet the
applicable pretreatment standard (as
modified by the removal credit) will be
deemed to have satisfied the sludge
requirements provision.
Section 403.7(a)(3)(v) of the final rule
also requires, as a prerequisite to
removal credit authorization, that the
POTW remain in compliance with its
NPDES permit limits and conditions
after giving removal credits. As
proposed, a POTW was only required to
maintain compliance with any toxic
limits in its permit for which it is
granting a removal credit Today's final
rule clarifies the Agency's intent that
removal credit authority not be granted
if a violation of the POTWs permit
limitations or conditions would result
For example, if a POTWs section
301(h) waiver application has been
approved, the POTWs NPDES permit
may contain conditions to assure that
the POTW maintains water quality that
protects a balanced indigenous
population of aquatic biota. If the
Approval Authority determines that
granting removal credits would cause
such permit conditions to be violated,
then the removal credit application must
be denied.
Section 403.7(a)(3)(v) can also be
satisfied in a manner analogous to that
provided in { 403.7(a)(3)(iv). That is. the
POTW can demonstrate that it will be in
compliance with its permit limitations
and conditions when industrial users
comply with their categorical
pretreatment standards, as modified by
the removal credit
Section 403.7(a)(3)(iii) and (d)—Local
Pretreatment Program Requirement and
Exception Thereto
Paragraph (a](3](iii) of the final rule is
the same as proposed on September 28,
1982. and for the most part similar to its
counterpart in the 1981 general
pretreatment amendment It provides
that a POTW must develop a local
prctreatment program as a prerequisite
to obtaining removal credit
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations 31215
authorization unless development of
•ch a program is not required by Part
J.
Paragraph (d) provides that a POTW
can grant "conditional" removal credits
prior to approval of its local program if
the POTW submitted a complete
application for pretreatment program
approval, meeting all the requirements
of § § 403.8 and 403.9 of the General
Pretreatment Regulations, in accordance
with the compliance schedule in its
NPDES permit or by July 1.1983, where
no permit deadline exists. All industrial
users who wish to receive conditional
removal credits must supply the POTW
with the baseline monitoring report
information required by 5 403.12(b) (1)-
[7] (except for new or modified
industrial users who must only submit
the information required by § 403.12(b)
(1M6)). Finally, the POTW must make a
demonstration of its consistent
removals, in accordance with the
requirements specified in § 403.7(b) of
the regulation, submit a complete
application and comply with all the
other conditions for receiving removal
credit authority as specified in the
regulation.
Conditional removal credits are
available in only a limited number of
cases. Only a POTW that submitted a
complete program application in
T.cordance with the compliance
edule in its permit or by July 1.1983,
ire no schedule deadline existed, and
..e Approval Authority has not yet
formally acted upon that application.
would the POTW be eligible for
conditional removal credits authority. If
a POTW failed to submit its program in
such a timely manner, it is not eligible
for conditional credit authority. In
addition, a POTW is ineligible for
conditional removal credit authority if it
is on a new compliance schedule by
virtue of an administrative order or
. some other enforcement mechanism,
and a date beyond July 1,1983. has been
established as the deadline for
- submission of a complete, approvable
program. For a POTW that did submit .
its application on time and had been
granted conditional credit authority, but
upon review its program submission is
determined non-approvable, such a
POTWs conditional credit authority
will be withdrawn.
Section 403.7fb}—Demonstrated
Consistent Removal
The primary criticism of the removal
credits provisions in the past was that
the requirements for demonstrating a
POTWs consistent removals were
unworkable. National removal credits
-e proposed by EPA as one way to
3ss this concern. Although national
credits cannot be promulgated for the
reasons discussed above, the Agency
anticipates that the demonstration
procedures finalized today will
adequately address some of the
concerns that would have been
addressed by the national removal
rates.
Generally, a POTW will collect 12
influent and effluent samples at
approximately equal intervals
throughout one full year, analyze these
samples for the appropriate pollutants
and calculate its consistent removal. In
lieu of or as a supplement to this
sampling, a POTW may use a historical
data base or an alternative sampling
design to demonstrate its consistent
removals. EPA recognizes, however, that
there might be problems with this
approach in some cases. Under some
circumstances, a pollutant known to be
contributed to a POTWs system may
not be detectable in either the influent
or effluent sample, or both. There are •
several possible explanations for this
result In some cases, a pollutant-will be
undetectable in the influent because the
industrial discharges to a POTW will be
diluted by all the other wastewaters
contributed to the POTWs system. In
other cases a pollutant will be degraded
or will volatilize in the sewer system. In
still other instances, installation of
ptetreatment technology by industries
discharging to a POTW may have
reduced pollutant loadings to such low
levels that pollutants cannot be
detected.
If a pollutant is measurable in some
influent and effluent samples, or is
measurable in some influent samples
but not measurable in any effluent
samples, 8 403.7(b)(4) specifies that all
of the samples are to be used to
demonstrate a POTWs consistent
removal. Influent and effluent
observations below the level of
detectability are to be set at a value
equal to the detectability limit
If a POTW cannot measure a
pollutant in some of its influent and/or -
effluent samples and it chooses not to
utilize any sampling data, or if it is
unable to measure a pollutant in any of
its influent samples, i 403.7(b)(4)
specifies that a POTW may make some
other alternative showing to
demonstrate its removal capability. For
example, a POTW may rely on .
treatability studies from POTWs with
similar characteristics (e.g.. comparable
categorical industrial dischargers;
comparable industrial/nan-domestic
and domestic wastewater flows;
comparable POTW treatment systems).
The Approval Authority must approve
of the POTWs alternative
demonstration.
In addition to these provisions, two
other features finalized today make a
demonstration of actual consistent
removal easier and more flexible. First
instead of taking the average of the
lowest 50 percent of measured removals
as was required under the 1981 amended
regulations, consistent removal is
calculated in the final rule as the
difference between the average influent
and effluent concentrations in all of the
sample data. This method, which does
not exclude sample observations,
provides a more accurate and equitable
estimate of the actual removal generally
achieved than the method employed in
the 1981 regulation. Second, rather than
prescribe rigorously the manner in
which the samples are to be collected.
the final rule describes these sampling
procedures in an appendix as guidance.
Although the options discussed above
may reduce the problem of non-
detectability in a number of cases, EPA
recognizes that there may be occasional
instances in which a POTW will be
unable to satisfy any of the
demonstration requirements. This
potentially could create an inequity
between certain POTWs. A POTW with
a high concentration of pollutants in its
influent can measure and thus
demonstrate removals. A POTW with a
low concentration of pollutants in its
influent may be unable to detect
incoming pollutants, even though some
are known to be discharged to its
system. Unless such a POTW can make
an alternative demonstration, as
provided for in the removal credits
regulation, it will be ineligible for
removal credit authority. EPA
acknowledges that if national removal
rates were made available, some
POTVV's with low levels of pollutants in
their influent would be eligible for
removal credit authority. However, in
view of Congress' intention that a
POTWs removal rates be case-specific
based on demonstrated actual removals,
as discussed in detail above. EPA
believes that prohibiting a grant of
removal credit authority is justified
when a POTW is unable through any
means to show any removal of a
regulated pollutant
Section 4O3.7(c)—Provisional Removal
Credits
Ordinarily, removal credits will be
sought for pollutants which are being
discharged currently in measurable
concentrations into a POTW.
Occasionally, however, a new or
modified industrial facility will want a
removal credit for a pollutant which is
-------
31216 Federal Register / VoL 49. No. 151 / Friday, August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations
aot being discharged at measurable
concentrations into the POTW from any
facility. .The POTW is obviously
incapable of demonstrating actual
removal prior to the discharge of the
pollutant into the POTW treatment
system. Therefore, the final rule
provides at paragraph (c) that consistent
removal may be provisionally
demonstrated using data from
treatability studies, provided that actual
consistent removal is demonstrated in
the conventional manner within 18
months of the commencement of the
discharge.
Procedures for modifying or
withdrawing provisional removal credits
were not included in the proposed
removal credits provision. Today's final
rule includes such procedures. The
process is the same as for withdrawal of
conditional removal credits.
Section 4O3.7(e}—POTW Application for
Authorization To Give Removal Credits
and Approval Authority Review
The provisions governing removal
credits applications are the same as
proposed on September 28.1982. and are
considerably more streamlined than
their counterparts in the 1981
amendments. Basically all that has to be
submitted in a list of the pollutants for
which removal credits are sought: data
demonstrating actual consistent
removal: the proposed new limits: a
certification that the POTW has an
approved local pretreatment program or
qualifies for the exception to this
requirement a description of the
POTWs current method of managing its
sludge; and a certification that granting
removal credits will not cause the
POTW to violate applicable sludge
requirements and NPDES permit limits
and conditions. In contrast with the 1981
amendments, which restricted the
submission of applications to certain
times, the revised section provides that
qualified POTWs can submit
applications at any time. The Approval
Authority is required to review the
•POTWs application in accordance with
•he procedures in \ 403.11. which
•{provide for completion of review within
90 days from public notice of the
application unless a public hearing is
Id or the public comment period
Mended, in which case the Approval
Authority may have up to another 90
_days.
ction 4O3.7(f)—Continuation or
Vithdrawal/Modificotion of
Authorization To Grant Removal
Credit*
• The final rule, like the September 28.
•982. proposal states that once a POTW
has received authorization to give
removal credits for a pollutant regulated
in a categorical pretreatment standard.
the POTW may automatically extend
that removal credit to the same pollutant
when regulated in other categorical
standards unless granting the removal
credit will cause the POTW to violate
any applicable sludge requirements or
permit conditions. This provision makes
explicit what was never expressly
stated in the January 1981 amendments;
that is. once removal credit
authorization is received for a particular
pollutant the POTW may, without
reapplication. give the same credit for
that pollutant when regulated in other
categorical standards. The POTW may.
of course, elect not to extend the
removal credit for a particular pollutant
to other categorical standards or
particular facilities in an industry '
category.
Upon being granted removal credit
authority, the removal credits will be
included in the POTWs NPDES permit.
Because the procedures to initially
authorize a POTW to grant removal
credits are essentially the same as those
to modify or revoke and reissue a
POTWs permit to incorporate the
removal credits (i.e, notice, comment
and opportunity for a public hearing).
the Approval Authority should consider
commencement of the process to amend
the POTWs permit simultaneously with
the formal review of a complete
application for removal credit authority.
This would reduce the administrative
burden of acting separately on the
removal credits application and permit
change.
As a condition of continued
authorization to give removal credits,
the POTW must continue to comply with
all the requirements of paragraph
(a)(3)(iiiHv). Compliance with these
requirements may be examined by the
Approval Authority at any time, tut at
the very least must be ascertained upon
reissuance of the NPDES permit The
penalty for failure to comply with the
paragraph (a)(3) requirements is
withdrawal or modification of the
removal credits. The regulation specifies
the procedures to be followed when
initiating an action to modify or *
withdraw.
Today's filial removal credits
regulation does differ considerably in
one aspect from that which was
proposed. Prior removal credits rules
were criticized as unworkable in part
because of the potential uncertainty
they created. POTWs were required to
submit periodic compliance reports that
included sampling data to indicate
whether or not they were maintaining
their approved consistent removal rates.
Failure to maintain that removal rate
could potentially result in an immediate
adjustment of its approved removal
rates to reflect the change. In turn, the
industrial users applicable categorical
pretreatment standards reflecting the
' removal credit would also have to be
readjusted to reflect the POTWs new
removal rates.
The final rule promulgated today
diminishes the uncertainty of changing
removal credits and shifting industrial
discharge limits. Once a POTW satisfies
the demonstration requirements and
does not violate the criteria specified in
paragraph (a)(iii'Hv). the removal
credits will generally remain set for the
term the POTWs NPDES permit. The
removal credits could be modified or
withdrawn during the permit term only
in the case of consistently and
substantially poor POTW performance.
As a means of monitoring for
occurrences of those circumstances in
which a readjustment would be
necessary, POTWs are required to
submit compliance reports at least
annually to the Approval Authority for
its review that include sampling data to
indicate their removal capability. A
minimum of one sample per month •
during the reporting period is required
and all the sampling data must be
included in the report As the POTWs
removal performance will be
reevaluated when its permit expires,
sampling data included in these
compliance reports also can be used to
justify continuation of the removal
credits or to calculate its new removal
capability at the end of the permit term.
A removal credit determination is
based on the removal efficiency (i.e.,.
percent removal) of a pollutant at the
POTW. Variability in removal efficiency
is inherent in any treatment system,
even those that are specifically designed
to remove particular pollutants. POTWs,
however, are generally designed to
remove suspended solids and
biodegradable organic materials, not
heavy metals, cyanide or non-
biodegradable toxic organics. The
removals of toxic pollutants are for the
most part incidental to the secondary
treatment employed by POTWs.
In addition to the design of the POTW.
there are a number of other factors that
contribute towards the* variability hi
removal efficiency. These include the
state of the pollutant (whether soluble or
insoluble]; pollutant concentrations in
the influent dilution of the raw
wastewaten or the detection limit of a
particular pollutant Because of the
combined effect of these factors and
site-specific conditions at a POTW. it is
impossible to determine the expected
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3, 1984 / Rules antf Regulations 31217
varibility on a pollutant-by-pollutant
basis across all POTWs.
The Agency recognizes that some
variability will exist and that nothing
can be done to totally eliminate it
Recognizing this variability factor, the
Agency strongly believes that a fair
balance must be struck between
ensuring continued consistent removal
of a pollutant which formed the basis for
the removal credit and the need of
POTWs and their industrial users to
have a degree of certainty in the
removal credit and the adjusted
categorical pretreatment standards
reflecting the credit To obtain this
balance, the Agency has established a
criterion for making a finding that a
' POTW is no longer achieving proper
removals of a given pollutant
Before the Approval Authority begins
a proceeding to modify or withdraw the
removal credits prior to permit
expiration, it must make a finding that
"the POTWs consistent removal rate is
consistently and substantially lower
than the removal credit specified in the
POTWs NPDES permit" This criterion
is established so that a POTW does not
lose its removal credit authority during
the permit term because of minor -
problems at the POTW or situations
outside of the POTWs control that
temporarily reduce its originally
lemonstrated removal efficiency.
.-fowever. if it a determined that the
POTWs consistent removal rate is
consistently and substantially lower
than the removal credit this indicates
serious problems at the POTW and
justifies invocation of the modification
or withdrawal provisions of the
regulation. This regulatory approach.
assuming that initially established
removal credits will be effective for the
life of the POTWs NPDES permit absent
substantially worsened POTW
performance or a violation of the
conditions specified in paragraph (a)(3)
of the rule, should provide the desired
balance of consistent removals and
POTW/industry certainty.
The "consistently and substantially
lower" criterion was purposefully
adopted to allow all the relevant facts of
any particular situation to be considered
in deciding whether removal credits
should be modified. A more specific
criterion [e.g.. designating a particular
percent reduction in a POTWs removal
rates as substantial) would be
technically inappropriate, since the
degree of unavoidable variability in a
POTWs removal rate is likely to vary
from plant to plant It is thus more
appropriate that the Approval Authority
rake a decision, on a case-specific
asis. whether a POTWs removals have
substantially worsened on a consistent
basis. If the Approval Authority initiates
the procedures to modify or withdraw
the credit based upon such a decision.
the affected POTW and its industrial
users would have an opportunity at that
time to challenge the decision and
demonstrate that the POTWs removals
have not consistently and substantially
worsened.
While the averaging of 12 monthly
samples will tend to stabilize the
POTWs removal rate, it should be
noted that some variations in the yearly
rates must be expected. Key to the
impact of this yearly variation on both
POTWs and industry is the magnitude
of the credit a POTW is considering to
grant The following table shows the
effluent limits that an electroplater
would have to meet depending on the
removal credit granted to the POTW. -
«l
•M
tn
An
IA
"Q
in
•A
f^t
Odrnum
(mg/q
1.2
1.5
1.T1
2.0
2.4
10
4.0
&0
124
Zinc Img/
' 4.2
US
6.O
7.0
14
103
14.0
21.0
42.0
The granting of a removal credit
anywhere in the range of 40 and 60
percent results in a range of industrial
effluent limits which can probably be
met by the same industrial treatment
technology—2.0 to 3.0 mg/1 for cadmium
and 7.0 to 10.S mg/1 for zinc. The impact
of a reduced removal credit on an
industrial user would be small since the
same technology would have been
employed. However, this is not the case
for those POTWs that intend to grant
credits in the 80-to-90 percent range.
Removal credits from 80 to 90 percent
would allow industrial users to install
little or no technology to meet the limits.
The failure of the POTW to demonstrate
these high removals will have major
impacts-on the industrial users which
may be required to install additional
technology if the removal credit is
reduced. POTW operators should be
aware that the demonstration of high
removals (75-90 percent) is difficult and
should be thoroughly evaluated to
provide their industrial users long-term
and stable effluent limits.
Another difference between today's
final rule and the September 28,1982,
proposal are the procedures for
modifying or withdrawing removal
credits when circumstances arise that
warrant a change. As proposed, if a
POTW failed to maintain its consistent
removal rate or violated some other
eligibility criteria (e.g., violated sludge
requirements or its permit limits), the
POTW had to notify the Approval
Authority, return to compliance within
six months and satisfy the Approval
Authority that the problem would not be
likely to recur. If. at the end of this six-
month period, the POTW did not return
to compliance or satisfy the Approval
Authority that the problem is non-
recurring in nature, the Approval
Authority would have had to revoke or
modify the removal credits. The
Approval Authority could, however.
have extended the time for compliance
for up to one year if the POTW
demonstrated good faith efforts to return
to compliance. Where the removal rates
were modified or withdrawn, industries
would have had to comply with the
modified discharge limits or original
categorical standard, whichever was the
case, within 18 months. .
After reevaluating this proposed
change, taking into account public
comments received, EPA has decided
not to finalize the procedures as
proposed. Instead, the modification/
withdrawal procedures in today's final
rule are more similar to those specified
in the 1981 removal credits provision.
The significant difference is that the
procedures promulgated today provide
for notice and comment before the
removal credits are modified or a
POTWs authority to grant removal
credits is withdrawn. The Agency
believes the process adopted by the
final rule better serves the requirements
of adequate due process.
Under the final rule, the Approval
Authority is required to make a
preliminary determination that a POTW
is in violation of any of the eligibility
criteria specified in paragraph (a)(3)(iiij-
(v), or that its ongoing removals are
substantially and consistently lower
than the removal credits. The Approval
Authority shall then, in accordance with
the procedures found in $ 403.11(b) (1)
and (2) of the General Pretreatment
Regulations, issue a public notice of its
intent to modify or withdraw, and
provide for public comment and an
opportunity for a public hearing on the
matter. It is during this time that a
POTW, its industrial users or any
interested party can present a case
against modification or withdrawal. At
the close of the public comment period
and after a public hearing (if one is
held), the Approval Authority will make
its final decision based on all available
information, including that received in
comments and at the hearing. If the
removal credits are to be modified or
removal credit authority withdrawn, the
POTW and its industrial users must be
-------
31218 Federal Register / VoL 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations
notified and apprised in writing of the
reasons for the modification or
withdrawal. Where the removal credits
are modified, the affected industrial
users will be required to comply with
the readjusted discharge limits, or. in the
case of withdrawal of removal credit
authority, with the original limits
prescribed by the applicable categorical
pretreatment standards. Compliance
with these limits must be achieved
within a reasonable time following
modification or withdrawal. The amount
of time allowed for compliance from the
date that the removal credit is modified
or withdrawn must be no greater than
the amount of time allowed for
compliance in the applicable categorical
standard. For example, if a pretreatment
standard provided for a compliance
period of three yean from the date of '
promulgation, an industrial user affected
by the modification or withdrawal of a
removal credit could be granted a
maximum compliance period of three
yean from the date of modification or
withdrawal Of course, the Approval
Authority could establish a shorter
period for compliance after considering
the necessary adjustment to existing
treatment technology or the amount of
additional treatment that must be
installed.
IV. Summary of Public Participation
Numerous governmental agencies,
individuals, industries, and trade
associations provided comments on the
proposed removal credit rale published
in the Federal Register on September 28.
1982. The following parties provided
comments: Detroit Water and Sewerage
District Caterpillar Tractor Company;
Air Products and Chemicals, Ino: South
Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control; Howard M.
Cohen: Village of Sauget IL: League of
Women Voten of Maryland. Ino: Barge.
Waggoner. Summer and Cannon;
Midland-Rose Corp.; Great Lakes
Tomorrow. M/M Gordon V. Bond;
General Moton Corp.; American Iron
and Steel Institute: Natural Resources
Defense Council: National Association
of Metal Finishers: American Paper
Institute/National Forest Products
Association: Steven H.J3igelow. Conoco.
Incx The Standard Oil Company (Ohio):
Bausch and Lomb; Anne W. Amacher,
PhD.; Chemical Manufacturers
Association: Texaco. Inc.: League of
Women Voten of South Carolina: The .
League of Women Voten of Kentucky.
Monsanto Company: Babcock and
Wilcox; Metropolitan Denver Sewage
Disposal District No. 1; Standard Oil
Company (Indiana); League of Women
Voten of Marion County. GA: County
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles
County: League of Women Voten of
Findlay. OH: and the Chicago
Association of Commerce and Industry.
Comment The majority of comments
received addressed various aspects of
the national removal credits concept.
including the legality of national
removal credits, the method of
calculating the national removal rates,
national credits for non-toxic pollutants
and the procedures a POTW must
follow to obtain and maintain removal
credit authority when utilizing national
credits.
Response: The comments regarding
the legal basis of national removal
credits have been addressed in the.
comprehensive discussion regarding this
issue in the preamble. Since national
credits have not been retained in the
final rule, comments regarding certain
technical aspects (e.g., selection of 25th
percentile. the broad definition of
POTW "compliance" with secondary
treatment, the impact of negative
removal rates in calculating the national
removal rates) have become irrelevant
Similarly, those comments addressing
the procedures and preconditions for
utilizing national credits have also
become irrelevant
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the removal credit regulation
provide POTWs the option of
substituting their local standards .
applicable to indirect dischargen for the
national categorical pretreatment
standards when these local standards
are based on local receiving water
quality or sludge disposal criteria.
Response: The removal credit concept
established in section 30?(b) of the
Clean Water Act provides for a credit
against a national categorical
pretreatment standard equal to or less
than the demonstrated removal by a
POTW for a specific pollutant If a
POTW can demonstrate that its actual
removal rate would allow an adjustment
to the categorical pretreatment standard
that results in a standard less stringent
than the POTWs current local standard
for a particular pollutant then the
POTW may impose its local standard. It
however, the adjusted categorical
standard remains more stringent than
the local standard, then the adjusted
categorical pretreatment standard must
be applied.
Comment- One commenter objected to
the procedure whereby a POTW self-
certifies that it complies with applicable
sludge requirements, limits and
conditions in the POTWs NPDES
permit and that it has an approved
pretreatment program. The objection
concerned the amount of discretion
given the POTW to determine
independently the complex factual
matters on which initial and continuing
qualification for removal credit depends.
Response: The final regulation
provides that a POTW must certify that
it has an approved pretreatment
program and that by granting removal
credits it will not violate any permit
limits or conditions, or applicable
Federal. State and local sludge
requirements. The Agency retains the
authority to review the certifications
and independently verify their accuracy.
Information regarding the status of the
local pretreatment program and
compliance with NPDES permits is
readily available. In many instances, the
Agency staff making the initial review of
the removal credit authority application
are also responsible for tracking the
POTWs performance in the other two
areas. Similarly, compliance with sludge
requirements can be easily corroborated
either by communicating within the
Agency or by contacting the appropriate
State or local agency. Additionally, the
applicant must describe its sludge
management plan. In those instances
where the information is not sufficient to
determine whether the POTW will
continue to be in compliance with
sludge requirements, the Agency may
request more information.
Comment- Many comments
questioned the Agency's basis for
imposing additional conditions for
obtaining removal credit authority that
are not specifically provided in section
307(b) of the CWA. Specifically, the
'comments concerned the requirement
that (a) A POTW have an approved
pretreatment program: (b) comply with
all applicable Federal. State and local
sludge management and disposal
requirements; and (c) be in compliance
with its NPDES permit discharge limits
for the toxic pollutant(s) for which
removal credits are sought The
comments suggested that the Agency
could only impose those criteria
explicitly mentioned in section 307(b)
(i.e.. that a POTW remove all or any part
of the toxic pollutant, that the discharge
from the POTW does not violate the
effluent limitation or standard which
would be applicable if the pollutant
were discharged by the source other
than through the POTW and that the
POTWs sludge.use or management be
in compliance with the requirements
established under section 405 of the
Clean Water Act).
Response: The Agency believes that
the imposition of these preconditions to
removal credit authority is not only a
logical exercise of its discretion, but is
directed by the statute and
congressional intent This response will
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations 31219
address each of the three conditions
separately since each condition is based
on different premises.
The "compliance with toxic limits"
requirement in section 403.7(a)(3)(v) of
the removal credit rule was first
imposed as a regulatory requirement as
proposed in September 1982. This
provision has been changed in the final
rule, for the reasons previously
discussed to require the POTW to
maintain compliance with all limits and •
conditions in its NPDES permit after
granting removal credits. This
requirement is consistent with the broad
purposes of section 307(b) that
discharges from industrial users of
POTWs not interfere with a POTW»
ability to comply with its NPDES permit
The second requirement is that a
POTW have an approved pretreatment
program. The Agency believes that the
imposition of this requirement is a
proper exercise of the Agency's
authority to ensure that a POTW
minimizes the potential of pass through
of pollutants or interference with the
POTW and was contemplated by
Congress when it amended the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act in 1977 (the
Clean Water Act). The statutory
language and the legislative history.
when read together, provide the
requisite authority to require a
pretreatment program as a precondition
to a POTWs authority to grant removal
credits.
The 1977 amendments added two new
provisions relating to pretreatment One
provision, section 402(b)(8). imposes on
POTWs that receive discharges from
industries subject to categorical
pretreatment standards a requirement to
develop a local pretreatment program.
The second provision, in section
307(b)(l). allows POTWs to adjust
categorical standards to reflect the _
POTWs ability to remove any or all of
the regulated pollutant These two
provisions are given meaning when read
in light of the legislative history which
clearly shows that Congress intended
that removal credits be integrally tied to
an approval pretreatment program.
The Senate, when debating the
conference report addressed this
connection between removal credits
(discussed as "local credits") and local
pretreatment programs:
Where • local compliance program If
approved. EPA and the permitting States may
approve case-by-case modifications of the
national pretreatment standards—or local
credit*—for documented pollutant removal*
attained by a publicly owned treatment
works. To receive a local credit there must be
a demonstration that the pollutant la
degraded or treated: credits will not be given
for dilution * * *. Tying local credits to local
compliance programs not only provide* an
incentive for local participation, but more
importantly, it provides assurance that the
removal levels which justified the local
credits will be maintained by a publicly
owned treatment works committed to
operating a sound pretreatment program.
(Legis. HisL. VoL 3. p. 461-462).
The House similarly discussed the
relationship between the two provisions
in its debate of the conference report:
Under the amendment to section 307(b) the
Administrator would establish national
pretreatment standards for toxic pollutants
based on the best available technology
economically achievable, or any more
stringent effluent standards under section
307(A). Then in applying these pretreatment
standards through its pretreatment programs.
the owner or operator of a municipal ~
treatment works could modify the
requirements applicable to individual classes
of source* introducing that pollutant into the
treatment works to reflect the degree of
reduction of that pollutant achieved by the
treatment works (emphasis added). (Legis.
HisL. VoL 3. p. 342-343.)
It is apparent that the Agency has
effectuated Congressional intent by
imposing this precondition for removal
. credit authority. Moreover, the Agency
believes that it has adequate authority
to impose such a requirement to
accomplish the goal of avoiding the
potential for pass through or
interference under its broad rulemaking
authority to section 501 of the CWA.
The Agency's position was judicially
sanctioned in a recent decision by the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third
Circuit in National Association of Metal
Finishers (NAMF) et al. v. EPA, 719 F.
2d 624 (3d Cir. 1983). Petitioners in that
case specifically challenged the local
pretreatment program requirement
claiming that the Agency acted without
authority in imposing this precondition
to granting removal credits. The court
disagreed with petitioners and adopted
the reasoning set out above as the basis
of the agency's authority.
The third requirement that the POTW
maintain compliance wfth all applicable
Federal State, and local sludge disposal
requirements after granting removal
credits, was also challenged by
commenters as being contrary to the
statute. The Agency maintains the
position it presented in the regulations
promulgated on January 28,1981. which
included the current provision regarding
compliance with sludge disposal
requirements. Essentially, the Agency
continues to believe that it is acting
within its authority granted by sections
307(b) and 405 of the CWA in
conditioning removal credit allowances
on continued compliance with
applicable requirements established
under the Solid Waste Disposal Act
(including Title II of this Act more
commonly referred to as the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)), the Clean Air Act the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). the
Marine Protection. Research and
Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA), and State
regulations developed under Subtitle D
of RCRA. (For a more detailed
discussion of this issue, see 46 Fed. Reg.
at 9428.) In addition, it should be noted
that these sludge requirements were
contained in the 1981 General
Pretreatment Regulations upheld by the
Third Circuit in NAMFet al. v. EPA.
supra.
Comment: Several comments were
received which supported the exclusion
of the combined sewer overflow (CSO)
compensation factor when calculating
the revised categorical standard.
Several comments were received which
argued that the CSO factor should have
been retained.
Response: EPA has analyzed the
relationship of CSOs and removal
credits in two different ways. The first
approach examined the amount of time
CSO events occur. In 1978.15 POTWs
were surveyed to determine the
frequency of rainfall-triggered
overflows. The Agency determined that
the average POTW will incur combined
sewer overflow only 7.3 percent of the
time. Even assuming that no treatment
occurs during an overflow situation, the
measurable effect on the revised
categorical standard is not significant
Therefore, compensation for CSOs on
the basis of time is not necessary. (For a
detailed example of the effect CSOs can
have on the revised standard based on
the time CSO events occur, see the
proposed removal credits rule in the
September 28.1982 Federal Register (47
FR at 42701)).
The second approach examined the
amount of pollutants that escaped
treatment during CSO events. This
involved the toxic pollutants discharged
by industry which are not treated at the
POTW during CSO events and which
settle in the sewer system during normal
dry conditions, and are resuspended
during CSO events. Recent EPA data
indicate that approximately 30 percent
of the toxic metals in a combined sewer
flow (i.e.. during wet weather conditions
sufficient to produce an overflow event)
are due to the problem of resuspension.
The concern relative to removal credits •
is that toxics resuspended under wet
weather conditions are carried out the
overflow point. A? a result, a portion of
the toxic pollutants contributed by
industrial users never reach the POTW
and is therefore not removed.
-------
*
31220 Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations
EPA analyzed the data collected on
heavy metals to determine the amount
of pollutants resuspended. The amount
of resuspension was then included in a
mass balance to determine the amount
of untreated heavy metals discharged
during a CSO event This analysis
indicated that on average, eight percent
of the metals bypassed the POTW and
were thus not treated After applying
this eight percent bypass factor to
several sample removal rates, the
Agency concluded that its effect on the
adjusted industrial discharge limit
would be minimal. Thus, neither the
frequency of CSO events nor the amount
of toxics discharged during such events
warrant a regulatory provision requiring
'CSOs to be factored into the formula for
determining a removal credit
Comment: Two comments suggested
that POTWs must have an affirmative
obligation to seek removal credit
authority. Giving POTWs the discretion
to seek or not seek removal credits
could frustrate the intent of the
provision and may result in unnecessary
'treatment
Response: The statute provides that a
POTW "may" seek removal credit
authority. EPA is not empowered to
require a POTW to seek removal credit
authority.
Comment Several commenters raised
the issue of a POTWs "compliance"
with a stated removal rate and the
grounds for withdrawal or modification
of removal credits. This comment
involves two concerns. The first is the
POTWs concern for some degree of
latitude before a POTW is considered to
. be out of compliance with its
demonstrated removal rate. The second
is the concern of industrial users who,
having obtained removal credits and
designed treatment facilities to meet a
stated standard, desire to have some
reasonable period without any change
to their discharge standards. Industrial
users are essentially seeking some
degree of certainty in their limits for
planning purposes.
Response: As discussed above in
detail, the Agency strongly believes that
a fair balance must be struck between
ensuring continued consistent removal
of a pollutant which formed the basis for
the removal credit and the need of
industrial users to have some guarantee
of certainty, for a reasonable period of
time, as to their discharge limits. To
obtain this balance, the Agency has
developed a criterion to determine when
the POTW is no longer achieving
consistent removal for a given pollutant
Comment: Many commenters
questioned the Agency's procedure for
handling influent and effluent samples
when the pollutant is not detectable.
Most commenters suggested that for
effluent samples the appropriate
procedure is to assign the samples a
concentration value of zero and not to
assume that the concentration is at the
level of detectability for that pollutant
Otherwise, they argued, the procedure
may fail to reflect the full extent of the
actual removal efficiency.
Response: The Agency believes that
in general, the use of the detection limit
as an estimate of immeasurable
concentrations in an effluent where the
influent was detectable, will provide a
better approximation of actual removals
than will the use of a zero value. Using
zero as a measure of the effluent
concentration necessarily results in •
conclusion that the pollutant is
experiencing a 100% removal by the
POTW. Such a result is theoretically
unlikely and inconsistent with the
Agency's POTW removal data collected
from SO well-operated secondary
treatment plants. The use of the
detection limit is likely to produce a
somewhat conservative estimate of
removals. However, in most cases, the
calculated removal should not be much
lower than the actual removal and
generally should be more accurate (and
more environmentally protective) than
that calculated by assuming a zero
discharge effluent In any event in cases
of non-detectability. the POTW has the
option of making an alternative
demonstration to qualify for removal
credit authority.
Comment: One commenter questioned
the proposed procedure for addressing
violations by the POTW of its removal
rate and the sanctions available. The
commenter argued that the procedure
may allow the violation to persist too
long and represent an unnecessary
endangerment to the environment
because of interference, pass through
and sludge contamination..
Response:Tbe Agency agrees that the
proposed procedure which could allow
up to 12 months befone withdrawal or
modification procedures are instituted
provided too much latitude to a POTW
which is experiencing problems.
Consequently, the Agency is amending
this provision. As discussed above.
today's final rule recognizes that some
variability in a POTWs removal rates
can be expected. However, if a POTWs
removal capability does consistently
and substantially worsen, indicating
that a serious problem exists and
requiring long-term corrective measures
be taken, or it violates any other
precondition of its removal credit
authority, the Approval Authority will
initiate the process to withdraw a
POTWs authority to grant removal
credits or to modify those credits. Public
notice of this action will be given, and a
comment period and opportunity for a
hearing provided for. The Agency
believes that once grounds for
modification or withdrawal do arise, the
procedures in the final rule allow for
prompt action by the Approval
Authority. In addition, these procedures
more adequately satisfy due process
requirements than past procedures.
Comment: Some commenters objected
to the 18 month time limit for industrial
users to comply with the pretreatment
standard once a removal credit has been
modified or withdrawn. They argued
that the time limit should be three years.
Response: The Agency partially
agrees with this argument The Agency
has revised this part of the regulation to
provide that the time period for
compliance be no longer than the time
allowed in the pretreatment standard or
such shorter time as determined after
considering the amount of additional
treatment that must be installed. This
time period is the same as was allowed
under the 1981 revised removal credit
regulation.
Comment: Some commenters
questioned the adequacy of the
compliance reporting requirements.
They believed that one annual report
will not be sufficient to detect quickly
any drops in removal efficiencies.
Response: The Agency disagrees with
this contention. A POTWs initially .
demonstrated removal rates were based
on 12 representative samples taken over
the course of one full year. Requiring
one compliance report per year that
includes a similar sampling requirement
(Le., 12 representative samples taken at
equal intervals over that year) provides
an accurate means of comparing a
POTWt ongoing performance with its
originally approved demonstrated
removal efficiency. These reports will be
reviewed by the Approval Authority.
Furthermore, while the new regulations
will minimally only require one annual
report there are several other sources of
information which can augment the
removal rate compliance reporting. In
addition to this report a POTW will be
providing other reports as part of their
NPDES permit and pretreatment
program. POTWs will also be subject to
pretreatment program audits and
inspections which can be used to
investigate a POTWs compliance with
its removal rates.
Comment: Many commenters
questioned the provision in the proposed
rule which provides that the removal
rates demonstrated by the POTW that
formed the basis for removal credits
become enforceable conditions of the
POTWs NPDES permit The commenters
-------
*
Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations 31221
!•.
i
suggested that the provision would
liscourage POTW'a from applying for
removal credit authority.
Response: Incorporating the removal
credits as an enforceable condition into
the POTW's NPDES permit was clearly
.intended by Congress when section
307(b) was passed. The House debate on
the conference report contained the
following statement: "Any effluent
reduction attained by the treatment
works and used to justify a modification
of pretreatment requirements must be a
permit condition enforceable against the
owner or operator of the treatment
works" (Legis. Hist.. Vol. 3. p. 343).
Thus, it is clear that this requirement
was contemplated by the Congress. The
.argument that this will act as an
impediment to POTWs seeking removal
credit authority does not militate against
the requirement It only assures that the
POTW will strive to maintain its
consistent removal rates. It should also
prove to be an incentive for industrial
users enjoying the benefit of removal .
credits to take greater interest in the
POTWs operation and pretreatment
program.
Comment: One comment raised the
issue of whether the proposed method
for calculating the removal rate is
appropriate. The commenter argued that
the technique of averaging all the
'fluent and effluent samples will mask
inability and may result in a distortion
of the removal efficiency.
Response: As the Agency stated in the
proposed rule, the technique of
averaging the influent and effluent data
will provide a more reliable estimate of
the actual removal generally achieved '
than the method used in the 1981
regulations. No sample observations will
be excluded from the calculation.
Miscellaneous
In the September 28,1982 proposal
several sections of the General
Pretreatment Regulations were proposed
to be amended because they referenced
the removal credits provision. Today's
action finalizes those changes to
conform to the new removal credits
section.
In addition to these changes,
J 403.8(e) also is being revised. Section
403.8(ej specifies specific circumstances
for modifying or revoking and reissuing
a POTW's permit. These grounds
include, among others, incorporation of
a compliance schedule for development
of a POTWs pretreatment program.
section 301 (h) and section 301(i) permit
conditions and an approved POTW
pretreatment program. By today's
•"•.lion. § 403.8(e) is revised to specify
t incorporation of the removal credits
nted by a POTW is cause for
modifying or revoking and reissuing a
POTWs permit Amending 5 403.8(e) in
this way is consistent with Congress'
intent, as discussed above, that the
removal credits be placed in the
POTW'a permit and thus be an
enforceable permit condition. In
addition, past removal credit provisions
and the September 28.1982. removal
credit proposal required incorporation of
removal rates into the permit
Executive Order 12291
Under Executive Order 12291. EPA
must judge whether a regulation is
"major" and therefore subject to the
requirement of a Regulatory Impact
Analysis. This regulation simplifies
existing requirements and will have the
ultimata effect of reducing pollution
control costs. It ia not a major regulation
because it does not meet the criteria set
forth in the Executive Order.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 601 et see.. EPA is required to
prepare a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis to assess the impact of rules on
small entities. No regulatory flexibility
analysis ia required, however, where the
head of the agency certifies that the rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of
entities. I hereby certify, pursuant to S
U.S.C. § 605(b), that today's final action
will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 403
Confidential business information:
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements; Waste treatment and
disposal; Water pollution control.
Dated: July 27.1984.
William D. RuckeUhau*
Administrator.
PART 403—GENERAL
PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS FOR
EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES OF
POLLUTION
.For the reasons set out in the
preamble. 40 CFR Part 403 is amended
as follows:
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR
Part 403 is as follows:
Authority: Sec. 51(c)(2) of the Clean Water
Act of 1977 (Pub. U 95-217). lections
204(b)fl)(C). 2Q8(b)(2)(C)(iii). 3m(bUl)(A)(ii).
301(b)(2KA)(ii). 301(b)(21(C). 301(h){5).
301 (i)(2). 304(e). 304(g). 307. 306. 309. 402(b).
405. and 501 (a) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (Pub. L 32-500). as amended by •
the Clean Water Act of 1977.
2. 40 CFR 403.7 is revised to read as
follows:-
§ 403.7 Removal credits.
(a) Introduction—(1) Definitions. For
the purpose of this section:
(i) "Removal" means a reduction in
the amount of a pollutant in the POTW's
effluent or alteration of the nature of a
pollutant during treatment at the POTW.
The reduction or alteration can be
obtained by physical, chemical or
biological means and may be the result
of specifically designed POTW
capabilities or may be incidental to the
operation of the treatment system.
Removal as used in this subpart shall
not mean dilution of a pollutant in the
POTW.
(ii) "Sludge Requirements" shall mean
the following statutory provisions and
regulations or permits issued thereunder
(or more stringent State or local
regulations): section 405 of the Clean
Water Act; the Solid Waste Disposal
Act (SWDA) (including Title II more
commonly referred to as the Resource
Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) and
State regulations contained in any State
sludge management plan prepared
pursuant to Subtitle D of SWDA); the
Clean Air Act; the Toxic Substances
Control Act and the Marine Protection.
Research and Sanctuaries Act
(2) General. Any POTW receiving
wastes from an Industrial User to which
a categorical Pretreatment Standard(s)
applies may. at its discretion and
subject to the conditions of this section,
grant removal credits to reflect removal
by the POTW of pollutants specified in
the categorical Pretreatment
Standard(s). The POTW may grant a
removal credit equal to or. at its
discretion, less than its consistent
removal rate. Upon being granted a
removal credit each affected Industrial
User shall calculate its revised
discharge limits in accordance with
subparagraph (4) of this paragraph.
Removal credits may only be given for
indicator or surrogate pollutants
regulated in a categorical Pretreatment
Standard if the categorical Pretreatment
Standard so specifies.
(3) Conditions for authorization to
give removal credits. A POTW is
authorized to give removal credits only
if the following conditions are met:
(\) Application. The POTW applies
for. and receives, authorization from the
Approval Authority to give a removal
credit in accordance with the
requirements and procedures specified
in paragraph (e) of this section.
(ii) Consistent removal determination.
The POTW demonstrates and continues
to achieve consistent removal of the
pollutant in accordance with paragraph
(b) of this section, j
-------
31222 Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations
(iii) POTW local pretreatment
program. The POTW has an approved
pretreatment program in accordance
with and to the extent required by Part
403; provided, however, a POTW which
does not have an approved pretreatment
program may. pending approval of such
a program, conditionally give credits as
provided in paragraph (d) of this section.
(iv) Sludge requirements. The granting
of removal credits will not cause the-
POTW to violate the local. State and
Federal Sludge Requirements which
apply to the sludge management method
chosen by the POTW. Alternatively, the
POTW can demonstrate to the Approval
Authority that even though it it not
presently in compliance with applicable
Sludge Requirements, it will be in
compliance when the Industrial User(s)
to whom the removal credit would apply
is required to meet its categorical
Pretreatment Standard(s) as modified by
the removal credit If granting removal
credits forces a POTW to incur greater
sludge management costs than would be
incurred in the absence of granting
removal credits, the additional sludge
management costs will not be eligible
for EPA grant assistance.
(v) NPDESpermit limitations. The
granting of removal credits will not
cause a violation of the POTWs permit
limitations or conditions. Alternatively,
the POTW can demonstrate to the
Approval Authority that even though it
is not presently in compliance with
applicable limitations and conditions in
its NPDES permit it will be in
compliance when the Industrial Userfs)
to whom the removal credit would apply
is required to meet its categorical
Pretreatment Standard(s). as modified
by the removal credit provision.
(4) Calculation of revised discharge
limits. Revised discharge limits for a •
specific pollutant shall be derived by
use of the following formula:
l-r
whew. '
x-pollutant discharge limit specified in the
applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard
r» removal credit for that pollutant at
established under paragraph (b) of this
section (percentage removal expressed
a* a proportion, i-e.. a number between 0
and 1)
y» revised discharge limit for the specified
pollutant (expressed in same units aa x)
(b) Establishment of Removal Credit;
Demonstration of Consistent Removal.
A POTW may be authorized to grant a
removal credit that does not exceed its
consistent removal rate. In order to
demonstrate consistent removal, the
POTW shall, for each pollutant with
respect to which removal credit
authorization is sought collect influent
and effluent data and calculate
consistent removal in accordance with
the following requirements. As a
condition of retaining removal credit
authorization, the POTWs consistent
removal must continue to be equal to or
greater than the removal credit
(1) Number of samples. At least
twelve representative samples of
influent and effluent shall be taken at
approximately equal intervals
throughout one full year. Upon
concurrence of the Approval Authority,
• POTW may utilize an historical data
base either in lieu of or as a supplement
to these twelve samples. In order to be
approved, the historical data base must
be representative of the yearly and
seasonal conditions to which the POTW
is subject and be representative of the
POTWs performance for at least one
year. As an alternative to the above, a
POTW. upon concurrence of the
Approval Authority, may utilize an
alternative sampling design, as long as
the alternative design provides for
samples to be taken at times which are
representative of the POTWs normal
operating conditions and the different
seasonal conditions to which the POTW
is subject
(2) Method of Samp/ing. The POTW
must use the composite sampling
method unless the grab sampling
method is more appropriate. A
description of these methods and
suggestions on when each method
should be used are included in
Appendix E as guidance.
(3) Method of Analysis for Pollutants.
The POTW shall analyze the samples
for pollutants in accordance with the
analytical techniques prescribed in 40
CFR Part 136. If 40 CFR Part 138 does
not contain analytical techniques for the
pollutant in question, or if the Approval
Authority determines that Part 138
analytical techniques are inappropriate.
the analysis shall be performed using
validated analytical methods or any
other applicable analytical procedures
approved by the Approval Authority,
including procedures suggested by the
POTW.
(4) Calculation of Consistent
Removal, (i) The consistent removal,
denoted by r. for a specific pollutant
shall be the difference between the
average concentrations of the pollutant
in the influent of the POTW. denoted by
L and the average concentrations of the
pollutant in the effluent of the POTW,
denoted by E, divided by the average
concentrations of the pollutant in the
influent denoted by L as follows:
The average concentrations of the
pollutant in the influent and effluent
shall be calculated by taking the
arithmetic average of all influent and
effluent data, respectively. In calculating
consistent removal under the
subparagraph, all sample data must be
used.
(ii) If a pollutant is only measurable in
some of the influent and effluent
samples (including the situation where it
is not measurable in any effluent
samples) and the POTW elects to
calculate consistent removal in
accordance with paragraph (b)(4)(i),
influent and effluent observations below
the limit of detectability should be
assigned a value equal to the limit of
detectability. In calculating consistent
removal under paragraph (b)(4)(i). all
sample data, including those set at the
limit of detectability, must be used.
(iii) If a pollutant is only measurable
in some influent and effluent samples
(including the situation where it is not
measurable in any effluent samples) and
the POTW elects not to calculate
consistent removal in accordance with
paragraph (b](4)[i), or if a pollutant is
not measurable in any of the influent
samples (in which case the sample data
may not be used to calculate consistent
removal in accordance with paragraph
(b)(4)(i)), the POTW may (A) use
historical data as provided in paragraph
(b)(l) of this section to calculate
consistent removal, or (B) upon the
concurrence of the Approval Authority,
the POTW may use data from
treatability studies, demonstrated
removal at similar treatment facilities or
provide some other alternative means to
demonstrate its consistent removal.
(iv) For purposes of this paragraph.
"measurable" refers to the ability of the
analytical method to quantify as well as
identify the presence of the pollutant in
question. "Limit of detectability" refers
to the lowest limit at which the
analytical method can quantify the
pollutant in question.
(c) Provisional credits. For pollutants
which are not being discharged
currently (i.e.. new or modified facilities,
or production changes) the POTW may
apply for authorization to give removal
credits prior to the initial discharge of
the pollutant Consistent removal shall
be based provisionally on data from
treatability studies or demonstrated
removal at other treatment facilities
where the quality and quantity of
influent are similar. Within 18 months
after the commencement of discharge of
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations
31223
pollutants in question, consistent
removal must be demonstrated pursuant
to the requirements of paragraph (b). If.
within 18 months after the
commencement of the discharge of the
pollutant in question, the POTW cannot
demonstrate consistent removal
pursuant to the requirements of
paragraph (b) of this section, the
authority to grant provisional removal
credits shall be terminated by the
Approval Authority and all Industrial
Users to whom the revised discharge
limits had been applied shall achieve
compliance with the applicable
categorical Pretreatment Standard(s)
within a reasonable time, not to exceed
the period of time prescribed in the
applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard(s). as may be specified by the
Approval Authority.
(d) Exception to POTW Pretreatment
Program Requirement A POTW
required to develop a local pretreatment
program by § 403.8 may conditionally
give removal credits pending approval
of such a program in accordance with.
the following terms and conditions:
(1) All Industrial Users who are
currently subject to a categorical
Pretreatment Standard and who wish
conditionally to receive a removal credit
must submit to the POTW the
information required in 5 403.12(b)(lH7)
(except hew or modified industrial users
must only submit the information
required by S 403.12(b)(l)-{6)).
pertaining to the categorical
Pretreatment Standard as modified by
the removal credit The Industrial Users
shall indicate what aditional technology.
if any, will be needed to comply with the
categorical Pretreatment Standard(s) as
modified by the removal credit;
(2) The POTW must have submitted to
the Approval Authority an application
for pretreatment program approval
meeting the requirements of § § 403.8
and 403.9 in a timely manner, not to
exceed the time limitation set forth in a
compliance schedule for development of
a pretreatment program included in the
POTW's NPDES permit, but in not case
later than July 1,1983. where no permit
deadline exists:
(3) The POTW must:
(i) Compile and submit data
demonstrating its consistent removal in
accordance with paragraph (b] of this
section;
(ii) Comply with the conditions
specified in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section: and
(iii) Submit a complete application for
removal credit authority in accordance
with paragraph (e) of this section:
(4) If a POTW receives authority to
grant conditional removal credits and
the Approval Authority subsequently
makes a final determination/ after
appropriate notice, that the POTW
failed to comply with the conditions in
paragraphs (d)(2) and (3) of this section.
the authority to grant conditional
removal credits shall be terminated by
the Approval Authority and all
Industrial Users to whom the revised
discharge limits had been applied shall
achieve compliance with the applicable
categorical Pretreatment Standard(s)
within a reasonable time, not to exceed
the period of time prescribed in the
applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard(s). as may be specified by the
Approval Authority.
(5) If a POTW grants conditional
removal credits and the POTW or the
Approval Authority subsequently makes
a final determination, after appropriate
notice, that the Industrial Userfs) failed
to comply with the conditions in
paragraph (d](l) of this section, the
conditional credit shall be terminated by
the POTW or the Approval Authority for
the non-complying Industrial User(s)
and the Industrial User(s) to whom the
revised discharge limits had been
applied shall achieve compliance with
the applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard(s) within a reasonable time.
not to exceed the period of time
prescribed in the applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standard(s), as may be
specified by the Approval Authority.
The conditional credit shall not be
terminated where a violation of the
provisions of this paragraph results from
causes entirely outside of the control of
the Industrial User(s) or the Industrial
• User(s) had demonstrated substantial
compliance.
(6) The Approval Authority may elect
not to review an application for
conditional removal credit authority
upon receipt of such application, in
which case the conditionally revised
discharge limits will remain in effect
until reviewed by the Approval
Authority. This review may-occur at any
time in accordance with the procedures .
of § 403.11. but in no event later than the
time of any pretreatment program
approval or any NPDES permit
reissuance thereunder.
(e) POTW application for
authorization to give removal credits
and Approval Authority review—(l)
Who must apply. Any POTW that wants
to give a removal credit must apply for
authorization from the Approval
Authority.
(2) To whom application made. An
application for authorization to give
removal credits (or modify existing
ones) shall be submitted by the POTW
to the Approval Authority.
(3) When to apply. A POTW may
apply for authorization to give or modify
removal credits at any time.
(4) Contents of the Application. An
application for authorization to give
removal credits must be supported by
the following information:
(i) List of pollutants. A list of
pollutants for which removal credits are
proposed.
(ii) Consistent Removal Data. The
data required pursuant to paragraph (b).
(iii) Calculation of revised discharge
limits. Proposed revised discharge limits
for each affected subcategory of
Industrial Users calculated in
accordance with paragraph (a)(4) of this
section.
(iv) Local Pretreatment Program
Certification. A certification that the
POTW has an approved local
pretreatment program or qualifies for
the exception to this requirement found
at paragraph (d) of this section.
(v) Sludge Management Certification.
A specific description of the POTW's
current methods of using or disposing of
its sludge and a certification that the
granting of removal credits will not
cause a violation of the sludge
requirements identified in paragraph
(a)(3](iv) of this section.
. (vi) NPDES Permit Limit Certification.
A certification that the granting of
removal credits will not cause a
violation of the POTW's NPDES permit
limits and conditions as required in
paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this section.
(5J Approval Authority Review. The
Approval Authority shall review the
POTW's application for authorization to
give or modify removal credits in •
accordance with the procedures of
§ 403.11 and shall, in no event, have
more that 180 days from public notice of
an application to complete review.
(6) EPA review of State removal
credit approvals. Where the NPDES
State has an approved pretreatment
program, the Regional Administrator
may agree in the Memorandum of
Agreement under 40 CFR 123.24(d) to
waive the right to review and object to
submissions for authority to grant ,
removal credits. Such an agreement
shall not restrict the Regional
Administrator's right to comment upon
or object to permits issued to POTW's
except to the extent 40 CFR 123.24(d)
allows such restriction.
(7) Nothing in these regulations
precludes an Industrial User or other
interested party from assisting the
POTW in preparing and presenting the
information necessary to apply for
authorization.
(f) Continuation and withdrawal of
authorization—(1) Effect of
-------
31224 Federal Register / Vol 49. No. 151 / Friday. Auyist 3. 1984 / Rules and Regulations
authorization, (i) Once a POTW has
received authorization to grant removal
credits for a particular pollutant
regulated in a categorical Pretreatment
Standard it may automatically extend
that removal credit to the same pollutant
when it is regulated in other categorical
standards, unless granting the removal
credit will cause the POTW to violate
the sludge requirements identified in
(a)(3)(iv) of this section or its NPDES
permit limits and conditions as required
by (a)(3)(v). If a POTW elects at a later
time to extend removal credits to a
certain categorical Pretreatment
Standard, industrial subcategory or one
or more Industrial Users that initially
were not granted removal credits, it
must notify the Approval Authority.
,(2) Inclusion in POTW permit. Once
authority is granted, the removal credits
shall be included in the POTWs NPDES
Permit as soon as possible and shall
become an enforceable requirement of
the POTWs NPDES permit. The removal
credits will remain in effect for the term
of the POTW's NPDES permit provided •
the POTW maintains compliance with
the conditions specified in subparagraph
(4) of this paragraph.
(3) Compliance monitoring. Following
authorization to give removal credits, •
POTW shall continue to monitor and
report on (at such intervals as may be
specified by the Approval Authority, but
in no case less than once per year) the
POTW's removal capabilities. A
minimum of one representative sample
per month during the reporting period is
required, and all sampling data must be
included in the POTW's compliance
report
(4) Modification or withdrawal of
removal credits, (i) Compliance with the
conditions in paragraph (a)(3)(iiiHv) ot
this section may be examined by the
Approval Authority whenever it elects
and must at the very least be examined
whenever the POTW's NPDES permit is
reissued. If the Approval Authority
determines, on the basis of compliance
monitoring reports or other information
available to it that the conditions
specified in paragraphs (a)(3](iii)-(v) of
this section are not being met the
Approval Authority shall withdraw the
POTW's authority to grant removal
credits or modify those credits in
accordance with the procedures
specified in subparagraph (iii) below.
(ii) If, during the term of the POTWs
NPDES permit the Approval Authority
determines that the POTWs consistent
removal rate is consistently and
substantially lower than the removal
credit specified in the POTWs NPDES
permit, the Approval Authority shall
either withdraw the POTW's authority
to grant removal credits or modify those
credits in accordance with the
procedures specified in subparagraph
(iii) below.
(iii) If the Approval Authority
tentatively determines, under
subparagraphs (i) or (ii) above, that the
withdrawal of a POTW's authority to
grant removal credits or modification of
those credits is warranted, the Approval
Authority shall in accordance with the
procedures specified in i 403.11(b) (1)
and (2) of this section, issue a public
notice, provide a public comment period
of at least 30 days and provide an
opportunity for interested persons to
request a public hearing. The mailing list
for the public notice shall include, at a
minimum, the POTW and Industrial
Users to whom revised discharge limits
have been applied. If the Approval
Authority finally determines to
withdraw the POTWs authority to grant
removal credits or to modify those
removal credits the POTW is authorized
to grant it shall notify the POTW. all
Industrial Users to whom revised limits
have been applied and each person who
has requested individual notice of its
decision and the basis for that decision.
Notice shall also be published in the
same newspaper as the original notice
of the tentative determination was
published. Following such notice and
modification or withdrawal, all
Industrial Users to whom revised
discharge limits have been applied shall
be subject to the modified discharge
limits or the discharge limits prescribed
in the applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standard(s), as
appropriate, and shall achieve
compliance with such limits within a
reasonable time, not to exceed the
period of time prescribed in the
applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard(s). as may be specified by the
Approval Authority.
(g) Removal credits in State-run
pretreatment programs under
S 4O3.10(e). Where an NPDES State with
an approved pretreatment program
elects to implement a local pretreatment
program in lieu or requiring the POTW'
to develop such a program (as provided
in $ 403.10(e}). the POTW will not be
required to develop a pretreatment
program as a precondition to obtaining
authorization to give removal credits.
The POTW will, however, be required to
comply with the other conditions of
paragraph (a)(3) of this section.
3.40 CFR 403.8(a)(2)(ii) is revised to
read as follows:
9 403.8 National Pr«treat!tt«nt Standard*:
Categorical Standards.
• « « • •
(a) • ' •
(2) • * *
(ii) Citing evidence and reasons why a
particular subcategory is applicable and
why others are not applicable. Each
such statement shall contain an oath
stating that the facts contained therein
are true on the basis of the applicant's
personal knowledge or to the best of his
information and belief.
4. In 40 CFR 403.8. paragraph (a) is
revised and paragraph (e)(6) is added to
read as follows:
9 4034 POTW prctrwatmcnt programs:
Development by POTW.
(a) POTWs required to develop a
pretreatment program. Any POTW (or
combination of POTWs operated by the
same authority) with a total design flow
greater than S million gallons per day
(mgd) and receiving from Industrial
Users pollutants which Pass Through or
Interfere with the operation of the
POTW or are otherwise subject to
Pretreatment Standards will be required *
to establish a POTW Pretreatment
Program unless the NPDES State
exercises its option to assume local
responsibilities as provided for in
S 403.10(6). The Regional Administrator
or Director may require that a POTW
with a design flow of 5 mgd or less
develop a POTW Pretreatment Program
if he or she finds that the nature or
.volume of the industrial influent
treatment process upsets, violations of
POTW effluent limitations,
contamination of municipal sludge, or
other circumstances warrant in order to
prevent Interference with the POTW or
Pass Through.
• • • • »
w * • •
(6) incorporate the removal credits
(established under S 403.7) in the POTW
permit
• . • • • •
S. In 40 CFR 403.11, the introductory
text paragraph (a), and the introductory
text of paragraph (b) are all revised.
Paragraph |b)[3) is removed. •
9 403.11 Approval procedure* for POTW
prwtrMtment program* and POTW granting
of removal crtdits.
The following procedures shall be
adopted in approving or denying
requests for approval of POTW
Pretreatment Programs and applications
for removal credit authorization:
(a) Deadline for review of submission.
The Approval Authority shall have 90
days from the date of public notice of
any Submission complying with the
requirements of i 403.9(b) and. where
removal credit authorization is sought
-------
f
r
.Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 151 / Friday. August 3. 1984 / Rules and. Regulations 31225
with J5 403.7(d) and 403.9(d). to review
the Submission. The Approval Authority
'hall review the Submission td
determine compliance with the
requirements of § 403.8 (b) and (f). and.
where removal credit authorization is
sought with $ 403.7. The Approval
Authority may have up to an additional
90 days to complete the evaluation of
the Submission if the public comment
period provided for in paragraph
(b)(l)(ii) of this section is extended
beyond 30 days or if a public hearing is
held as provided for in paragraph (b)(2)
of this section. In no event, however.
shall the time for evaluation of the
Submission exceed a total of 180 days
from the date of public notice of a
Submission meeting the requirements of
. S 403.9(b) and. in the case of a removal
credit application. 55 403.7(d) and
403.9(b).
(b) Public notice and opportunity for
hearing. Upon receipt of a Submission
the Approval Authority shall commence
its review. Within 5 days after making a
determination that a Submission meets
the requirements of J 403.9(b). and.
where removal credit authorization is
sought 55 403.7(d) and 403.9(d), the
Approval Authority shall:
§403.12 [Amended]
6. 40 CFR 403.12 is amended by
removing paragraphs (i) and (j) and
redesignating the remaining paragraphs
as ('HO accordingly.
7. A new Appendix E is added to 40
CFR Part 403 and reads as follows:
Appendix E — Sampling Procedures
L Composite Method
A. It it recommended that influent and
effluent operational data be obtained through
24-hour flow proportional composite samples.
Sampling may be done manually or
automatically, and discretely or continuously.
If discrete sampling is employed, at least 12
aliquots should be composited. Discrete
sampling may be flow proportioned either by
varying the time interval between each
aliquot or the volume of each aliquot. All
composites should be flow proportional to
either the stream flow at the time of
collection of the influent aliquot or to the
total influent flow since the previous influent
aliquot Volatile pollutant aliquots must be
combined in the laboratory immediately
before analysis.
B. Effluent sample collection need not be •
delayed to compensate for hydraulic
detention unless the POTW elects to include
detention time compensation or unless the
Approval Authority requires detention time
compensation. The Approval Authority may
require that each effluent sample is taken
approximately one detention time later than
the corresponding influent sample when .
failure to do so would result in an
unrepresentative portrayal of actual POTW
operation. The detention period should be
based on a 24-hour average daily flow value.
The average daily flow should in turn be
based on the average of the daily flows
during the same month of the previous year.
II. Grab Method
If composite sampling is not an appropriate
technique, grab samples should be taken to
obtain influent and effluent operational data.
A grab sample is an individual sample
collected over a period of time not exceeding
IS minutes. The collection of influent grab
samples should precede the collection of
effluent samples by approximately one
detention period except that where the
detention period is greater than 24 hours such
staggering of the sample collection may not
be necessary or appropriate. The detention
period should be based on a 24-hour average
daily flow value. The average daily flow
should in turn be based upon the average of
the daily flows during the same month of the
previous year. Crab sampling should be
employed where the pollutants being
evaluated are those, such a» cyanide and
phenol, which may not be held for an
extended period because of biological.
chemical or physical interaction which take
place after sample collection and affect the
results.
(Fit Doc. M-20413 Filed 8-Z-M: MS «ra|
WLUNQ CODE (5W-50-M
*
•i
i
-------
fwferri
tdl. 3a.Jfa.-29 ,/ Jriday, Fabcuary 10. 1884 / Rules aad fteyriationa
intent of Congress appears to
ootaemplate liability without causation.
Thus, the court also remanded the
definition of interference.
The "pass through" definiliaain
1 403.3(n) was challengcd-
grounds. P«titionei«-afguednt)iatthe
definition was never proposed, thus
eliminating the opportunity for public
comment. EPA had conceded this
procedural error arid-requested the court
to remand the definition to the Agency.
The oourt did remand the provision, and
chose not to review the substance of the
definition on Us merits.
By today's action EPA is suspending
the current definitions of new source.
interference and pass through as they
appear in the General Pretreatment
Regulations. Revised definitions will be
proposed in the near future in a separate
nilemaking.
3. Technical Amendment to the PDF
Provision
Section 403.13 of the General
Pretreatment Regulations established
the criteria and procedures -for a PDF
variance. The variance would be an
adjustment, on a case-by-case basis, to
the discharge limits in a categorical
pretreatment standard as it applies to an
individual indirect discharger if data
specific to that indirect discharger
indicate it presents factors
fundamentally different from those
considered by EPA in developing the
categorical standard in question.
This provision was challenged in the
pretreatment litigation on the grounds
that EPA had no authority under the
Clean Water Act to for the iiaal action
taken today to become .eifeclive
immediately.
Liat of Subjects in 40 CFR Pait 403
Confidential business information.
Reporting and tecordkeeping
requirements. Waste .treatment and
disposal. Water pollution control.
Dated: February 1. IBM.
William D. Ruckeiahain.
PART 403 — 3ENERAL
PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS FOR
EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES
For the reasons set out in the
preamble. 40 CFR Part 403 is revised as
follows:
1. The authority citation for part 403
reads as follows:
Authority: Section 54(c|(2) of the Clean
Water Act of 1977 (Pub. L 95-217). Sections
204(b)(l)(C), 208(b](2)(C)(iii|. 30lfb)(1]|A)(ii).
301(b)(2)(A)|ii). 301lb)(2)(C). 301lh)(5|.
3Ol(i)(2). 3
be initiated by the EPA.
[2] A fundamentally HiffVer.: far'ors
variance :s not a-vatiabie for ar\ "ox:,;
ooilutant controlled in a catr.e.jr:;..il
?re':?atment Standard.
•IU..-MG COOE «MO-W-M
19
-------
1-83
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORTER
NEWS & ANAL>3S
13 ELR 10011
ARTICLES
Reasoned Decisionmaking in Regulatory Reform: The Third Circuit
Reinstates EPA's Pretreatment Rules
by Edward L. Strohbehn, Jr.
Editors' Summary; Regulatory reform must be carried out through the same reasoned
dedsionmaking processes which the Administrative Procedure Act IAPA) requires for the
promulgation of new rules. This, Mr. Stohbehn argues, is the Third Circuit's message to
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
v. Environmental Protection Agency, 12 ELR 20833. The Reagan EPA hoi indefinitely
deferred the effective date of pretreatment regulations promulgated on January 29, 198!
(in a midnight action of the Carter Administration) in order to subject them to the regula-
tory impact analysis mandated by President Reagan's regulatory reform Executive Order
12291. The court found the deferral to be tantamount to repeal of the rule, an action
which requires compliance with the APA 's notice and comment procedures.
Mr. Strohbehn analyzes the regulatory history of the pretreatment regulation and
court's decision. Noting that the court carefully avoided the substantive implications of the
Reagan regulatory reform actions, and even sidestepped the question of whether a deferral
affixed duration would have required notice and comment, he concludes that the Third
Circuit's primary concern was to ensure that the principles of good government dedsion-
rnafajig embodied in the APA not be circumvented in the regulatory reform process.
Regulatory reform was a major element of President
Reagan's campaign and a priority concern of his new ad-
ministration. The President wanted to reduce unneces-
sary regulatory burdens on industry. Quick to receive
attention were regulations which had been promulgated
at the close of the Carter Administration and which were
not yet effective when the Reagan Administration took
office.
Thus, acting in response to an executive order (E.O.)1
issued by the President in February 1981, in March the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indefinitely de-
ferred the effective date of Clean Water Act pretreatment
Mr. Strohbehn is a member of Orrick. Harrington & Suicliffe. P.C.,
San Francisco; and formerly was Executive Director. Council on Envi-
ronmental Quality. Execuive Office of the President.
l.Exec. Order No. 12291. 46 Fed. Reg. 13193 (Feb. 19. 1981), ELR
REC.45035.
2.46 Fed. Reg. 19936 (Apr. 2. 1981).
program regulations,2 which it had promulgated in Jan-
uary 1981.'
On July 8, 1982, in Natural Resources Defense Coun-
cil, Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit overturned the
EPA decision and made the regulations effective retroac-
tively as of March 30, 1981.' The court's decision was a
setback for one element of the President's regulatory re-
lief program and underscored that the Administrative
Procedure Act governs the process of reforming existing
regulations every bit as much as it controls their initial
promulgation.
3.46 Fed. Reg. 9404 (Jan. 28. 1981). issued pursuant to Clean Water
Act §307
-------
13 ELR 10012
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORTER
1-83
The Pretrealment Program
The pretreatment program plays a critical role in the
Clean Water Act's scheme for water pollution control.'
In contrast with the Act's other major components,
however, its statutory framework is beguilingly simple:
The Administrator shall, within one hundred and eigh-
ty days after the date of enactment of this title and from
time to time thereafter, publish proposed regulations es-
tablishing pretreatment standards for introduction of
pollutants into treatment works (as defined in section 212
of this Act) which are publicly owned for those pollutants
which are determined not to be susceptible to treatment
by such treatment works or which would interfere with
the operation of such treatment works. •
While the statutory directive seems straightforward,
Congress' intent was not so simple. The legislative history
revealed a concern that EPA avoid requiring indirect dis-
5. To understand the substantive importance of the federal pretreat-
ment program, a brief discussion of the facts on which it is based
follows. This discussion is based on information contained in briefs
filed in NRDC v. EPA, note 4.supra, and in National Association of
Metal Finishers v. EPA. Nos. 79-2256 et al. (3d Cir.t (These cases
involve all the challenges on the merits of EPA's 1981 pretreatment
program regulations).
About 87.000 industrial facilities discharge their wastewaters
into publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). In contrast, about
60.000 industrial facilities discharge directly into the nation's rivers.
lakes, streams, estuaries, and oceans. POTWs also receive waste
streams from residences, city streets, and other nonindustrial
sources. Although industrial facilities contribute only a modest
amount of the total flow of wastewater to POTWs. they contribute
about 65 percent of the total toxic metals which enter POTWs and
an even greater share of other toxic pollutants such as ethyl benzene,
cyanide, and phenol. Some of the toxic pollutants found in the efflu-
ent from industrial facilities are carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogen-
ic. or acutely toxic to humans and aquatic organisms. Many of these
toxic pollutants pass through the POTW and are discharged into the
nation's waters. Other pollutants in the industrial facilities' effluent
may interfere with the operation of POTWs. Finally, some of the
polluianis discharged by industrial facilities could corrode ihc
POTW\ pipes, ignite and explode wiihin the POTW. or otherwise
be incompaiible wuh ihe POTW.
Prior to enactment of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972 (FWPCA) (Pub. L. No. 92-500. 86 Stat. 816),
no federal requirements applied to discharges to POTWs. However,
in many situations the industrial user of a POTW was subject to pre-
treatment requirements which were imposed by local ordinances or
by POTW user contracts. However, these requirements were often
concerned only with protecting the POTW itself and not water qual-
ity. POTWs would prohibit the discharge of substances which would
destroy the biological treatment system or physically damage the fa-
cility. These requirements were not uniform and rarely dealt with
pollutants which simply pass through the POTW into the nation's
waters.
Two factors related to (he 1972 FWPCA heightened federal in-
terest in pretreatment issues. First, the principal purpose of the Act
is to reduce the discharge of pollutants into (he nation's waters.
Congress made direct discharges of pollutants subject to technology-
based effluent limitations established by EPA. See §§301. 304, 402.
33 U.S.C. §§1311. 1314. 1342, ELR STAT. 42123. 42126. 42141.
However, Congress recognized that many of these regulated pollu-
tants passed through POTWs; if it did not regulate indirect dis-
charges, its efforts to clean up the nation's waters would be unsuc-
cessful.
Second. Congress imposed effluent limitations on POTWs and,
(o help POTWs meet these requirements, established a construction
grant program which would provide up to 70 percent of the funds
necessary to meet the Act's effluent limitation requirements. This
was the largest public works program in the nation's history. Thus.
Congress had a strong interest in establishing a pretreatment pro-
gram which would protect the federal investment in POTW con-
struction. Accordingly, the FWPCA established a pretreatment pro-
gram which applied to indirect discharges into POTWs.
6.Secnon 307(b)(l). 3? U.S.C. SI3l7(b)(l). ELR Sr*r. 42130(empha-
sis added).
21
charges to provide treatment where treatment was
already being adequately provided by a publicly owned
treatment work (POTW):
In no event is it intended chat pretreatment facilities be
required for compatible wastes as a substitute for ade-
quate municipal waste treatment works.'
This policy, which was reinforced by the 1977 Clean
Water Act Amendments, created the need for relatively
complex regulatory requirements which became the prin-
cipal source of serious delays in establishing the pretreat-
ment program.
EPA decided to implement the pretreatment program
by developing general requirements which apply to all in-
direct discharges and specific categorical pretreatment
effluent limitation standards which apply to indirect dis-
chargers in each major industrial point source category.
TJie general pretreatment requirements establish: (1) ad-
ministrative processes by which the pretreatment pro-
grams will be developed and adopted by local authorities;
(2) general prohibitions against the discharge of pollu-
tants which could interfere with a POTW by, for exam-
ple, causing fire, explosion, or corrosion; and (3)
methods by which the categorical pretreatment standards
will be applied to specific industrial point sources, such as
removal credits, the combined waste stream formula, and
definitions of "interference" and "pass through."'
Legal Challenges to the Pretreatment Program
Congress intended that EPA implement the federal
pretreatment program by August 1973, nine months after
enactment of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (FWPCA). EPA failed to meet the deadline. The Na-
tural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed suit to
compel performance and, in June 1976, the suit was set-
tled, along with several others, producing the NRDC
Consent Decree.' Under the Decree, EPA agreed to
implement the pretreatment program "as expeditiously
as possible."10
The current litigation involves EPA's most recent
attempt to meet its obligations under the Consent Decree
and the Clean Water Act." On January 15, 1981, the
7.S. CONF. REF. No. 92-1236. 92d Cong.. 2dSess.. as reported in 1972
U.S. CODE CONG. &. AD. NEWS 3807.
8.40C.F.R. pt. 403 aid 46 Fed. Reg. 9404 (Jan. 28, 1981). The indus-
try petitions for review on the merits of the pretreatment regulations
promulgated by EPA in January 1981 involve challenges 10 those
pan* ol'the regulanoni which address the lour i-siies noied in ihc
text. In addition, environmental oream/ations raised other merits
issues concerning [he 1981 preireatment regulations.
9. NRDC v Train, ft ELR 20588 ID.D.C. ]9~h). a\ imttlified. NRDC
v.Costlt.9ELR:0176(D.D.C. 1979).
10. NRDC v. Train. 6 ELR 20588. 20592 (D.D.C. 1976) ("The regula-
tions developed pursuant to this Agreement shall be applied and
shall be required to be applied by (he Administrator to the full extent
of his authority as expeditiously as possible (o all point sources
covered by such regulations.").
11. A brief history of the 1976-1981 period follows.
In 1977, Congress generally endorsed the Decree, enacting
many of its requirements into law. Clean Water Act of 1977. Pub.
L. No. 95-217. 91 Siat. 1566: see NRDC v. Costle. 9 ELR 201'n.
20178 (D.D.C. 1979) ("In new ol" Congress' general endorsement
of ihe approach of the Agreement (Consent Decree] . . . ."). Also in
1977. EPA proposed regulations which it promulgated in final form
in June 1978. 43 Fed. Reg. 27736 (June 26, 1978). These regulations
were challenged by industry and environmental groups. In May
-------
1-83
NEWS & ANALYSIS
13 ELR 10013
EPA Administrator signed final pretreatment regula-
tions; these regulations, promulgated on January 28,
1981, after President Reagan's inauguration, were to be-
come effective on March 13, 1981." Suits challenging the
1981 regulations on the merits were filed in the Third,
Seventh, and District of Columbia Circuits. All of these
suits were consolidated in the Third Circuit and are now
pending.
On January 29, 1981, President Reagan issued a mem-
orandum directing agencies to postpone for 60 days all
regulations which were scheduled to become effective
during the 60-day period.11 On February 17, 1981, the
President issued E.O. 12291 which directed agencies to
defer the effective date of pending major regulations to
the extent possible within existing laws to permit review
and reconsideration pursuant to the regulatory reform
provisions of the Executive Order." E.O. 12291 required
agencies to prepare a Regulatory Impact Analysis, which
was designed to examine the costs and benefits of the
deferred regulations and alternatives to them." In
response to the Executive Order, in March 1981 EPA
deferred "until further notice" the 1981 pretreatment
regulations, leaving in place the 1978 pretreatment
1979. industry reached a settlement agreement with EPA which pro-
vided in part that the 1978 regulations would remain effective and
that EPA would propose certain amendments to the pretreatment
regulations consisienl with the settlement agreement. The settlement
did not affect the environmental organizations' challenges to the
1978 pretreatment regulation. The elements of the pretreatment pro-
gram which were most controversial were those which translated the
EPA technology-based categorical pretreatment effluent limitations
into the actual limits which point sources would have to meet.
Among the controversial elements were: the combined waste stream
formula and removal credit system and the definitions of "interfer-
ence" and "pass through."
In October 1979, EPA proposed regulations which were de-
signed to comply with the settlement agreement. 44 Fed. Reg. 62260
(Oct. 29. 1979). Detailed comments submitted by parties to the set-
tlement indicate that they considered the proposed regulations to be
inconsistent with the settlement agreement in several key areas.
Many other detailed comments were submitted to EPA. underscor-
ing the fact that the program remained highly controversial. In June
1980, the House Public Works and Transportation Committee held
oversight hearings on the Clean Water Act. including the pretreat-
ment program. The Committee issued a report in which it indicated
its concern with aspects of the pretreatment program, including the
removal credit system which it recommended be abolished. HOUSE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON REVIEW AND OVERSIGHT OF THE HOUSE COMMIT-
TEE os PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION, IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT. 96TH CONG.. 2o
SESS. 59-60(1980).
12.46 Fed. Reg. 9404 (Jan. 28. 1981).
13.46 Fed. Reg. 11227 (Feb. 6. 1981).
14.46 Fed. Reg. 13193 (Feb. 19, 1981), ELR REG. 45035.
15. This executive order was the keystone of the Reagan Administra-
tion's new regulatory reform program. Two major institutional
changes were mandated by the program: (i) as noted above, agencies
were required to prepare more detailed Regulatory Impact Analyses
(RIAs) than was true under the Carter Administration on all major
rules and (ii) major rules, together with their RIAs. were to be
submitted to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review before the rules were issued in proposed final
form. Subject to certain narrow exceptions, the Executive Order
gave the OMB Director authority to require agencies to defer
promulgation pending resolution of concerns raised by OMB. It also
imposed a number of other procedural and substantive analytical
requirements, all of which were supposed to result in a more careful
review of the costs and legal implications of agency regulations. It is
fair to conclude that the underlying purpose of the regulatory
reform program was "regulatory relief: i.e., to reduce the number.
length, and detail of regulations and to reduce their direct costs on
the regulated entities.
rules."
In June 1981 NRDC filed its petition for review in the
Third Circuit, contending that the indefinite deferral
was illegal under the Administrative Procedure Act.
due to EPA's failure to comply with the APA notice-and-
comment requirements. In brief, NRDC contended that
the effective date of a rule is an integral, substantive ele-
ment of the rule itself. Accordingly, any change in the
effective date of a final rule is a substantive rulemaking
action which can be accomplished only by following the
strict notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures of
§553 of the APA." EPA and industry both took the posi-
tion that, because of EPA rulemaking actions in October
1981 which, inter alia, made the 1981 pretreatment regu-
lations effective in January, 1982, the case was moot or,
if not moot, that NRDC had received all the relief to
which it was entitled. In addition, industry contended
that deferral of the future effective date of a rule is not a
rule .within the meaning of the APA and, even if it were,
gobd cause existed for EPA's decision not to follow APA
notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements in this
case.
The Ttoerd Cireanit's IDtecssiom
The case posed the issue whether an agency, without
following APA notice-and-comment rulemaking require-
ments, could indefinitely defer the effective date of a reg-
ulation which had been issued in final form but had not
become effective. The basic question was whether, as
NRDC contended, the effective date element of a pro-
mulgated regulation is itself a "rule" within the meaning
of the APA. The intervenors claimed that adopting
NRDC's position "would be making, a fundamental
change in existing laws . . . .'"° The gist of industry's
contention was that EPA in deferring the effective date
did not prescribe a course of conduct or substantially
affect any interests but, instead, simply maintained the
status quo based on strong public interest considerations.
16.46 Fed. Reg. 19936 (Apr. 2. 1981). Pursuant to the Presidential
Memorandum of January 29. 1981 directing that the effective date
of certain regulations be postponed for 60 days, on February 6. 1982
EPA deferred the effective date of the 1981 pretreatment regulations
until March 30. 1981. 46 Fed. Reg. 11972 (Feb. 12. 1981). This EPA
action was not challenged by NRDC. and the Third Circuit implicit-
ly considers ii valid because its decision makes the 1981 pretreatmeni
regulations effective as of March 30, 1981.
17.5 U.S.C. §553. ELR STAT. 41002.
18. Brief for Intervenors Chemical Manufacturers Association. Nov.
23. 1981, at 22. Intervenor Ford Motor Company also contended
that because EPA indefinitely deferred the 1981 pretreatmeni reg-
ulations before they had become effective, "the temporary deferral
action was simply one step in an unfinished rulemaking" and no
APA notice-and-commem violation occurred; there was "no rule"
to which the APA could have applied. Brief for Intervenor Ford
Motor Company, November 23. 1981. at 22. 27-37. The court's
principal reason for rejecting imervenor's finality contention was
that the 1981 final pretreatmeni regulations were effective for pur-
poses of judicial review on February 10. 1981. The court concluded
that "(t]o argue that they were not final for purposes of being
altered by EPA renders illusory (heir finality for purpose* lor mdi-
cial review." \'RDC v. EPA. note 4 supra, at 20837. The coun also
noied lhai ihe D.C. Circuii on January 29. 1982. held in Consumer
Energy Council of America \. FERC. 67? F.2d425(D.C. Cir. 1982).
thai a final agency rule which was not yet effective was a final rule
rule for which APA nonce-and-commem requirements had 10 be
mei before ihe agency could repeal the rule. Id. ai 446. discussed in
NRDO. EPAno(e-isupra. ai 20837-38.
22
-------
13ELR 10014
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORTER
1-83
The intervenors' position was significantly undercut by
twci facts. First, EPA did not contend that deferral of the
effective date was not rulemaking within the meaning of
the APA; EPA's basic strategy was to seek to avoid judi-
cial review." Thus, in October 1981, in an effort to moot
the case, EPA issued an order making the challenged
rules effective in January 1982; at the same time, and
following APA notice-and-comment requirements, EPA
proposed indefinitely deferring the effective date of the
rules beyond January 1982." Thus, only the industry in-
tervenors took the position that EPA's March 1981 indef-
inite deferral action was not a rule.
Second, the Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit had held on April 16, 1981, in Council
of Southern Mountains Inc. v. Donovan, that a tempo-
rary deferral of a rule was rulemaking with the meaning
of the APA.:' In Council of Southern Mountains, as in
NRDC v. EPA, the government did not dispute that the
deferral order was a rule within the meaning of the APA.
It was in this context that the Third Circuit analyzed
the issues in NRDC v. EPA. It considered indefinite
deferral of a rule as tantamount to a repeal and pointed
out that the APA defines rulemaking to include "agency
process for ... repealing a rule."" Having reached this
conclusion, the Third Circuit had to decide whether the
rulemaking action fit either of the two exceptions to the
notice-and-comment requirements: whether it was an
"interpretive rule" or whether "good cause" existed to
avoid the notice-and-comment requirement."
Courts rely on the substantial impact test to distinguish
interpretive rules, which do not require compliance with
notice-and-comment procedures, from substantive rules,
which must comply. The Third Circuit found that the
deferral would have a "substantial impact" on the regu-
lated industry because EPA had earlier prescribed that
the categorical pretreatment standard for the electroplat-
ing industry would take effect three years after promul-
gation of the combined waste stream formula, which was
part of the deferred regulations." Thus, as a consequence
of the deferral, the regulated industry could indefinitely
postpone installation and operation of the pollution con-
trol equipment necessary to meet the categorical pretreat-
ment effluent limitations. That postponement, in turn,
meant that discharges of pollutants would continue for a
longer period than if EPA had not deferred the effective
date. Accordingly, the court held that "the indefinite
postponement of the effective date of a final rule fits the
APA definition of 'rule' where, as here, the postpone-
ment has a substantial impact upon the public and upon
the regulated industry . . . .""
As noted above, the APA permits an agency to avoid
19. See Brief for Respondent (EPA). Nov. 23. 1981.
20.46 Fed. Reg. 50502. 50503 (Oct. 13. 1981).
21.653 F.2d 573 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
22.5 U.S.C. §551(5). ELR STAT. 41002. The court reasoned that an
"agency could (albeit indirectly) repeal a rule simply by eliminating
(or indefinitely postponing) its effective date, thereby accomplishing
without rulemaking something for which the statute requires a rule-
making proceeding." NRDC v. EPA. note 4 supra. 12 ELR at
20839: set also id., at 20840 n.23.
23. 5 U.S.C. §553(b). ELR STAT. 41002.
24.40C.F.R. §413.01.
25. NRDC v. EPA. note 4 supra. 12 ELR at 20840. 23
compliance with the notice-and-comment procedures
where "good cause" exists.26 In analyzing the good cause
issue, the Third Circuit held that the exception " 'should
be limited to emergency situations' "'•' and that there is a
"need for exceptional circumstances before the immi-
nence of a deadline will constitute good causes."1' It
found that the E.O. 12291 directive that promulgated-
but-not-yet-effective major rules be deferred for further
review and consideration and preparation of a Regula-
tory Impact Analysis did not constitute good cause for
avoiding APA requirements, because: (1) E.O. 12291 re-
quired agencies to act consistent with applicable law,
which, the Third Circuit found, included the APA, and
(2) as to the 1981 pretreatment regulations. EPA could
have satisfied the requirements of both the APA and
E.O. 12291." The court noted that EPA's October 1981
rulemaking, which prescribed a January 1982 effective
date and which also proposed deferring the regulations in-
definitely, supported the coun's conclusion that rulemak-
ing complied with E.O. 12291, according to EPA, and
with the APA.!0 Thus, the court held that "good cause"
did not exist for EPA's failure to comply with the APA.
Legal and Policy Implications of NRDC v. EPA
Benefits of APA Compliance: Better Decisionmaking
The Third Circuit's decision is part of a long line of cases
which hold that courts will strictly enforce the procedural
requirements of the APA.JI The Third Circuit briefly
noted only two of the various policy considerations that
underlie those cases. In determining that the deferral ac-
tion was a rulemaking subject to the APA, it quoted the
recent observation by U.S. Court of Appeals for the Dis-
trict of Columbia Circuit in Consumer Energy Council of
America v. FERC" that:
The value of notice and comment prior to repeal of a
final rule is that it ensures that an agency will not undo
all (hat it accomplished through its rulemaking without
giving all parties an opportunity to comment on the wis-
dom of repeal."
26. Section 553(b)(3) provides:
Except when notice or hearing is required by statute, this subsec-
tion does not apply—
(A) to interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or
rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice; or
(B) when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates
the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the
rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are im-
practicable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.
27. NRDC v. EPA. note 4 supra. 12 ELR at 20840, quoting Consumer
Energy Council of America v. FERC. 673 F.2d 425 (D.C. Cir.
1982).
29. NRDC v. EPA. note4iupra. 12ELR at 20841 n.25.
29. Id. at 20840-42.
30. Id. at2084l-42.
31.E.g.. NLRB v. Wyman-Gordan Co., 394 U.S. 759 (1969): State
Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Ass'n v. Dep't of Transportation, 680 F.2d
206 (D.C. Cir. 1982): American Fed'nof Gov'i Employees v. Block.
655 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1981): American Bus. Ass'n v. U.S.. 627
F.2d 525 (D.C. Cir. 1980): New Jersey Dep't of Envtl. Protection v.
EPA, 626F.2d 1038, 10 ELR 20963 (D.C. Cir. 1980); Weyerhauser
Co. v. Costle. 590 F.2d 1011. 9 ELR 20284 (D.C. Cir. 1978): Tex-
aco, Inc. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 412 F.2d 740(3d Cir. 1969).
32.673 F.2d 425. 445-46 (D.C. Cir. 1982).
33. NRDC v. EPA. note4 jupro. 12 ELR at 20840.
-------
l-o3
NEWS & ANALYSIS
The Third Circuit then emphasized the educational and
informational value of following the notice-and-com-
ment procedures, noting that had EPA complied with the
APA in March 1981, it might have discovered sooner the
useful information which it obtained as a result of its Oc-
tober 1981 rulemaking.14
The basic policies which the Third Circuit's decision
advances are outlined in the cases relied on by the court.
First, requiring strict compliance with the APA's rule-
making requirements provides the courts with a clear cut
role in the judicial review process while ostensibly en-
abling them to avoid making judgments on the merits of
the agency action in issue. Second, strict observance of
the APA's requirements theoretically.ensures public in-
volvement in the rulemaking process, avoids domination
of decisions by narrow or special interests, and educates
the agency, the public, and the regulated community
about the implications of the proposed rule and its al-
ternatives. In sum, courts consider compliance with the
APA's procedural requirements as a means for promot-
ing better decisionmaking and good government.
Under the Third Circuit's decision, agencies have an
incentive to consult fully and thoroughly with all poten-
tially affected interests prior to promulgating a rule. Sim-
ilarly, interested parties have an incentive for participat-
ing in the rulemaking process rather than waiting to see if
the agency is serious and assessing the impact of the pro-
posed rule after its promulgation in final form. Other-
wise, the agency's action can be modified only by under-
taking a full scale rulemaking process.
The Third Circuit may also have viewed its decision as
making judicial challenge of agency rules less likely to
occur and easier to resolve when brought. The decision
makes it more likely that all contested issues will be be-
fore the agency when it makes its decision. As a result, it
is more likely that the agency will act reasonably, relying
on the best evidence and balancing competing interests,
than that the agency will act "arbitrarily and capricious-
ly." Moreover, judicial review of such a decision would
be on the merits and, for such cases, as the Third Circuit
emphasized, courts apply a "deferential standard of re-
view for [the] substance of agency action.""
APA Compliance And Regulatory Change
To the extent that the Third Circuit's decision represents
sound precedent, it foreshadows certain significant policy
implications. The first is that if outgoing administrations
can adequately complete rulemaking proceedings prior to
the inauguration, new administrations can reverse those
decisions only by instituting new rulemaking proceedings.
Two aspects of the Third Circuit's decision reinforce this
conclusion. The Third Circuit emphasized that efforts to
overturn prior administration last minute actions are
those " 'sharp changes of agency course [which] consti-
tute "daneer sienals" to which a reviewing court must be
alert.' """
M.W. 3120842.
35. W. 3120838.
36. Id. quoting State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. DOT, 680 F.2d
206. 220 (D.C. Cir. 1982). itself quoting judge Levemhal in Joseph
v. FCC. 404 F.2d 207. 2\2 (D.C. Cir. 1968). Compare Andrus v.
Sierra Club. 44; L'.S. 747. .158.9 ELR 20390. 20393 (1979).
[I]t makes sense to scrutinize the procedures employed by
the agency all the more closely where the agency has
acted, within a compressed time frame, to reverse itself
by the procedure under challenge."
In subjecting the agency action in issue to close scrutiny,
the Third Circuit held that efforts to defer the effective
date of a rule are rulemaking actions subject to the APA
procedural requirements. Thus, a new administration
will have to weigh proposals to reverse the last-minute
rules of the previous administration as carefully as it does
other rulemaking proposals in ranking its priorities.
The second implication is that the role of career civil
servants is probably enhanced by the decision. Sudden
rulemaking changes are more likely to result from the
appointment of new policy making officials, usually poli-
tical appointees, than from discoveries of new informa-
tion. By requiring substantive rulemaking changes to
comply with APA notice-and-comment requirements
and, accordingly, to be based on a record, the court's
opinion means that new officials will have a great need to
rely' on experienced career officials. These are the people
who can ensure that the rulemaking proceeds in a legit-
imate fashion; i.e., that proposal alternatives to existing
rules are clearly supported by the agency's record.
The Unanswered Questions
D Did the Decision Fundamentally Change the Law?
The Third Circuit decision leaves several important ques-
tions unanswered. The court chose not to address explic-
itly intervenors' contention that a fundamental change in
the law would be effected if the court required applica-
tion of APA notice-and-comment requirements to agency
action deferring the effective date of a rule. The court
justified its application of those procedural requirements
by construing EPA's indefinite deferral of the rule as a
"repeal," which is explicitly subject to APA. require-
ments. Thus, under the court's analysis its decision does
not change the law.
D Must AH Deferrals Comply With Notice-and-
Comment Requirements? It is clear that the court found
its decision easy because EPA had indefinitely postponed
the rule, an action which the court could analogize to a
repeal, which is expressly identified in the APA as subject
to notice-and-comment. Council of Southern Mountains,
by contrast, involved a six-month rather than indefinite
deferral." The D.C. Circuit held that while this deferral
was subject to APA notice-and-comment requirements, it
met the good cause exception. Although the Third Circuit
stated that it agreed with the D.C. Circuit's holding in
Council of Southern Mountains, it chose to rest NRDC v.
EPA on the narrower ground that an indefinite deferral is
effectively a repeal and therefore explicitly subject to
APA notice-and-comment requirements."
3T Id.
38.653 F.2d 573 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
39./V7?£>Cv. EPA. note 4 supra, 12 ELR ai 20839. The Third Circuit's
decision is narrow in another respect. By holding that the APA
notice-and-comment requirement applies because there was sub-
stantial impact "upon the public and upon the regulated industry."
the court leaves open the possibility that both sectors must be a
fected before a rule could be considered substantive rather tha
interpretative, (emphasis added.)
24
-------
13ELR 10016
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORTER
1-83
Thus, NRDC v. EPA leaves open the question whether
a 60-day, 90-day, six-month, or one-year deferral must
necessarily comply with APA notice-and-comment re-
quirements. For example, if a 60-day deferral was subject
to APA notice-and-comment requirements and only
"emergency situations" would constitute "good cause"
for not complying with these requirements, agencies
might be prevented from undertaking reasonable fine
tuning of regulations which had not yet taken effect. This
factual setting and concern were at the core of the conten-
tion by NRDC industry intervenors that the Third Cir-
cuit would be making a fundamental change in the law if
it held that deferrals of a future effective date are subject
to APA notice-and-comment requirements.
The Third Circuit's decision suggests that it may have
been at least partly persuaded by industry's contention
and wanted to leave open the possibility that some defer-
rals are not subject to notice-and-comment requirements.
Two possibilities exist.
First, the Third Circuit may be willing to recognize
"good cause" exceptions for deferrals that are broader
than the District of Columbia Circuit's "emergency situ-
ations" or "exceptional circumstances" standards,
which the Third Circuit cited with approval in NRDC v.
EPA.'" In fact, this is what the Third Circuit has recently
done. In Philadelphia Citizens in Action v. Schweiker,"
the court distinguished two of its earlier "good cause"
decisions, which had led the Philadelphia trial court to
overturn an agency rulemaking action for failure to
follow APA notice-and-comment requirements, and
noted that it interpreted these cases "more cautiously.'2
Thus, Philadelphia indicates that the court will provide
more latitude for agency action to qualify for the "good
cause" exception.
Second, the Third Circuit may be willing to construe
the "substantive impacts" test narrowly, so that short-
term deferrals could be considered "interpretative rules
... or rules of agency organization, procedure, or prac-
tice"0 rather than substantive rules. As a result, the rule-
making action would not have to comply with APA
notice-and-comment requirements. Whether this was the
court's intent cannot be divined from its decision in
NRDC v. EPA, but the option was not foreclosed by the
court.
~ Does E.O. 12291 Have Any Legal Significance? In
NRDC v. EPA, the Third Circuit carefully avoided any
implication that it was construing the applicability or
meaning of E.O. 12291. The court asserted that EPA
"could have complied with both the APA and E.O.
12291."" It found support for its conclusion by pointing
to EPA's rulemaking actions in October 1981 when EPA
40. Id. at-20841 n.25. In addition, these very narrow "good cause" ex-
ceptions are similar 10 ihe Third Circuit'* decisions in Sharon Sieel
Corp. v. EPA. 597 F.2d .177. 9 ELR 2031 fi (3d Cir. 1979). and
American Iron & Steel Inst. v. EPA. 568 F.2d 284, 7 ELR 20738 (3d
Cir. 1977).
41.669F.2d877(3dCir. 1982).
42. Id. at 883.
4.V 5 U.S.C. 5553(b)<3). ELR Sr*r. 41002.
44. NRDC v. EPA, note 4 supra. 12 ELR at 20841.
purported to comply with both the APA and E.O. 12291.
But the court did not independently analyze the appli-
cable law to reach its conclusion. As a result, ii avoided
two issues.
First, the Third Circuit explicitly avoided the issue "of
whether a deadline imposed by an Executive Order is en-
titled to the same deference as a deadline created by
statute."" Second, and more interesting, the court did
not rule on whether E.O. 12291 provides agencies with a
legal basis for avoiding other requirements. Under the
Third Circuit's NRDC v. EPA discussion, this would
appear not to be the case, at least with respect to the
APA. In addition, E.O. 12291 states that it "is not in-
tended to create any right or benefit, substantive or pro-
cedural, enforceable at law by a party against the United
States, its agencies, its officers or any person."4' But,
both E.O. 12291 and the Third Circuit decision leave
ope,ri the question whether in fact a situation could arise
in which the Executive Order could affect the rights of a
party. The most obvious example would be one in which
compliance with the Executive Order entailed noncompli-
ance with other prescribed procedures. In Public Citizen
v. DHHS, the District of Columbia Circuit recently re-
fused to reverse a district court decision which found that
an indefinite deferral of an agency rule undertaken in
compliance with "the spirit" of E.O. 12291 and without
notice-and-comment did not violate APA requirements.'7
The District of Columbia Circuit gave the agency one
month to decide whether it would modify its rulemaking
action. Thus, the circuit court backed away from the
holding one might believe was mandated by its earlier
decision in Council of Southern Mountains." As a result,
legal effect of E.O. 12291 on agency decisionmaking and
procedures remains unclear.
Conclusion
By its own reasoning NRDC v. EPA does not substan-
tially change the law that governs agency rulemaking
practices. The principal practical effect of the decision is
to goad the Third Circuit and the parties before it to re-
solve more quickly the merits of the pending cases on the
pretreatment regulations and to start tolling the three-
year period by which those subject to these pretreatment
regulations—the integrated electroplate industry—must
comply with their requirements. The principal legal effect
is to reinforce the statutory requirement that agencies
must strictly observe prescribed APA procedures when
modifying or substantially delaying regulations. Further-
more, the decision underscores that courts are likely to
require strict APA compliance when the issue is doubtful.
45. Id. at2084l n.26.
46. Exec. Order No. 12291. §9, ELR REG. 45037 (emphasis added).
47. Public Citizen v. DHHS. 671 F.2d 518 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
48.653 F.2d 573 (D.C. Cir. 1981). Judge Edwards makes this point in
his dissent in Public Citizen v. DHHS. 671 F.2d 518 (D.C. Cir.
1981).
25
-------
D/REG. 10/#36
CHAPTER 3
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
Local administration of National Categorical Pretreatment Standards has
become a major focus for municipalities in the development and implementation
of their pretreatment programs. This chapter provides a short history of
categorical pretreatment standards, a brief, discussion of the relationship
between the standards for direct dischargers and those for indirect dis-
chargers (industries that discharge to POTWs are indirect dischargers), and an
overview of methods available for modifying the standards as applied to
individual industrial users.
Background of Categorical Standards
Pollutant discharge standards applicable to specific categories of
industries were promulgated as early as the mid-1970s for a list of 56
industries. This list included processors of dairy products, fruits and
vegetables, seafood, and sugar as well as manufacturers of chemicals, plas-
tics, fertilizer, soap, paint, and other products. Although the regulations
were primarily concerned with setting standards for industries that discharge
directly into rivers, lakes, and other natural water bodies, many of them also
contained pretreatment standards for industries that discharge to POTWs.
Except where they are superceded by more recent regulations, these early
standards remain in effect.
Most of the pretreatment standards in the early regulations limited only
conventional pollutants such as pH, oil and grease, BOD, and suspended solids.
In some industry categories, the pretreatment standards section simply re-
ferred to 40 CFR Part 128, which has been deleted but substantively replaced
by 40 CFR Part 403. The Prohibited Discharge Standards contained in 40 CFR
403.5 are as stringent or more stringent than the pretreatment standards
expressed in many of the early regulations.
As a result of a suit brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council
(NRDC) against EPA in 1976, EPA was forced to shift its focus from the control
of conventional pollutants to the control of toxic pollutants. As part of the
settlement of this suit, EPA agreed to develop technology-based standards to
3-1
-------
E/REG. X-l/#36
control 65 toxic substances and classes of toxic substances produced in 21
categories of industries. EPA later refined its effort to include a more
detailed list of 129 (now 126) pollutants representative of the broader list
of 65 toxic pollutants and classes, and 34 (now 26) industrial categories. In
developing the pretreatment standards for these pollutants and these indus-
tries, EPA needed to know what level of each pollutant would cause inter-
ference with wastewater treatment processes and what amount of each pollutant
is removed by typical treatment processes and, therefore, does not pass
through into the receiving waters. Various studies were then conducted to
provide the technical data needed to establish specific pretreatment stan-
dards. As a result of these efforts, categorical pretreatment standards have
been promulgated and continue to be promulgated for pollutants discharged from
industries identified as being the primary sources of toxic pollutants. (See
Attachment 3.1 for status of categorical pretreatment standards.)
Development of Categorical Pretreatment Standards
Categorical standards are technology-based limits on the discharge of
pollutants. As such, they constitute minimum standards and may be superceded
by more stringent sludge disposal limitations or water quality-based standards
developed to protect specific lakes, streams, and other natural waters.
Economic impacts on affected industries are taken into consideration in the
development of categorical standards which assume industry-wide usage of the
best available technology (BAT) for pollution control.
The Effluent Guidelines Division of EPA first develops categorical
standards for industries that discharge directly into natural waters.
Pretreatment standards for indirect dischargers (industries that discharge to
POTWs) are based on the standards for direct dischargers. If POTW treatment
plant processes remove any of an industry's pollutants to the same extent as
the technology assumed in establishing the standards for direct dischargers,
then pretreatment standards for those pollutants as discharged from that
industry are generally not promulgated. However, if a specific pollutant
passes through the POTW to a greater extent than it would if the industrial
user were a direct discharger using the "best available technology," then the
indirect dischargers are required to meet the same pollutant standards as
those applied direct dischargers of that category.
3-2
-------
E/REG. X-1///36
EPA policy is to establish categorical standards that are production-
based whenever possible. A production-based standard is a particularly
equitable form of standard. Industries that conserve process waters are not
penalized by a production-based standard as they would be with a simple
concentration-based standard. Moreover, production-based standards discourage
the substitution of dilution for treatment. However, application of these
standards requires a POTW to have reliable data concerning industrial produc-
tion rates.
A list of industries subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards is
provided in Attachment 3.1 along with the effective date and compliance dates
for these standards. Summaries of the Categorical Pretreatment Standards are
provided in Attachment 3.5.
A number of industries in the list of 34 identified as primary sources of
toxic pollutants have been excluded from regulation for various reasons
allowed in the NRDC vs. EPA Settlement Decree. A discussion of these exclu-
sions, referred to as "Paragraph 8 Exclusions" is provided in Attachment 3.3.
These industrial users, as well as all-other nondomestic dischargers to the
POTW, are still subject to the National Prohibited Discharge Standards, which
are provided in Attachment 3.2.
One of the most common industries subject to Categorical Pretreatment
Standards is the electroplating and metal finishing industries. Guidance for
applying pretreatment standards to this industry is contained in the Guidance
Manual for Electroplating and Metal Finishing Pretreatment Standards.
Category Determinations
In accordance with the provisions of the General Pretreatment Regula-
tions, a category determination may be requested by either a POTW or an
industrial user. The determination will be made by the Enforcement Division
Director in the EPA Regional office or by the director of the State water
pollution control agency if the State has an approved NPDES program. Such
requests must be made within 60 days after the effective date of the standards
in question, or within 60 days after the notice of availability of the
3-3
-------
E/REG. X-1///36 *
I
technical development document for the standard in question, whichever date is
later [40 CFR 403.6(a)].
Baseline Monitoring Reports
As a first step in applying Categorical Pretreatment Standards, a POTW
must have basic data about its industrial dischargers that are subject to
these standards. Section 403.12(b) of the General Pretreatment Regulations
requires every industrial user subject to a Categorical Standard to submit a
report within 180 days after the effective date of the standard; this report
is commonly referred to as the baseline monitoring report (BHR). If a
category determination has been requested, the BMR is not due until 180 days
after a final administrative decision has been made concerning the industry's
inclusion in the category. The BMR must contain the following items of
information:
(1) Name and address of the facility, and names of the operator and
owners
(2) List of environmental control permits
(3) Description of operations, including the average rate of production
and SIC codes
(4) Flow measurements
(5) Pollutant measurements
(6) Certification of whether applicable Pretreatment Standards are being
met, and if not, a description of the additional operation and
maintenance (0 and M) or pretreatment facilities that are needed to
comply with the standards
(7) A schedule by which the industrial user will provide the additional
0 and M or pretreatment needed to comply with the applicable
pretreatment standards.
Further discussions of BMR submittal requirements can be found in Chapters 6
and 9. If an industrial user has already submitted the specific information
listed in 40 CFR 403.12, including the schematic process diagram indicating
discharge points, etc., in a permit application or data disclosure form, and
this information is still current, it need not be reproduced and resubmitted
in the BMR.
3-4
-------
D/REG. 10///36
Due dates for submission of BMRs are provided in the table in Attachment
3.1.
Modifications of Categorical Pretreatment Standards
Categorical pretreatment standards may be modified for a particular
discharger if approved for any of the following reasons:
• Net/Gross Adjustment - Upon request of the industrial user, the
applicable standard will be adjusted to reflect credit for pollutants
in the intake water, if the user demonstrates that:
- Its intake water is drawn from the same body of water that the POTW
discharges into,
- The pollutants present in the intake water will not be entirely
removed by the treatment system operated by the user,
- The pollutants in the intake water do not vary chemically or
biologically from the pollutants limited by the applicable stan-
dard, and
- The user does not significantly increase concentrations of pollu-
tants in the intake water, even if the total amount of pollutants
remains the same.
Requests for net/gross adjustments must be made within 60 days after
the effective date of the applicable categorical pretreatment standard
[40 CFR 403.15].
• Removal Credit - A POTW may apply to the EPA Regional Administrator or
director of the State water pollution control agency for authorization
to revise pollutant discharge limits in categorical pretreatment stan-
dards to reflect removal of such pollutants by the POTW.
• Fundamentally Different Factors (FDF) Variance - An FDF variance may
be requested by an industrial user, a POTW, or other interested
person. The request is made to the EPA Regional Enforcement Division
Director or the director of the State water pollution control agency.
A variance request may be made to establish limits that are either
more stringent or less stringent than the categorical pretreatment
standard. The requestor must fully document the reasons for the
variance, and must submit the request within 180 days after the
effective date of the categorical pretreatment standard or within 30
days after a final decision has been made on a request for category
determination [40 CFR 403.13]. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit has recently held that the Clean Water Act does not
permit FDF variances for toxic pollutant pretreatment standards. The
Supreme Court has, however, decided to review the Third Circuit's
decision on this issue.
3-5
-------
D/REG. 10///36
In general, the above methods of modifying categorical pretreatraent
standards will be used to request limits that are less stringent. It should
be noted, however, that wherever local discharge limits are more stringent
than promulgated or adjusted categorical pretreatment standards, it is the
local limits that must be met by industrial users.
Due dates for requesting the various means of modifying categorical
pretreatment standards are shown in the table in Attachment 3.4.
3-6
-------
ATTACHMENT 3.1
STATUS OF CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
WITH BMR AND COMPLIANCE DATES
-------
E/H-38a/»4 Revised 1-1-flS
ATTACHMENT 3.1
SUMMARY STATUS OF NATIONAL CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS: MILESTONE DATES
FINAL REGULATIONS
Industry Category
Timber Products
Electroplating
Textile Hills
Metal Finishing
Pulp, Paper, Pa per board
Steam Electric
Electrical Components I
Iron and Steel
Inorganic Chemicals I
Leather Tanning
Porcelain Enameling
Petroleum Refining
Coll Coating I
Copper Forming
Aluminum Forming
Pharmaceuticals
Coll Coating (Canmaklng)
Promulgation
Date
1-26-81
1-28-81
9-2-82
7-15-83
11-18-82 -.
11-19-82
4-8-83
5-27-82
6-29-82
11-23-82
11-24-82
10-18-82
12-1-82
8-15-83
10-24-83
10-27-83
11-17-83
Effective
Date
3-30-81
3-30-81
10-18-82
8-29-83
1-3-83
1-2-83
5-19-83
7-10-82
8-12-82
1-6-83
1-7-83
12-1-82
1-17-83
9-26-83
12-7-83
12-12-83
1-2-84
BMR Due Date
9-26-81
9-26-81 (Nonlnteg.)
6-25-83 (Integrated)
2-24-84 (TTO)
4-16-83
2-25-84
7-2-83
7-1-83
11-15-83
4-6-83
5-9-83
7-5-83
7-6-83
5-30-83
7-16-83
3-25-84
6-4-84
6-9-84
6-30-84
PSES
Compliance
Date
1-26-84
4-27-84 (Nonlnteg.)
6-30-84 (Integrated)
7-15-86 (TTO)
_ 1
6-30-84 (Part 433. TTO)2
7-10-85 (Part 420, TTO)
2-15-86 (Final)
7-1-84
7-1-84
7-1-84 (TTO)1
II -8-85 (As)
7-10-85
8-12-85
11-25-85
11-25-85
*
12-1-85
12-1-85
8-15-86
10-24-86
10-27-86
11-17-86
-------
D/H-38a/l4
Revised I-3-8S
ATTACHMENT 3.1
SUMMARY STATUS OP NATIONAL CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS: MILESTONE DATES
(Continued)
Industry Category
Battery Manufacturing
Nonferrous Helals I
Electrical Components II
Inorganic Chemicals II
Plastics Molding and
Fo ruing
_
Pesticides
Organic Chemicals
Metal Molding and
Casting (Foundries)
Nonferrous Metals Fornlng
Nonferrous Metals II
Pronulgatton
Date
3-9-84
1-8-84
12-14-83
fl-22-84
12-17-84
(11-84)
(2-85)
(6-84)
(10-84)
(11-84)
Effective
Date
4-18-84
4-23-84
1-27-84
10-5-84
1-30-85
PROPOSED
(1-85)
(4-85)
(8-84)
(12-84)
(1-85)
BMR Due Date
10-15-84
10-20-84
7-25-84
4-3-8S
4-30-85
REGULATIONS
(7-85)
(10-85)
(2-85)
(6-85)
(7-85)
PSRS
Compl lance
Dale
3-9-87
3-9-87
7-1,4-87
6-29-flS
8-22-87 (C«SO
Nl SO )
q
N/A
(1/85)
(4-88)
(8-87)
(12-87)
(1-88)
Proposed
Date
11-30-82
3-21-83
11-15-82
3-5-84
6-27-84
Parentheses Indicate expected milestone dates for categories that do not yet have final standards.
Footnotes:
(I) No nuaerlcal pretreatnenl Halts have been established for the Textile Hills Industrial category, and
there Is no final compliance dale for categorical pretreatnent standards. Firm) In this Industry are
required to comply only with the General Pretreatnent Regulations In 40 CFR 403.
(2) Existing sources that are subject to the Metal Finishing standards In 40 CFR Part 433 must comply only
with the Interim Unit for Total Toxic Organlcs (TTO) by June 30. 1984. Plants also covered hy 40 CFR
Part 420 BUSI comply with the Interln TTO Unit by July 10, 1985. The conpllance date for Metals,
Cyanide, and final TTO Is February 15, 1986 for all sources.
(3) The compliance date for existing Phase I Electrical and Electronic Components manufacturers for TTO Is
July I, 1984. The compliance date for arsenic Is November 8, 1985.
Note: The compliance date for any New Source (PSNS) In the same date as the commencement nf I lip .11 srliarge.
-------
ATTACHMENT 3'.2
NATIONAL PROHIBITED DISCHARGE STANDARDS
-------
A/H-21/018
Attachment 3.2 National Pretreatment Standards:
Prohibited Discharges
Prohibited Discharge Standards apply to all non-domestic sources intro-
ducing pollutants into a POTW whether or not the source is subject to other
National Pretreatment Standards or any national, State, or local Pretretment
Requirements. Prohibited Discharge Standards include general prohibitions and
specific prohibitions, as outlined below.
A. General Prohibitions
Pollutants introduced into POTWs by a non-domestic source shall not Pass
Through the POTW or Interfere with the operation or performance of the works.
B. Specific Prohibitions
The following pollutants shall not be introduced into a POTW:
(1) Pollutants which create a fire or explosion hazard in the POTW
(2) Pollutants which will cause corrosive structural damage to the POTW,
but in, no case Discharges with pH lower than 5.0, unless the works
is specifically designed to accomodate such Discharges
(3) Solid or viscous pollutants in amounts which will cause obstruction
to the flow in the POTW resulting in Interference
(4) Any pollutant, including oxygen demanding pollutants (BOD, etc.)
released in a Discharge at a flow rate and/or pollutant concen-
tration which will cause Interference with the POTW
(5) Heat in amounts which will inhibit biological activity in the POTW
resulting in Interference, but in no case heat in such quantities
that the temperature at the POTW Treatment Plant exceeds 40°C
(104°F) unless the Approval Authority, upon request of the POTW,
approves alternate temperature limits.
-------
A/H-21///18
POTWs that develop Pretreatment Programs must develop and enforce
specific limits to implement the general and specific prohibitions. Addi-
tionally, any POTW where pollutants contributed by users result in Inter-
ference or Pass-Through, and such violation is likely to recur, must develop
and enforce specific effluent limits.
[Adapted from 40 CFR 403.5]
-------
ATTACHMENT 3.3
INDUSTRIES EXCLUDED FROM REGULATION
BY PARAGRAPH 8
-------
Summary of the 1976
NRDC SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Paragraph 8 Exclusions
Introduction:
After several years of litigation with environmental groups over EPA's
implementation of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) in 1976 entered into a Settlement Agreement with the plaintiffs
(known as the NROC Settlement Agreement). Among other requirements, the
Settlement Agreement requires EPA to: develop a program to regulate toxic
pollutants; and to adhere to an established schedule for promulgating effluent
regulations for 21 major industrial categories for Best Available Technology
(BAT), Naw Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and Pretreatment Standards
for Existing and New Sources (PSES and PSNS) for 65 toxic compounds (subse-
quently defined by EPA as 129 specific "priority pollutants"). Additionally,
The 1977 amendments to the CWA basically codified the Settlement Agreement's
toxic pollutants strategy for implementing national effluent regulations.
Paragraph 8 Exclusions
EPA may exclude a point source category or subcategory or specific toxic
pollutants from the BAT, NSPS, PSES, or PSNS specific technology-based
effluent regulations under Paragraph 8 of the Settlement Agreement. The
reasons for exclusion provided within Paragraph 8 are as follows:
- sufficient protection is already provided by the Agency's guidelines
and standards under the Act [§8(a)(i)];
- except for pretreatment standards, a specific pollutant is present
in the effluent solely as a result of its presence in the intake
water [§8(a)(-ii )];
- for pretreatment standards, the specific pollutant is present in the
effluent which is introduced into a POTW solely as a result of its
presence in the point sources 's intake waters [§8(a)(ii)];
- a pollutant is not detectable with the use of analytical methods
approved pursuant to 304(h) of the Act, or where approved methods
do not exist, with the use of state-of-the-art methods [§8(a)(iii )];
- a pollutant is detectable from only a small number of sources within
a subcategory and the pollutant is uniquely related to those sources
- a pollutant is present only in trace amounts and is neither causing
nor likely to cause toxic effects [§8(a)(iii )];
-------
the pollutant is present in amounts too small to be effectively
reduced by technologies known to the Administrator [§8(a)(iii }];
the pollutant will be effectively controlled by the technologies
upon which are based other effluent limitations and guidelines,
standards of performance, or pretreatment standards [§8(a)(iii )];
the amount and toxicity of each pollutant in the discharge
does not justify developing national regulations in accordance
with the NRDC Settlement Agreement schedule [§8(a)(iv)];
for pretreatment standards, if 95% of the dischargers in the
industrial category or subcategory do not discharge pollutants
to a publicly owned treatment work which meet the §307 (a) criteria
C§8(b)(i)];
for pretreatment standards, if the amount and toxicity of incompat-
ible pollutants discharged to publicly owned treatment works is
insignificant that it does not justify developing pretreatment
standards in accordance with the schedules in the Agreement
Paragraph 8(c) requires EPA to prepare an affidavit for the parties involved
in the Settlement Agreement explaining the reasons for each exclusion
from regulation. This provision also requires EPA to solicit public
comments on the exclusion via any Federal Register preamble announcing
proposed regulations.
Finally, Paragraph 8(d) requires EPA to submit paragraph 8(c) statements
any time the Agency has decided to curtail or not initiate studies covered
by the Settlement Agreement.
-------
EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DIVISION
PROJECTS EXCLUDED FROM REGULATION
[PARAGRAPH 8, NRDC SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (modified 1979)]
INDUSTRIAL CATEGORY
Adhesives and Sealants
Auto and Other Laundries
Carbon Black
Explosives Manufacturing
Gum and Wood
Ink Formulation
Paint Formulation
Paving and Roofing ,
Photographic Equipment and Supplies ..
Printing and Publishing ,
Rubber Processing (1 ). ,
Soaps and Detergents Manufacturing (2),
AFFIDAVIT
Date ; Signature
2/28/83;
Ml 7/81;
it
*
6/21/82;
6/21/82;
6/21/82;
5/10/79;
1/16/81;
1/19/82;
6/21/82;
6/21/82;
Eidsness
Barrett
Eidsness
Eidsness
Eidsness
Jorling
Beck
Barrett
Eidsness
Eidsness
CFR PART
NUMBER
. 456
. 444
. 458
. 457
. 454
, 447
, 446
. 443
, 459
, 448
, 428
,417 '
Note:
* Exclusion has been approved; affidavit is pending signature.
(1) The affidavit excludes only the "reclaimer" portions of this category.
(2) The affidavit excludes only the SIC's addressed by the Settlement Agreement,
A partial list of additional subcategories excluded in accordance with the
provisions of Paragraph 8 is shown in Appendix D of the General Pretreat-
ment Regulations [40 CFR 403].
-------
ATTACHMENT 3*4
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS'
DEADLINE FOR REQUESTING
CATEGORY DETERMINATION, NET/GROSS ADJUSTMENT,
AND PDF VARIANCE
-------
E/ll-38a/id5
(Revised 1-31-85)
ATTACHMENT 3.4 SUMMARY OF APPLICATION DEADLINE DATES FOR REQUESTS OF CATEGORY DETERMINATION,
FDF VARIANCES AND NET/GROSS ADJUSTMENTS
Industry
Category
Timber Products
Electroplating (Nonlntegrated)
( Integrated)
Textile Mills
Metal Finishing
Pulp, Paper, Paperboard
Steam Electric
Electrical Components I
Iron and Steel
Inorganic Chemicals I
Leather Tanning
Porcelain Enameling
Petroleum Refining
Coll Coating I
Copper Forming
Aluminum Forming
Pharmaceuticals
C oating (Canmaklng)
Effective Date
of Standard
3-30-81
3-30-81
10-18-82
8-29-83
1-3-83
1-2-83
5-19-83
7-10-82
8-12-82
1-6-83
1-7-83
12-1-82
1-17-83
9-26-83
12-7-83
12-2-83
1-2-84
_ \a i
Category
Determination
5-29-81
5-29-81
2-25-83
3-15-83
10-28-83
5-17-83
3-3-83
7-18-83
12-7-82
1-9-83
8-29-83
3-8-83
1-31-83
3-18-83
11-25-83
2-5-84
2-10-84
2-84
Net/Gross
Ad jnslment
5-29-fll
5-29-81
2-25-83
12-17-82
10-28-83
3-4-83
3-3-83
7-18-83
12-7-82
1-9-83
3-7-83
3-8-83
1-31-83
3-18-83
11-25-83
2-5-84
2-10-84
3-2-84
Variance
9-26-81
9-26-81
6-25-83
4-16-83
2-25-84
7-2-83
7-1-83
11-15-83
4-6-83
5-9-83
7-5-83
7-6-83
5-30-83
7-16-83
3-25-«4
6-4-84
6-9-84
6-30-84
-------
'-38.1/1/5
(Rev1 -I 1-31-85)
ATTACHMENT 3.4 SUMMARY OF APPLICATION DEADLINE DATES FOR REQUESTS OF CATEGORY DETERMINATION,
PDF VARIANCES AND NET/GROSS ADJUSTMENTS (Continued)
Industry
Category
Battery Manufacturing
Nonferrous Metals I
Electrical Components II
Inorganic Chemicals II
Plastics Molding and Forming
Pesticides
Organic Chemicals
Metal Molding and
Casting (Foundries)
Nonferrous Metals Forming
Nonferrous Metals II
Effective Date
of Standard
4-18-84
4-23-84
1-27-84
10-5-84
1-30-85
1-85
4-85
(8-84)
(12-84)
(1-85)
(a)
Category
Determination
6-18-84
6-22-84
3-28-83
12-4-84
1-16-85
3-85
6-85
(10-84)
(2-85)
(3-85)
Net/Gross
Adjustment
6-18-R4
6-22-84
3-28-83
12-4-84
1-16-85
3-85
6-85
(10-84)
(2-85)
(3-85)
FDF(b)
Variance
10-15-84
10-20-84
7-25-87
4-3-85
6-14-85
9-85
12-85
(2-85)
(6-85)
(7-85)
Parentheses Indicate expected milestone dates for categories that do not yet have final standards.
(a)
(b)
According to S403.6a, applications for category determination must he submitted 60 days after the effective date of
a Prelreatment Standard for a suhcategory under which an Industrial User may be Included, or within 60 days after
the Federal Register notice announcing the availability of the technical development document for that suhcategorv,
whichever Is later. The dates Indicated In the column are 60 days after the effective date of the Pretreatment
Standards noted.
If the User has requested a category determination, the User may elect to wait for the results of the determination
before submitting a variance request. When a User elects to wait for a category determination, the User roust
submit the variance request within 30 days after a final decision has been made on the category determination. FDF
variances will not be granted to provide less stringent standards for toxic pollutants.
-------
ATTACHMENT 3.5
SUMMARIES OF CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
-------
CATEGORICAL STANDARDS .SUMMARY SHEETS
MAY 198/1
-------
NOTE: These brief (one to three page) summaries of finalized
industrial categorical standards are meant to be used
by POTWs as a concise overview of the industrial cate-
gories. This summarized information has not been for-
mally approved by EPA and cannot replace the detailed
information presented in the final regulations for
each industrial category. These documents may be re-
viewed and approved by EPA in the near future and made
available for general distribution.
-------
C/H-23///16
ALUMINUM FORMING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Correction
Subcategorles
A. Rolling with Neat Oils
B. Rolling with Emulsions
C. Extrusion
D. Forging
E. Drawing with Neat Oils
F. Drawing with Emulsions
or Soaps
- November 22, 1982, Vol. 47, page
52626
- October 24, 1983, Vol. 48, page 49126
- March 27, 1984, Vol. 49, page 11629
SIC Code
Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
3353, 3355 Chromium, Cyanide, Zinc, TTO
3353, 3355 Chromium, Cyanide, Zinc, TTO
3354 Chromium, Cyanide, Zinc, TTO
3463 Chromium, Cyanide, Zinc, TTO
3354, 3355, Chromium, Cyanide, Zinc, TTO
3354, 3355, Chromium, Cyanide, Zinc, TTO
3357
Regulation Effective Date - December 7, 1984
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - June 4, 1984
Date of Compliance - PSES - October 24, 1986
- PSNS - date the new source commences discharge
Comments:
Section 467.01 (c) of the standard was promulgated as an interim rule.
It sets PSES for two groups of plants: 1) those that extrude less
than 1,360,000 kg (3 million pounds) of aluminum annually, and 2)
plants that draw with emulsions or soaps and produce less than 453,333
kg (1 million pounds) of aluminum annually.
-------
C/H-23///16
• Casting processes at plants that cast aluminum without cooling are
regulated by the Nonferrous Metals categorical standard (Federal
Register, Vol. 49, p. 8742, March 8, 1984).
• As an alternative to monitoring for TTO, plants may monitor and limit
oil and grease to the levels established in the PSES or PSNS.
• SIC codes are tentative until EPA makes a final determination.
• Surface treatment of aluminum, whether chemical or electrochemical, is
covered by the Aluminum Forming standards whenever it is performed as
an integral part of aluminum forming. For the purposes of this cate-
gory, surface treatment is considered to be an integral part of alumi-
num forming whenever it is performed at the same plant site at which
the aluminum is formed. These surface treatment operations are
covered by the standards for cleaning or etching baths, rinses, and
scrubbers in the Aluminum Forming.Category and are not subject to
regulation under the Metal Finishing standards in 40 CFR Part 433.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources.
-------
A/H-23///19
BATTERY MANUFACTURING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
- November 10, 1982, Vol. 47, page
51052
- March 9, 1984, Vol. 49, page 9108
Subcategories
A. Cadmium
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Calcium
Lead
Leclanche
Lithium
Magnesium
Zinc
SIC Code Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
3691, 3692 'Copper, Lead, Cadmium, Nickel,
Zinc, Cobalt, Silver
3691, 3692 No numerical limits
3691, 3692 Copper, Lead
3691, 3692 Mercury, Zinc, Manganese
3691, 3692 Chromium, Lead
3691, 3692 Lead, Silver
3691, 3692 Chromium, Mercury, Silver, Zinc,
Manganese, Nickel, Cyanide
Regulation Effective Date - April 18, 1984
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - October 15, 1984
Date of Compliance - PSES - March 9, 1987
- PSNS - From commencement of discharge
Comments:
• Subcategory B - Calcium is reserved for PSES and allows no discharge of
process wastewater pollutants for PSNS.
• All SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes final deter-
mination.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources.
-------
B/H-23///14
COIL COATING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule - January 12, 1981 Vol. 46, page
2934
Final Rule (Subcategories A, B, C) - December 1, 1982 Vol. 47, page
54232
Amendment - September 15, 1983 Vol. 48, page
41409
Final Rule (Subcategory D) - November 17, 1983 Vol. 48, page
52380
Subcategories SIC Code Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
A. Steel Basis Material 3479, 3411, Chromium, Cyanide, Zinc
3497
B. Galvanized Basis Material 3479, 3411, Chromium, Copper, Cyanide, Zinc
3497
C. Aluminum Basis Material 3479, 3411, Chromium, Cyanide, Zinc
3497
D. Canmaking 3479, 3411, Chromium, Cyanide, Fluoride,
3497 Manganese, Phosphorus, Zinc, TTO
Regulation Effective Date - January 17, 1983 (Subcategories A, B, and C)
January 2, 1984 (Subcategory D)
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - July 16, 1983 (Subcategories A, B,
and C)
June 30, 1984 (Subcategory D)
Date of Compliance - PSES - December 1, 1985 (Subcategories A, B, and C)
November 17, 1986 (Subcategory D)
- PSNS - date the new source commences discharge
Comments:
• Provisions are made to allow coil coating facilities to demonstrate the
absence of cyanide from its process and wastewater streams to be exempt
from the requirements of monitoring for cyanide.
-------
B/H-23///14
• All limitations and standards established for this category are mass
based.
• SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes a final
determination.
• Industries in Subcategory D may monitor for Oil and Grease in lieu of TTO
monitoring.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources
-------
C/H-23/#12
COPPER FORMING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Correction
Final Rule
Amendment
Correction
- November 12, 1982, Vol. 47,
page 51278
- January 14, 1983, Vol. 48,
page 1796
- August 15, 1983, Vol. 48,
i' page 36942
- September 15, 1983, Vol. 48,
page 41409
.- November 3, 1983,.Vol. 48,
page 50714
Subcategory
Copper Forming
Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
Chromium, copper, lead, nickel, zinc, TTO
(Total Toxic Organics), Oil and Grease**
SIC Codes
Specific SIC Codes to be affected by these regulations were not identi-
fied in the Federal Register. However, the operations covered under the
copper forming Subcategory are hot rolling, cold rolling, extrusion,
drawing and forging.
Regulation Effective Date - September 26, 1983
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - March 25, 1984
Dates of Compliance - PSES - August 15, 1986
- PSNS - From commencement of discharge
Comments:
• All limitations are mass based.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and
existing sources.
**Monitoring for oil and grease may be substituted for TTO.
-------
B/H-23///9
ELECTROPLATING*
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Final Rule Amended
- February 14, 1978 Vol. 43 page
6560
- January 28, 1981 Vol. 46 page 9462
- February 12, 1981 Vol. 46 page
11972
-.September 2, 1981 Vol. 46 page
43972
- January 21, 1983 Vol. 48 page 2774
- July 15, 1983 Vol. 48 page 32462
- September 26, 1983 Vol. 48 page
43680
- October 3, 1983 Vol. 48 page 45105
Subcategories
A. Electroplating of
Common Metals
B. Electroplating of
Precious Metals
C. Electroplating of
Specialty Metals
D. Anodizing
E. Coatings
F. Chemical Etching
SIC Code Pollutant with Numerical Limits**
3471, 3479 Cyanide (A), Cyanide (total),
Lead, Cadmium, Nickel,. Chromium,
Zinc, Total Metals, Copper, TSS,
pH, TTO (Total toxic organics)t
3471, 3479 Cyanide (total), Lead, Cadmium,
Zinc, Silver, Copper, Chromium,
Nickel, Total Metals, pH, TTO
3471, 3479 Reserved
3471, 3479 Cyanide (A), Cyanide (total),
Lead, Cadmium, Copper, Nickel,
Chromium, Zinc, Total Metals, TSS,
pH, TTO
3471, 3479 Cyanide (A), Cyanide (total),
Lead, Cadmium, Copper, Nickel,
Chromium, Zinc, Total Metals, TSS,
pH, TTO
3471, 3479 Cyanide (A), Cyanide (total),
Lead, Cadmium, Copper, Nickel,
Chromium, Zinc, Total Metals, TSS,
pH, TTO
-------
B/H-23///9
G. Electroless Plating 3471, 3479 Cyanide (A), Cyanide (total),
Lead, Cadmium, Copper, Nickel,
Chromium, Zinc, Total Metals, TSS,
pH, TTO
H. Printed Circuit Board 3471, 3479 Cyanide (A), Cyanide (total),
Lead, Cadmium, Copper, Nickel,
Chromium, Zinc, Total Metals, TSS,
pH
Regulation Effective Date - March 30, 1981
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - Integrated facilities
June 25, 1983
- Non-integrated
September 26, 1981
Date of Compliance - Integrated facilities (Metals and Cyanide)
June 30, 1984
- Non-integrated (Metals and Cyanide)
April 27, 1984
- For TTO
July 15, 1986
Comments:
• Electroplating limitations are based on daily maximum and four-day
average value limits.
• For plants with a daily flow of 38,000 liters or less per day, the
standards limit only lead, cadmium, and cyanide.
• All SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes final
determination.
*Existing independent job shop electroplaters and printed circuit board manu-
facturers must only comply with the electroplating regulations. All other
electroplating subcategories are now covered by both the electroplating and
metal finishing standards.
**This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and
existing sources.
tTotal Toxic Organics (TTO) has been added to electroplating PSES through
amendments in the Federal Register, July 15, 1983, Vol. 48, page 32462.
-------
B/H-23/#13
ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS (PHASE I)
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Amendment
- August 24, 1982, Vol. 47, page 37048
- April 8, 1983, Vol. 48, page 15382
- September 15, 1983, Vol. 48, page
41409
Subcategories
A. Semiconductors
B. Electronic Crystals
SIC Code ,' Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
3674
3679
TTO (Total Toxic Organics)
TTO, Arsenic**
Regulation Effective Date - May 19, 1983
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - November 15, 1983
Dates of Compliance - PSES - TTO - July 1, 1984
Arsenic - November 8, 1985
- PSNS - From commencement of discharge
Comments:
• The semiconductor subcategory includes all process operations except
sputtering, vapor deposition, and electroplating.
• SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes a final deter-
mination.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameterr for both new and
existing sources.
**0nly at facilities which manufacture gallium or indium arsenic crystals.
-------
C/H-23///15
ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS (PHASE II)
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule - March 9, 1983, Vol. 48, page 10012
Final Rule - December 14, 1983, Vol. 48, page
55690
Subcategories SIC Code Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
C. Cathode Ray Tube 3671 • Cadmium, Chromium, Fluoride,
Lead, Zinc, TTO
D. Luminescent Materials 3672 Antimony, Cadmium, Fluoride,
Zinc
Regulation Effective Date - January 27, 1984
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - July 25, 1984
Date of Compliance - PSES - July 14, 1986
- PSNS - From commencement of discharge
Comments:
• SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes a final deter-
mination.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources.
-------
C/H-23///6
INORGANIC CHEMICALS (PHASE I)
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Correction
Amendment
Subcategories
A. Aluminum Chloride
B. Aluminum Sulfate
SIC Code
281
281
F. Chlor-alkali (Chlorine
and Sodium or Potassium
Hydroxide) 281
L. Potassium Dichromate 281
V. Titanium Dioxide 281
A.H. Chrome Pigments 281
A.J. Copper Sulfate 281
A.L. Ferric Chloride 281
A.R. Lead Monoxide 281
A.U. Nickel Sulfate 281
B.A. Silver Nitrate 281
B.C. Sodium Fluoride 281
- July 24, 1980 Vol. 45 page 49450
- June 29, 1982 Vol. 47 page 28260
- December 8, 1982 Vol. 47 page
55226
- January 21, 1983 Vol. 48 page 2774
Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
PH
Zinc
Copper, Lead, Nickel, Mercury
Chromium (total), Chromium
(hexavalent) - Existing sources
No discharge of process wastewater
- New sources
Iron, Nickel, Chromium (total)
Chromium (total), Lead, Zinc
Copper, Nickel, Selenium
Chromium (total), Chromium
(hexavalent), Copper, Nickel, Zinc
Lead
Copper, Nickel
Silver
Fluoride
Regulation Effective Date - August 12, 1982
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - May 9, 1983
Date of Compliance - PSES - August 12, 1985
- PSNS - date the new source commences discharge
-------
C/H-23///6
Comments:
• All SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes final
determination.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources.
The following subcategories are either reserved or do not have numerical
pretreatment limits and are subject only to the General Pretreatment
Regulations. Those categories marked with an asterisk (*) allow no discharge
of process wastewater to navigable waters.
C. Calcium*
D. Calcium Chloride*
E. Calcium Oxide*
G. Hydrochloric Acid
I. Hydrogen Peroxide
J. Nitric Acid
K. Potassium Metal*
M. Potassium Sulfate*
N. Sodium Bicarbonate*
0. Sodium Carbonate
P. Sodium Chloride*
R. Sodium Metal
S. Sodium Silicate
T. Sodium Sulfite*
U. Sulfuric Acid
W. Aluminum Fluoride
X. Ammonium Chloride
Y. Ammonium Hydroxide
Z. Barium Carbonate
AA. Borax Production
AB. Boric Acid Production
AC. Bromine Production
AD. Calcium Carbonate
AE. Calcium Hydroxide
AF. Carbon Dioxide
AG. Carbon Monoxide and By-Product
Hydogen
AI. Chromic Acid
AK. Cuprous Oxide
AM. Ferrous Sulfate
AN. Fluorine
AO. Hydrogen
AQ. Iodine
AS. Lithium Carbonate
AT. Managanese Sulfate
AV. Strong Nitric Acid
AW. Oxygen and Nitrogen
AX. Potassium Chloride
AY. Potassium Iodide
AZ. Potassium Permanganate
BD. Sodium Hydrosulfide
BE. Sodium Hydrosulfite
BF. Sodium Silicofluoride
BG. Sodium Thiosulfate
BH. Stannic Oxide
BI. Sulfur Dioxide
BJ. Zinc Oxide
BK. Zinc Sulfate
-------
C/H-23///2
IRON AND STEEL
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Final Rule Amended
Final Rule Corrected
- January 7, 1981 Vol. 46 page 1858
- May 27, 1982 Vol. 47 page 23258
- June 7, 1982 Vol. 47 page 24554
- September 22, 1982 Vol. 47 page
41738
- January 21, 1983 Vol. 48 page 2774
- 'October 14, 1983 Vol. 48 page
46942
- May 17, 1984 Vol. 49 page 21024
- November 10, 1983 Vol. 48 page
51647
- November 14, 1983 Vol. 48 page
51773
Subcategories
A. Cokemaking
B. Sintering
C. Ironmaking
D. Steelmaking
E. Vacuum Degassing
F. Continuous Casting
G. Hot Forming
H. Salt Bath Descaling
I. Acid Pickling
J. Cold Forming
SIC Code
3312
3312
3312
3312
3312
3312
3312, 3315,
3317
3312, 3315,
3317
3312, 3315,
3317
3316
Pollutants with Numerical Limits
Ammonia (N), Cyanide, Phenols
(4AAP)
Ammonia (N), Cyanide, Phenols
(4AAP), Lead, Zinc
Ammonia (N), Cyanide, Phenols
(4AAP), Lead, Zinc
Lead, Zinc
Lead, Zinc
Lead, Zinc
No numerical limits
Chromium, Nickel, Cyanide
Lead, Zinc, Chromium, Nickel
Chromium, Lead, Nickel, Zinc,
Napthalene, Tetrachloroethylene
-------
C/H-23///2
K. Alkaline Cleaning 3312, 3315, No numerical limits
3316, 3317
L. Hot Coating 3312, 3315, Lead, Zinc, Chromium (hexavalent)
3317
Regulation Effective Date - July 10, 1982
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - April 6, 1983
Date of Compliance - July 10, 1985 (PSES, PSNS)
Comments:
• In order to provide the iron and steel industry flexibility in con-
trolling its various wastestreams, to promote greater economic effi-
ciency, and to encourage the development of new control strategies, EPA
has instituted a water bubble policy for the Iron and Steel Category.
• EPA elected to not promulgate effluent limitations for all toxic
pollutants found in the steel industries wastestream for the various
steel industry subcategories. Alternatively, EPA established limita-
tions for the following nine "indicator" toxic pollutants: chromium,
lead, nickel, phenols (4AAP), zinc and four toxic organic pollutants.
• All SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes final deter-
mination.
• Industries in SIC group 3312 that are engaged in coil coating, other
than hot dipcoating, are not regulated under the Iron and Steel cate-
gorical standards.
-------
B/H-23/07
LEATHER TANNING AND FINISHING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Amendment
Amendment
Correction
Amendment
- July 2, 1979 Vol. 44 page 38746
- November 23, 1982 Vol. 47 page
52848
- June 30, 1983 Vol. 48 page 30115
- July 15, 1983 Vol. 48 page 32346
-' August 5, 1983 Vol. 48 page 35649
- September 15, 1983 Vol. 48 page
41409
Subcategories SIC Code
A. Hair Pulp, Chrome Tan,
Retan-Wet Finish 3111
B. Hair Save, Chrome Tan,
Retan-Wet Finish 3111
C. Hair Save or Pulp,
Nonchrome Tan,
Retan-Wet Finish 3111
D. Retan-Wet Finish-
Sides 3111
E. No Beamhouse 3111
F. Through-the-Blue 3111
G. Shearling 3111
H. Pigskin 3111
I. Retan-Wet Finish-
Splits 3111
Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
Sulfide, Total Chromium, pH
Sulfide, Total Chromium, pH
Sulfide, Total Chromium, pH
Total Chromium, pH
Total Chromium, pH
Sulfide, Total Chromium, pH
Total Chromium, pH
Sulfide, Total Chromium, pH
Total Chromium, pH
Regulation Effective Date - January 6, 1983
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - July 5, 1983
-------
B/H-23///7
Date of Compliance - PSES - November 25, 1985
- PSNS - date the new source commences discharge
Comments:
• Provisions are made for POTWs who are eligible to waive the sulfide
pretreatment standard for tanning and finishing facilities.
• All SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes final
determination.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources.
-------
B/H-23/011
METAL FINISHING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Regulation Effective Date
- August 31, 1982 Vol. 47 page 38462
- July 15, 1983 Vol. 48 page 32462
- August 29, 1983
Subcategories
None - limits are concentration based and can be applied to all metal
finishing process discharges.
Operations and Processes Affected
The metal finishing regulations apply to plants which perform one or more
of the following operations: electroplating, electroless plating,
anodizing, coating, chemical etching, or printed circuit board manufac-
turing. If any of these processes is performed, then discharges from the
following 46 operations are covered by the metal finishing standards.
1. Electroplating 23.
2. Electroless Plating 24.
3. Anodizing 25.
4. Coating (Chromating, 26.
Phosphating, & Coloring) 27.
5. Chemical Etching and Milling 28.
6. Printed Circuit Board Manu- 29.
facturing 30.
7. Cleaning 31.
8. Machining ' 32.
9. Grinding 33.
10. Polishing 34.
11. Tumbling 35.
12. Burnishing 36.
13. Impact Deformation 37.
14. Pressure Deformation 38.
15. Shearing 39.
16. Heat Treating 40.
17. Thermal Cutting 41.
18. Welding 42.
19. Brazing 43.
20. Soldering 44.
21. Flame Spraying 45.
22. Sand Blasting 46.
Other Abrasive Jet Machining
Electric Discharge Machining
Electrochemical Machining
Electron Beam Machining
Laser Beam Machining
Plasma Arc Machining
Ultrasonic Machining
Sintering
Laminating
Hot Dip Coating
Sputtering
Vapor Plating
Thermal Infusion
Salt Bath Descaling
Solvent Degreasing
Paint Stripping
Painting
Electrostatic Painting
Electrepainting
Vacuum Metalizing
Assembly
Calibration
Testing
Mechanical Plating
-------
B/H-23///11
SIC Codes Affected
EPA has not yet identified specific SIC codes to be affected by these
regulations. However, if a plant discharges from one of the processes
listed above, these regulations probably apply. If there are any
questions, contact EPA or the approval authority.
Pollutants with Numerical Limits
PSES Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Lead,
Nickel, Silver, Zinc, Cyanide (total),
TTO, Cyanide (A)*
PSNS Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Lead,
Nickel, Silver, Zinc, Cyanide (total),
TTO, .Cyanide (A)*
*Amenable cyanide limit may apply in
place of total cyanide limit
Compliance Dates
- PSES for interim TTO (based June 30, 1984 (July 10, 1985 for plants
on management practices only) covered by Part 420)
- PSES for Metals, Cyanide, February 15, 1986
and TTO (based on manage-
ment practices followed by
precipitation/clarification)
- PSNS From commencement of discharge
Comments:
Existing independent job shop electroplaters and printed circuit board
manufacturers must only comply with the electroplating regulations.
All other electroplating subcategories are now covered by both the
electroplating and metal finishing standards.
If a plant is engaged in one or more of the following operations in
addition to metal finishing, the following regulations take precedence
over metal finishing regulations when overlap occurs.
- Nonferrous Metal Smelting and Refining (40 CFR Part 421)
- Coil Coating (40 CFR Part 465)
- Porcelain Enameling (40 CFR Part 466)
- Battery Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 461)
- Iron and Steel (40 CFR Part 420)
- Metal Molding and Casting (Foundries) (40 CFR Part 464)*
- Aluminum Forming (40 CFR Part 467")
- Copper Forming (40 CFR Part 468)
- Plastic Molding and Forming (40 CFR Part 463)*
*Not yet promulgated
-------
B/H-23/#18
NONFERROUS METALS MANUFACTURING (PHASE I)
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Correction
Subcategories
B. Primary Aluminum Smelting
C. Secondary Aluminum Smelting
D. Primary Copper Smelting
E. Primary Electrolytic Copper
Refining
F. Secondary Copper
G. Primary Lead
H. Primary Zinc
I. Metallurgical Acid Plants
J. Primary Tungsten
K. Primary Columbium—Tantalum
L. Secondary Silver
M. Secondary Lead
- February 17, 1983, Vol. 48, page 7032
- March 8, 1984, Vol. 49, page 8742
- July 24, 1984, Vol. 49, page 29792
Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
Benzo(a)pyrene, Nickel, Fluoride,
Cyanide
Lead, Zinc, Ammonia (as N)
No discharge of process wastewater
pollutants
Arsenic, Copper, Nickel
No discharge of process wastewater
pollutants
Lead, Zinc
Cadmium, Zinc
Arsenic, Cadmium, Copper, Lead, Zinc
Lead, Zinc, Ammonia (as N)
Lead, Zinc, Ammonia (as N), Fluoride
Copper, Zinc, Ammonia (as N)
Antimony, Arsenic, Lead, Zinc, Ammonia
(as N)
Regulation Effective Date - April 23, 1984
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - October 20, 1984
Date of Compliance - PSES - March 9, 1987
- PSNS - From commencement of discharge
Comments:
• Subcategory A - Bauxite Refining will be regulated under the Phase II
regulations for this industrial category.
-------
B/H-23/018
• Subcategory D - Primary Copper Smelting is reserved for PSES and
allows no discharge of process wastewater pollutants for PSNS.
• Subcategory F - Secondary Copper allows no discharge of process waste-
water pollutants for both PSES and PSNS.
• EPA has not yet identified specific SIC codes to be affected by these
regulations.
• Primary operations produce metals from ore concentrates, while
secondary operations recover metals from recycled metallic wastes
(e.g., aluminum cans, lead batteries).
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources.
-------
B/H-23///5
PETROLEUM REFINING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
- December.21, 1979 Vol. 44 page
75926
- October 18, 1982 Vol. 47 page
46434
Subcategories
A. Topping
B. Cracking
C. Petrochemical
D. Lube
E. Integrated
SIC Code Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
2911 Ammonia (as N), Total Chromium,
Oil and Grease
2911 Ammonia (as N), Total Chromium,
Oil and Grease
2911 Ammonia (as N), Total Chromium,
Oil and Grease
2911 Ammonia (as N), Total Chromium,
Oil and Grease
2911 Ammonia (as N), Total Chromium,
Oil and Grease
Regulation Effective Date - December 1, 1982
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - May 30, 1983
Date of Compliance - PSES - December 1, 1985
- PSNS - date the new source commences discharge
Comments:
• All limitations are concentration based. However, if the petroleum
refining facility discharges only sour waters to the POTW, provisions
are made to give the facility the option of complying with an
alternative mass limit for ammonia (as N).
• All SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes final
determination.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources.
-------
C/H-23///17
PHARMACEUTICAL MANUFACTURING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
- November 26, 1982, Vol. 47, page
53584
- October 27, 1983, Vol. 48, page 49808
Subcategories
A. Fermentation Products
B. Extraction Products
C. Chemical Synthesis Products
D. Mixing/Compounding and
Formulation
Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
Cyanide (Total)
Cyanide (Total)
Cyanide (Total)
Cyanide (Total)
Regulation Effective Date - December 12, 1983
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - June 9, 1984
Date of Compliance - PSES - October 27, 1986
- PSNS - date the new source commences discharge
Comments:
• Firms must monitor for cyanide after cyanide treatment and before
dilution with other streams unless the cyanide standard is adjusted,
based on the dilution ratio of the contaminated wastestream flow to
the total process discharge.
• Firms may be exempt from the monitoring requirement if they certify to
the Control Authority that they are not using or generating cyanide.
• The pharmaceutical products, processes, and activities regulated under
this subcategory include:
- Biological products (SIC 2831)
- Medicinal chemicals and botanical product (SIC 2833)
- Pharmaceutical products (SIC 2834)
- All fermentation, biological, and natural extraction, chemical
synthesis, and formulation products that are considered as
-------
C/H-23///17
pharraaceutically active ingredients by the FDA, but are not covered
by SIC 2831, 2833, or 2834
- Cosmetic preparations that function as a skin treatment (SIC 2844)
- Products with multiple end uses that are attributable to pharma-
ceutical manufacturing as a final pharmaceutical product, component
of a pharmaceutical formulation, or pharmaceutical intermediate.
Products that have non-pharmaceutical uses may also be covered by the
pharmaceutical standard if the products are primarily intended for use
as Pharmaceuticals.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources.
-------
B/H-23///3
PORCELAIN ENAMELING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Amendment
- January 27, 1981 Vol. 46, page
8860
- November 24, 1982 Vol. 47, page
53172
- September 15, 1983 Vol. 48, page
41409
Subcategories
A. Steel Basis Material
B. Cast Iron Basis Material
C. Aluminum Basis Material
D. Copper Based Material
SIC Code Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
3631, 3632 Chromium, Lead, Nickel, Zinc
3633, 3639,
3431, 3469,
3479
3631, 3431 Chromium, Lead, Nickel, Zinc
3469, 3479, Chromium, Lead, Nickel, Zinc
3631
3469, 3479 Chromium, Lead, Nickel, Zinc
3631
Regulation Effective Date - January 7, 1983 .
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - July 6, 1983
Date of Compliance - PSES - November 25, 1985
- PSNS - date the new source commences discharge
Comments:
• Porcelain enameling facilities which prepare or coat less than 1600 m?/
day and discharge less than 60,000 I/day or perform porcelain enameling
on a precious metal basis material, only need comply with the provisions
of 40 CFR Part 403.
• • Provisions are made to allow porcelain enameling facilities to demon-
strate the absence of chromium in its process and wastewater streams to
be exempt from the requirements of routine monitoring for chromium.
-------
B/H-23///3
• Existing facilities covered under Subcategory B are prohibited from
discharging process wastewater pollutants from metal preparation
operations.
• All SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes final
determination.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources.
-------
B/H-23///10
PULP. PAPER. AND PAPERBOARD
AND BUILDERS' PAPER AND BOARD MILLS
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Final Rule Corrected
Subcategories
SIC Code
- January 6, 1981 Vol. 46 page 1430
- November 18, 1982 Vol. 47 page
52006
- March 30, 1983 Vol. 48 page 13176
Pollutants with Numerical Limits*
Part 430
A. Unbleached Kraft 2611
B. Semi -Chemical 2611
D. Unbleached Kraft -
Pentachlorophenol ,
Pentachlorophenol ,
Trichlorophenol
Trichlorophenol
E.
I.
J.
K.
M.
Neutral Sulfite
Semi-Chemical
(Cross Recovery)
Paperboard From Waste-
paper
F. Dissolving Kraft
G. Market Bleach Kraft
H. BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Papergrade Sulfite
(Blow Pit Wash)
Dissolving Sulphite
Pulp
Groundwood-Thermo-
mechanical
2611
2631
2611
2611
2611
2611
2611, 2621
2611
2611, 2621
N. Groundwood-CMN Papers 2611, 2621
Pentachlorophenol , Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol , Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol , Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol , Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol , Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichloro-
phenol, Zinc
Pentachlorophenol, Trichloro-
phenol, Zinc
-------
B/H-23/#10
0. Groundwood-Fine Papers 2611, 2621
P. Soda 2611, 2621
Q. Deink
R. Nonintegrated-Fine
Papers 2621
S. Nonintegrated-Tissue
Papers 2631
T. Tissue From Wastepaper 2647
U. Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) 2611, 2621
V. Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical 2611
W. Uastepaper Molded
Products 2646
X. Nonintegrated-
Lightweight Papers 2621
Y. Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers 2621
Z. Nonintegrated Paper-
board 2631
Part 431
A. Builders' Paper and 2661
Roofing Felt
Pentachlorophenol, Trichloro-
phenol, Zinc
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol, Trichlorophenol
Regulation Effective Date - January 3, 1983
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - July 2, 1983
Date of Compliance - PSES - July 1, 1984
- PSNS - date the new source commences discharge
Comments:
• Only pulp and paper mills using chlorophenolic-containing biocides are
subject to the pretreatment standards in this category. Pulp and paper
mills not using chlorophenolic-containing biocides need to certify this
with the permit-issuing authority.
-------
B/H-23///10
• Zinc limitations are only applicable at facilities where zinc
hydrosulfite is used as a bleaching agent. Facilities not using zinc
hydrosulfite as a bleaching agent must certify this with the
permit-issuing authority.
• All SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes final
determination.
*This listing is a summation of pollutant parameters for both new and existing
sources.
-------
STEAM ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule . - October 14, 1980 Vol. 45 page
68328
Final Rule - - November 19, 1982 Vol. 47 page
52290
Subcategories SIC Code Pollutants with Numerical Limits
Steam Electric 4911, 4931 ' See Comments
Regulation Effective Date - January 2, 1983
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Report - July 1, 1983
Date of Compliance - PSES - July 1, 1984
— PSNS — date the new source commences discharge
Comments:
• The entire industry is treated as a single subcategory with separate
limitations for each of the following types of wastestreams:
- Once through cooling water
- Cooling tower blowdown
- Fly ash transport water
- Bottom ash transport water
- Chemical metal cleaning waste
- Low volume waste
- Coal pile runoff.
EPA has reserved effluent limitations for the following four types of
wastestreams for future rulemaking:
- Noncheraical metal cleaning waste
- Flue gas desulfurization waters
-------
- Runoff from materials storage and construction areas (other than coal
storage)
- Thermal discharges.
- Following are the pollutant limits imposed on the regulated waste-
streams:
- Discharges of polychlorinated biphenol (PCS) compounds are prohibited
for all wastestreams
- New sources are prohibited from discharging wastewater pollutants from
fly ash transport water
- A numerical limit is set for Copper,for chemical metal cleaning
wastestreams
- Numerical limits are set on Chromium and Zinc for cooling tower
blowdown - all other priority pollutants are prohibited from discharge
in any detectable amounts in blowdown wastewater.
-------
B/H-23///8
TIMBER PRODUCTS PROCESSING
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Federal Register Citations
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
Amendment
- October 31, 1979 Vol. 44 page
62810
- January 26, 1981 Vol. 46 page 8260
- February 12, 1981 Vol. 46 page
11972
Subcategories
A. Barking
B. Veneer
C. Plywood
D. Dry Process Hardboard
E. Wet Process Hardboard
F. Wood Preserving-Water
Borne or Nonpressure
SIC Code
2421, 2426,
2432, 2491,
2499
2432
2432
2499
2499
2491
G. Wood Preserving-Steam* 2491
H. Wood Preserving-
Boulton*
I. Wet Storage
J. Log Washing
K. Sawmills and Planing
Mills
L. Finishing
2491
2491, 2421,
2426, 2429,
2431, 2499
2491, 2421,
2426, 2429,
2431, 2432,
2499
2429, 2431,
2421, 2426
2421, 2426,
2429, 2431,
2432, 2499
Pollutants with Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
Oil and Grease, Copper, Chromium,
Arsenic
Oil and Grease, Copper, Chromium,
Arsenic
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
-------
B/H-23/08
M.
N.
0.
P.
Particleboard Manufac- 2492
turing
Insulation Board
Wood Furniture and
Fixture Production
Without Water Wash
Spray Booth(s) or
Without Laundry
Facilities
Wood Furniture and
Fixture Production
With Water Wash
Spray Booth(s) or
With Laundry Facilities
2661
2511, 2512,
2519, 2521,
2531, 2541,
2591, 2599
2511, 2512,
2519, 2521,
2531, 2541,
2591, 2599
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
No Numerical Limits
Regulation Effective Date - March 30, 1981
Due Date of Baseline Monitoring Reports - September 26, 1981
Date of Compliance - PSES - January 26, 1984
- PSNS - date the new source commences discharge
Comments:
• All subcategories with no numerical limits must still comply with 40 CFR
Part 403 (General Pretreatment Regulations).
• All SIC codes are tentative until EPA Headquarters makes final
determination.
*The numerical limitations stated are for existing sources only, new sources
are prohibited from discharging process wastewater pollutants into a POTW.
-------
D/Region 10//M
CHAPTER 4
APPLYING PRETREATMENT STANDARDS TO INDUSTRIAL USERS
Before a POTW can proceed with program implementation, it is important
that it fully understand the concept of applying pretreatment standards to
industrial users. The discussion that ensues and the examples that are pro-
vided deal with only the Significant Industrial Discharger (SID) category.
BACKGROUND
There basically exist four types of standards applicable to industrial
users:
• Categoricaj. Pretreatment Standards; These are standards published by
the EPA for different types of industrial users (categorical
industries). These standards are published in accordance with Section
307(b) and (c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The list and status of
the categorical standards can be found in Chapter 3, Attachment 3.1.
• National Prohibitive Standards: These standards apply to all indus-
trial facilities within a POTW. They are generically described in 40
CFR 403.5(b) of the General Pretreatment Regulations (Federal Register
January 28, 1981). These standards are listed in Chapter 3, Attach-
ment 3.2.
• Locally Derived Specific Numerical Standards; Generally, these stan-
dards consist of heavy metal limits, cyanide, BOD,., and fats, oil and
grease (FOG), and possibly a few toxic organics. They are generally
expressed as maximum limitations, however, some POTWs have both
average and maximum values. These limits are contained in a POTW's
sewer use ordinance. Many cities have had such limits in their
ordinance for a number of years and recently, as a requirement of
developing its own pretreatment program, POTWs have refined existing
limits or developed and enacted new limits for the first time. The
basic philosophy behind locally derived limits is: prevention of
interference, pass-through of pollutants that may affect water
quality, and sludge contamination.
Locally derived limits can apply to all nondomestic users, not just
categorical industries, and usually they are end-of-pipe standards
that apply at the end of a facility's treatment plant (which may be
treating a number of various wastestreams) or at the end of the
facility's property line prior to its wastewaters entering the
municipality's main sewer lines.
Section 403.5(c) of the General Pretreatment Regulations requires that
POTWs develop specific limits. Section 403.5(d) states that these
limits are considered pretreatment standards as defined in Section
307(d) of the CWA.
4-1
-------
D/Region 10//M
• Local Prohibitive Standards: These standards are generally described
in a generic fashion in a POTW's local sewer use ordinance and are
basically similar in nature to the national prohibitive standards
discussed above. Some differences may be that the POTW prohibitive
standards may be more descriptive, include additional prohibitions, or
may vary slightly in such areas as pH and heat.
Locally derived numerical limits can, in some cases, be more stringent
than Federally promulgated standards, since they are based on local site-
specific situations. For example, a POTW may be located on a water quality-
limited receiving stream; hence its NPDES permit may contain heavy metal
effluent limitations. Other examples could be that the POTW may be experi-
encing interference or upset problems at the treatment plant caused by par-
ticular toxicants or its sludge disposal practices (such as marketing it as a
fertilizer) may necessitate reduced levels of toxicants, particularly heavy
metals, such as cadmium. These local conditions can result in a POTW devel-
oping stricter local standards.
*
In implementing its pretreatment program, a POTW is required to enforce
the "applicable pretreatment standard" (i.e., local/State/Federal, whichever
applies at the time or is most stringent). The General Pretreatment Regu-
lations as well as a sewer use ordinance are structured in this fashion.
Although, all industrial facilities are potentially affected by the "applic-
able pretreatment standards," POTWs will generally be enforcing the "applic-
able pretreatment standards" on the Significant Industrial Discharger through
individual permits, contracts or industrial waste acceptance forms (IWAs).
In the case of the Noncategorical Significant Industrial Discharger, a
POTW simply has to apply its own locally derived numerical limits, and general
prohibitive standards, as appropriate, based on the type of facility. For
example, a food processor may receive a permit with the general prohibitions,
and a BOD,, and/or FOG limit. A galvanizer, not covered by a Federal promul-
gated standard, discharging zinc may receive a permit with a zinc limit and
the general prohibitions taken from the POTW's sewer use ordinance.
In the case of a Categorical Significant Industrial Discharger, the task
of applying limits can be a bit more complicated. The reason for this is that
locally derived-numerical limits are generally end-of-pipe limitations (i.e.,
4-2
-------
D/Region 10//M
effluent pretreatment standards) whereas the federal categorical pretreatment
standards are end-of-process limits (i.e., they apply at the end of a regu-
lated process line and not at a common pipe where all wastewaters come
together).
Where Federal standards have not been promulgated for a specific cate-
gorical SID, the POTW for the time being would issue a permit or some other
enforceable document to it with locally derived limits. These are considered
the "applicable pretreatment standard," for the time being. An example could
be a metal finisher where the regulations have not been promulgated. The POTW
would issue a permit with its own locally derived heavy metal and cyanide
standards and general prohibitive standards and require compliance with them.
The permit may be modified later once the Federal standards are promulgated,
if some or all of the Federal standards prove to be more stringent than local
limits.
For situations where a Federal standard has been promulgated or is
immminent (i.e., within six months) for a categorical SID and limits are to
apply at a common point where co-mingling of other flows (i.e., regulated and
nonregulated) occur, the POTW must perform an analysis of which limits are
more stringent and therefore which limit applies. Once the analysis has been
completed the permit issued to the categorical SID may contain a mixture of
Federal and local standards, because some may be more stringent than others.
As an illustration of such a situation, in the example presented below, the
electroplater may have a permit issued containing the following heavy metals:
cadmium, lead, nickel, chromium-T, copper, zinc, and cyanide. The maximum
limits for cadmium, lead and copper are the POTW's limits contained in its
sewer use ordinance because they are more stringent than the Federal limits.
Whereas, the nickel, chromium, zinc and cyanide limits are Federal limits
since the POTW's limits for these parameters are less stringent.
PROCESS FOR COMPARING LOCAL LIMITS AND FEDERALLY PROMULGATED STANDARDS
A. Categorical SID - Local Limits Apply End-of-Pipe
Locally derived limits as discussed above are generally effluent limits,
whereas Federal limits are end-of-process. In the situation where a plant
4-3
-------
D/Region 10/04
sewer connected to the POTW's sewer contains only wastewater from a process
regulated under a particular categorical standard, then the end-of-process is
the same as the end-of-pipe and the determination of which limits apply, local
or Federal, is simply which limit is more stringent (job shops are an example
of this case and are discussed in Section C below).
However, in the situation where a plant sewer connected to the POTW's
sewer contains other process wastewater (e.g., from a process regulated by
another category or not regulated by a categorical standard) or other waste-
water (e.g., noncontact cooling water or sanitary wastewater), then the
evaluation of which limits apply is not a simple comparison of values. It
would be like comparing "apples and oranges." In order to analyze both sets
of limits, the POTW must adjust the Federal limits to end-of-pipe (i.e.,
effluent limits) or take its locally derived effluent limits and back-calcu-
late its limits to the regulated process eliminating nonregulated, sanitary
and cooling water flows which are dilution streams as they relate to the
regulated process line.
For the POTW to perform the above analysis, it will need certain infor-
mation from the industry such as individual flows. It can obtain this from
the industrial user's permit application, baseline monitoring report or data
disclosure form.
The following simple example should provide the POTW with the information
necessary to determine the "applicable limits" for this type of facility.
EXAMPLE
FACTS
1. The following bullets provide a description of the example facility:
• The company is a large integrated facility
• The electroplating operations consist of cadmium, nickel, and
chrome plating
• The other manufacturing operations consist of plastic extrusion and
spray painting. Wastewaters from the extrusion operation are
noncontact cooling water.
• The facility has sanitary and cafeteria wastewaters.
4-4
-------
E/Region 10/#4
2. The electroplating pretreatment standards have been promulgated by
EPA. The following maximum limits for any one day (mg/1) are:
CN,T: 1.9 Zn: 4.2
Cu: 4.5 Pb: 0.6
Ni: 4.1 Cd: 1.2
Cr: 7.0 Total Metals: 10.5
Maximum values are utilized for the comparison in this example,
because POTW local limits are normally expressed as maximum
limits for any one day. .Hence, a permit issued to this
categorical SID would contain the Federal four-day average limit
as adjusted for noncontact cooling water and other dilution flow
standards, and the more stringent maximum standard for any one day
(local or Federal).
3. The POTW has the following maximum limits (mg/1):
CN,T: 3.0 Zn: 4.0
Cu: 2.0 Pb: 0.1
Ni: 3.0 Cd: 0.5
Cr: 5.0
4. The facility has no treatment.
5. As shown below, it appears that when comparing local vs. Federal
standards on paper, six of the local limits are more stringent than
the Federal limits. Since Federal standards are end-of-process limits
and not effluent limits, this one-step, simple comparison is not
appropriate if the facility is integrated and standards apply at a
point where all wastewaters are combined.
Federal Standard Local Standard
CN,T 1.9 3.0
Cu 4.5 2.0
Ni 4.1 3.0
Cr 7.0 5.0
Zn 4.2 4.0
Pb 0.6 0.1
Cd 1.2 0.5
Total Metals 10.5
4-5
-------
D/Region 10/M
6. Schematic of facility
Electroplating
50,000 gpd
Spray painting
10,000 gpd
Sanitary
wastewater
5,000 gpd
Plastic extrusion
noncontact cooling water
30,000 gpd
Cafeteria
wastewater
5,000 gpd
sampling manhole
Q POTW Sewer Q
A - Federal categorical standards apply here
B - Local standards apply here
For purposes of this example, the flows are broken down as:
Regulated flow (electroplating only): F
Dilution flow (sum of. plastic
extrusion, sanitary, cafeteria
wastewaters) : F
Nonregulated process flows
(spray painting only) :
Total flow : F.
50,000 gpd
40,000 gpd
10,000 gpd
100,000 gpd
The nonregulated flows from the painting operation are considered
"dirty water". Hence3 it is not factored into the dilution flow
(FJ)' It merely becomes part of the total flow (?+)•
ADJUSTMENT OF FEDERAL STANDARDS
The following illustrates how to calculate an adjusted Federal limit for
cadmium (Cd), using the combined wastestream formula contained in 40 CFR
403.6(e) and the data presented above. (Chapter 5 presents a detailed
4-6
-------
D/Region 10///4
discussion and examples of the use of the combined wastestream formula.) This
step is important so that a proper comparison of Federal and local standards
can be undertaken.
Step 1
Combined wastestream formula:
N
n tr \
F - F
C I i_i I £ d
°t I N „ | Pt
where:
C = Alternative concentration limit (value utilized to compare with
local limits)
C. = Federal categorical standard for a pollutant in the regulated
wastestream (F )
F = Regulated wastestream
F = Total flow
F. = Dilution flow
d
Step 2
Calculating for cadmium using flows presented in Section 6 above:
1.2 mg/1 x 50.000 gpd 100,000 gpd - 40,000 gpd
t " 50,000 gpd 100,000 gpd
1.2 mg/1 X .6
.72 mg/1
Because of the diluted streams (40,000 gpd) which are co-mingled with
the regulated wastestream (60,000 gpd), the Federal categorical
standard for cadmium (1.2 mg/1) is reduced to 0.72 mg/1.
4-7
-------
E/Region 10//M
Step 3
Perform the above calculations for the other regulated pollutants and
make a comparison and selection of the more stringent limits (i.e.,
local limits vs. adjusted Federal limits).
CN,T
Cu
Ni
Cr
Zn
Pb
Cd
Total Metals
(a)
Federal Limit
(C )
Daily Max
1.9
4.5
4.1
7.0
4.2
0.6
1.2
10.5
(b)
Adjusted Federal
Limit (C )
Daily Max
2
4.
1.14
2.7
.46
20
2.52
0.36
0.72
6.3
Local Limit
Daily Max
(d)
Applicable Limit
(most stringent)
3.0
2.0
3.0
5.0
4.0
0.1
0.5
1.14 (Federal)
2.00 (Local)
2.46 (Federal)
4.20 (Federal)
2.52 (Federal)
0.10 (Local)
0.50 (Local)
Examining the table above, the following observations are made:
(1) Local limits are more stringent for Cu, Pb, and Cd.
(2) Without adjusting the Federal limits using the combined wastestream
formula, comparing column (c) with column (a), it appears as
discussed earlier that local limits for Ni, Cr, and Zn are more
stringent. However, after calculating the adjusted Federal
categorical standards (C ), the adjusted Federal limits for these
three pollutant parameters are more stringent than the local limit.
(3) In summary, comparison of the limits without adjusting the Federal
standard shows that six local limits would be more stringent. After
the adjustment, only three limits remain more stringent.
B. Categorical SID - Local Limits Apply End-of-Process
There exist POTWs who have elected to apply their local limits in the
same manner as EPA, at the end of a regulated manufacturing process line.
Under this situation, the comparison would be simple. The POTW selects the
most stringent standard, and if the industrial facility mixes nonregulated
process wastewater or dilution wastewater with the regulated process waste-
water and elects to have the applicable standard applied at a point where
flows are combined, it will have to employ the combined wastestream formula to
adjust the more stringent standard (local, State or Federal) to take into
consideration the other wastewater flows.
4-8
-------
D/Reglon 10/#4
C. Job Shop Categorical SID - Local Limits Apply at Either End-of-
Process or End-of-Pipe
A job shop normally only generates wastewater from one group of processes
all regulated by a particular Categorical Pretreatment Standard and generates
little, if any, other wastewater. Generally, the quantity of sanitary
wastewater generated is minimal, therefore the combined wastestream formula
does not need to be used. For this situation, the end-of-process limits are
the same as the end-of-pipe limits. Therefore, the determination of whether
the local limit or the Federal limit is more stringent is a simple comparison
of which is lower.
4-9
-------
B/Region 10/038
CHAPTER 5
USE OF THE COMBINED WASTESTREAM FORMULA
Federal categorical pretreatment standards regulate the discharge of
certain pollutants from a particular industry or industrial process. An
important consideration of the categorical standards is that the pollutant
limitations specified in the standards apply to the discharge of wastewater
from the regulated process only, prior to mixing with any other wastestreams.
As such, determination of an industrial user's (IU) compliance status should
be done by collecting and analyzing a sample of wastewater representing only
the discharge from the regulated process.
However, it is often difficult or impossible to collect and analyze a
sample of only the wastewater from the regulated process. The industrial user
may combine some or all of their wastestreams and treat them in a single
wastewater treatment facility. Some of the wastestreams may be regulated by
one categorical pretreatment standard, while others are regulated by a
different categorical standard or not regulated at all.
The combined wastestream formula (CWF), described in Section 403.6(e) of
the Federal pretreatment regulations, is a mechanism for adjusting the dis-
charge limits (concentration or mass) in categorical pretreatment standards
when a regulated process wastestream is combined, prior to treatment, with
another wastestream (either regulated or unregulated), resulting in a mixed
discharge to the POTW system. The CWF is applied to the mixed discharge to
account for the presence of the additional flow contributed by the unregulated
or dilute wastestream.
BACKGROUND
EPA's intent in establishing the CWF was two-fold. First, and most
important, was to account for the dilution of a regulated wastestream by other
wastestreams. Although dilution reduces the pollutant concentration, the mass
loading of that pollutant to the POTW could increase. Second, EPA did not
want to force industrial users to segregate their process wastestreams (either
regulated or unregulated) when there could be some benefit in the treatment of
the combined wastestreams. Concurrent pretreatment of the combination of the
5-1
-------
D/REG. X-l/038
unregulated and the regulated wastestream could result in an overall decrease
in the pollutant loading, whereas no pretreatment of the unregulated waste-
stream may allow a net increase of the pollutant load in the final discharge
to the POTW.
Public interest groups who commented on CWF regulations were concerned
f
that use of the formula could result in increased pollutant loads if the
unregulated wastestream contained pollutant levels below that of the cate-
gorical standard for the regulated stream. The volume of the unregulated
wastestream would dilute the pollutant concentration of the regulated stream,
but the allowable pollutant concentration (determined by the formula) would
not be lowered to compensate for dilution. Although EPA considers this an
"environmental loss", they consider it a trade off for the "environmental
gains" from the concurrent treatment of unregulated streams with high pollu-
tant levels when they are combined with a regulated stream.
DEFINITIONS
Regulated Process Wastestream - an industrial process wastestream regulated by
National Categorical Pretreatment Standards.
UnregulatedProcess Wastestream - an industrial process wastestream that is
not regulated by a categorical standard.
Note; Definitions apply to individual pollutants. A wastestream from a
process may be "regulated" for one pollutant and "unregulated" for another
pollutant.
Dilute Wastestream - an unregulated wastestream containing none of the
regulated pollutant or only trace amounts of it (i.e. boiler blowdown,
sanitary wastewater, noncontact cooling water and Paragraph 8 excluded
wastestreams).
Concentration-based Limit - a limit based on the relative strength of a
pollutant in a wastestream, usually expressed in mg/1 (Ib/gal).
Mass-based Limit - a limitation based on the actual quantity of a pollutant
(e.g. pounds or kilograms) in a wastestream per unit of production, usually
expressed in mg/square meter of operation or Ib/square foot of operation.
REGULATORY BACKGROUND
• General Pretreatment Regulations, June 1978, Appendix A, National
Pretreatment Strategy - recognized the need for a CWF to deter
dilution as a form of pretreatment
5-2
-------
C/REG. X-1///38
General Pretreatment Regulations, October 1979, Proposed Amendments -
proposed to formalize the CWF as part of the pretreatment regulations
to "eliminate uncertainty among Control Authorities and affected
industries, and to ensure consistent application nationwide"
General Pretreatment Regulations, January 1981, Final Rule - promul-
gated the CWF in section 403.6(e)
NRDC v EPA - U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the CWF was effective as
of March 30, 1981
Future Regulatory Changes or Additions - EPA may add an appendix to
the General Pretreatment Regulations to further explain the CWF and
its uses and provide examples of how it is applied to industrial
wastestreams.
CONDITIONS FOR USING THE CWF TO CALCULATE AN ALTERNATIVE (ADJUSTED) LIMIT
To ensure proper application of the CWF, the following conditions must be
met by a municipality and its industries:
• Alternative discharge limits that are calculated in place of the
promulgated categorical pretreatment standards must be enforceable as
categorical standards.
• Calculation of alternative limits must be performed by the POTW or by
the industrial user with written permission from the POTW.
• Alternative limits must be established for each regulated pollutant in
each of the regulated processes.
• The POTW and/or the Industrial user may use mass-based limitations in
place of the concentration-based limitations, as long as a prior
agreement exists between the regulated industrial user and the POTW
that is receiving these wastes.
• Both daily maximum and long-term average (usually monthly) alternative
limits must be calculated for each regulated pollutant. If two or
more Categorical Standards apply to the facility and one of the pro-
cesses is regulated by the Electroplating Standards (regulated by a 4-
day average limit) and the other process(es) are regulated by other
Standards (regulated by a monthly average limit), then the
Electroplating Standard 4-day average limit must be adjusted to the
appropriate equivalent monthly average (see page 5-11 of the Guidance
Manual for Electroplating and Metal Finishing Pretreatment Standards).
• If process changes at an industry warrant, the POTW must recalculate
the alternative limits at its discretion or at the request of the
industrial user. The new alternative limits must be calculated and
become effective within 30 days.
5-3
-------
C/REG. X-l/038
The POTW may impose more stringent alternative limits, but may not
impose alternative limits that are less stringent than the calculated
limits.
A calculated alternative limit cannot be used if it is below the
analytical detection limit for that pollutant. If a calculated limit
is below the detection limit, the industrial user must either: 1) not
combine the dilute streams with the regulated streams prior to the
combined treatment facility, or 2) segregate all wastestreams entire-
ly.
If an industrial user needs to segregate its wastestreams because
calculated alternative limits are below the detection limit, but the
cost to segregate wastestreams is disproportionate to the cost of
compliance, the industrial user may be eligible for further variance
from categorical pretreatment standards under Section 403.13.
The categorical standards of the regulated wastestreams which are
applied to the CWF must be consistent interms of the number of samples
the standard is based on. Electroplating Point Source Category
Pretreatment Standards, 40 CFR Part 413, specify 4-day average limits
as opposed to monthly average limits. However, according to Section
413.04, if a nonelectroplating wastestream is regulated by a maximum
monthly average standard (based on ten sample days), and it is
combined with an electroplating wastestream, 30-day average standards
rather than 4-day average standards are to be used in calculating an
alternative limit with the CWF. Section 413.04 also states that if
two electroplating wastestreams regulated under different subcate-
gories of the electroplating regulations are combined, the 4-day
standards may be used to calculate the alternative limit, unless an
additional wastestream subject to monthly standards is added.
Section 413.04 provides a table for the conversion of a 4-day average
standard to a 30-day average standard.
COMBINED WASTESTREAM FORMULAS
Alternative Concentration Limit Formula:
C = / i=l "1*1 I „ / Ft " Fd
t I N F, I \ Ft
C = alternative concentration limit for the pollutant
C = Categorical Pretreatment Standard concentration limit for the pollutant
in regulated stream i
F = average daily flow (at least 30 day average) of regulated stream i
5-4
-------
C/REG. X-1///38
F, = average daily flow (at least 30 day average) of dilute wastestream(s)
d
F = average daily flow (at least 30 day average) through the combined
treatment facility (including regulated, unregulated and dilute
wastestreams)
N = total number of regulated streams
Alternative Mass Limit Formula
M = alternative mass limit for the pollutant
M. = Categorical Pretreatment Standard mass limit for the pollutant in
regulated stream i
F = average daily flow (at least 30 day average) of regulated stream i
F, = average daily flow- (at least 30 day average) of dilute wastestream(s)
F * average daily flow (at least 30 day average) through the combined
treatment facility (including regulated, unregulated and dilute
wastestreams)
N = total number of regulated streams
An example of how to use the combined wastestream formula showing
conversion from a mass-based standard to a concentration-based standard is
presented in Table 5.4, Example D in the Guidance Manual for Electroplating
and Metal Finishing Pretreatment Standards.
5-5
-------
SAMPLE APPLICATION OF THE COMBINED WASTESTREAM FORMULA
EXAMPLE 1
CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE LIMIT
FOR AN INTEGRATED ELECTROPLATER PRIOR
TO THE METAL FINISHING COMPLIANCE DATE
Industrial Category
(Subcategory)
Electroplating
(common metals)
Metal Finishing
(painting)
Wastestream Flow
Type mgd
Regulated 0.4
Unregulated 0.1
Daily Max.
Zn Limit (mg/1)
4.2
N/A
Electroplating
(Common Metals)
Q
Zn
Metal Finishing
(Painting)
0.4 mgd
4.2 mg/1
Q
Zn
0.1 mgd
N/A
Zn
cwf
4.2 mg/1 (0.4 mgd)
0.4 mgd
(0.1 mgd + 0.4 mgd) - 0
(0.1 mgd + 0.4 mgd)
4.2 mg/1
Note: This limit applies to integrated electroplaters from June 30, 1984 to
February 15, 1986. After February 15, 1986, integrated electroplaters
are covered by the single industrial category - Metal Finishing. The
daily maximum zinc limit for Metal Finishing is 2.61 mg/1. Therefore,
this example facility must meet a zinc limit of 4.2 mg/1 until February
15, 1986 and 2.61 mg/1 after February 15, 1986.
5-6
-------
DATA USED FOR CWF EXAMPLES 2 THROUGH 5*
Industrial Category Wastestream Flow Daily Max.
(Subcategory) Type mgd Zn Limit (mg/1)
Metal Finishing ^ Regulated 0.5 2.61
(Electroplating)
(Painting)1
2
Porcelain Enameling Regulated 0.3 1.33
(Steel - coating only)
Photographic Processing Unregulated , • 0.2 N/A
Sanitary Waste Dilution 0.05 N/A
*These examples assume the Metal Finishing compliance date is in effect and
the industry is an integrated electroplater.
These are not subcategories; they are metal finishing processes.
2 2
Alternative production based limit = 0.85 mg/m coated.
5-7
-------
EXAMPLE 2A
CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE LIMIT
(Zn f) WHEN TWO REGULATED WASTESTREAMS ARE COMBINED
(NO DILUTE WASTESTREAMS)
Metal Finishing
(Electroplating)
(Painting)
Q
Zn
0.5 mgd
2.61 mg/1
Porcelain
Enameling (Steel)
Q = 0.3 mgd
Zn -'1.33 mg/1
Zn
cwf
2.61 mg/1 (0.5 mgd) + 1.33 mg/1 (0.3 mgd)
(0.5 mgd + 0.3 mgd)
2.13 mg/1
Note: Alternative limit is proportioned by flow to regulated wastestream.
EXAMPLE 2B
CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE LIMIT
(Zn J WHEN TWO REGULATED WASTESTREAMS ARE COMBINED
cwr
WITH A DILUTE WASTESTREAM
Metal Finishing
(Electroplating)
(Painting)
> mgd
>1 mg/1
Porcelain
Enameling (Steel)
Q = 0.3 mgd
Zn = 1.33 mg/1
Sanitary
Waste
Q = 0.05 mgd
Zn = (N/A)
Zn
cwf
2.13 mg/1 (0.5 mgd + 0.3 mgd + 0.05 mgd - 0.05 mgd) _
0.85 mgd
= 2.0 mg/1
Note; Alternative limit of 2.13 mg/1 derived in Example 2A is further reduced
because of dilution.
5-8
-------
EXAMPLE 3A
CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE LIMIT
(Zn ,) WHEN ONE REGULATED WASTESTREAM AND ONE
UNREGULATED WASTESTREAM ARE COMBINED
(NO DILUTE WASTESTREAM)
Q
Zn
Metal Finishing
(Electroplating)
(Painting)
mgd
mg/1
Q -, 0.2
Zn * (N/A
Photographic
Processing
mgd
)
Zn
,
cwf
2.61 mg/1 (0.5 mgd)
0.5 mgd
0.7 mgd - 0
0.7 mgd
2.61 rag/1
Note: Alternate limit is not changed by addition of unregulated wastestream
only.
EXAMPLE 3B
CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE LIMIT (Zn )
WHEN ONE REGULATED WASTESTREAM AND ONE
UNREGULATED WASTESTREAM ARE COMBINED
WITH A DILUTE WASTESTREAM
Q = 0.5 mf
Zn = 2.61 t
Metal Finishing
(Electroplating)
(Painting)
5d
ng/1
Photographic
Processing
Q = 0.2 mgd
Zn =• (N/A)
i
Q = 0.05 mj
Zn - (N/A)
Sanitary
Waste
Id
r
Zn
cwf
2.61 mg/1 (0.5 mgd + 0.2 mgd + 0.05 mgd - 0.05 mgd)
0.75 mgd
2.44 mg/1
Note: Alternate limit of 2.61 mg/1 derived in Example 3A is reduced because
of dilution.
5-9
-------
EXAMPLE 4A
CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE LIMIT (Zn e)
cvf
WHEN TWO REGULATED WASTESTREAMS AND ONE
UNREGULATED WASTESTREAM ARE COMBINED
(NO DILUTE WASTESTREAM)
Q - 0.5 mgd
Zn = 2.61 mg
Metal Finishing
(Electroplating)
(Painting)
/I
Q
Zn
= 0.3 mg
- 1.33 m
Porcelain
Enameling
(Steel)
d '
g/i
Q = 0.
Zn = (N
Photographic
Processing
2 mgd
/A)
Zn
cwf
2.61 mg/1 (0.5 mgd) + 1.33 mg/1 (0.3 mgd)
(0.5 mgd + 0.3 mgd + 0.2 mgd)
= 2.13 mg/1
Note; Alternate limit is proportioned by flow to regulated wastestreams and
not changed by addition of unregulated wastestream.
EXAMPLE 4B
CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE LIMIT (Zn ,)
rwr
WHEN TWO REGULATED WASTESTREAMS AND ONE
UNREGULATED WASTESTREAM ARE COMBINED
WITH A DILUTE WASTESTREAM
Metal Finishing
(Electroplating)
(Painting)
mgd
L mg/1
Porcelain
Enameling
(Steel)
Q = 0.3 mgd
Zn = 1.33 mg/1
Photographic
Processing
Q = 0.2 mgd
Zn = (N/A)
Sanitary
Waste
Q = 0.05 mgd
Zn = (N/A)
Zn
cwf
2.13 mg/1 (0.5 mgd + 0.3 mgd + 0.2 mgd + 0.05 mgd - 0.05 mgd)
1.05 mgd
7 n, ,.
2.03 mg/1
Note; Alternate limit of 2.13 mg/1 derived in Example 4A is reduced because
of dilution.
5-10
-------
EXAMPLE 5
CONVERSION OF PRODUCTION-BASED (MASS) CATEGORICAL STANDARDS
TO CONCENTRATION-BASED: TWO REGULATED WASTESTREAMS
WITHOUT DILUTION WATER
The Porcelain Enameling and several other categorical standards can be
implemented as concentration-based or production-based limits. The example
below converts production-based limits to equivalent concentration-based
limits. These equivalent concentration-based limits can then be used as the
standard for porcelain enameling as demonstrated in the previous examples.
Porcelain Enameling (Steel) Daily
Maximum Limit for Zinc
Average Daily Production During
Last 12 months
Average Daily Water Usa£e in
Porcelain Enameling Coating
During Last 12 months
0.85 mg/m coated
6 2
2 x 10 m coated/day
300,000 gpd
Step 1: Convert Production-based Limit to Equivalent Concentration Limit
Concentration= (Production-Based Limit)(Avg. Daily Production Rate)
Equivalent (Avg. Daily Flow from Regulated Process) (Conversion Factor)
Zn
(equivalent)
0.85 mg/m (2 x 10 m coated/day)
300,000 gpd (3.785 liters/gallon)
1.50 mg/1
Step 2; Once the concentration-based equivalent is determined, then the
alternate limit can be calculated as in Example 2A.
Q -
Zn =
0.5 mgd
2.61 mg/1
Metal Finishing
(Electroplating)
(Painting)
Porcelain
Enameling
(Steel)
Q » 0.3 mgd
Zn » 1.50 mg/1
Zn
cwf
2.61 mg/1 (0.5 mgd) + 1.50 mg/1 (0.3 mgd)
(0.5 mgd + 0.3 mgd)
2.19 mg/1
5-11
-------
D/Reg 10/011
CHAPTER 6
NOTIFICATION OF INDUSTRIAL USERS
INTRODUCTION
A POTW is responsible for being up-to-date on all Federal pretreatment
standards and applicable requirements under the Clean Water Act and Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act. The POTW is responsible for notifying all of
its industrial users, but particularly Significant Industrial Dischargers
(SIDs) that may be affected by existing or newly promulgated standards and
requirements.
Various procedures are available for a POTW to obtain current information
on the status of the Federal pretreatment regulations and requirements, as
well as other regulations. If a POTW is quite large, it might subscribe to
the Federal Register or some other comparable printed circular that summarizes
EPA regulatory status, and assign one individual the duty to review the sub-
ject document(s). Smaller or medium sized POTWs could obtain the information
from the State Pretreatment Coordinator, or the EPA Regional Pretreatment
Coordinator, if the State does not possess pretreatment authority.
Regional EPA offices and/or approved pretreatment States should be
encouraged to develop a simple network for communicating pretreatment program
information to the POTWs.
The balance of this chapter is devoted to:
• Types of notification
• Contents of a notification package
• Review of baseline monitoring reports and/or applications, or data
disclosure forms from significant industrial dischargers
• Outlined procedure for notifying significant industrial dischargers.
The narrative will center on significant industrial users, as defined in
Chapter 1, which includes categorical industries for which EPA is promulgating
Federal categorical pretreatment standards.
6-1
-------
D/Reg 10///11
TYPES OF NOTIFICATIOK
There are three types of notification which may apply to most POTWs.
They are:
Initial Notification
The POTW notifies the industrial users that its pretreatment program
application has been approved and that it will be enforcing local and Feder-
ally promulgated standards on the industrial facility.
Notification to Submit a Baseline Monitoring Report (BMR) or Permit
Application or Data Disclosure Form
Depending on what system the POTW utilizes (permit, contract, or indus-
trial waste acceptance form), the POTW notifies the industrial users to submit
information within a specified time period.
A POTW may combine these first two types of notification especially if
categorical industrial users need to be notified immediately of promulgated
pretreatment standards.
Periodic Notifications
A POTW may wish to institute a system to remind industrial users that
progress reports, final compliance reports or semi-annual reports are due.
The POTW would use periodic notifications to present any regulatory news to
the regulated community.
CONTENTS OF A NOTIFICATION PACKAGE
Whatever type of notification is utilized, the notification package needs
to describe information in a succinct manner. It is strongly encouraged that
the POTW use standardized forms when gathering information from an industrial
user.
*
1. Contents of Initial Notification Package
This initial notification should be brief and provide a general outline
to the industrial users of the POTW's overall pretreatment program strategy,
6-2
-------
D/Reg 10/011
especially its enforcement mechanism (permit, contract, industrial waste
acceptance form) and what the industrial users should be expecting in the near
future (e.g., notification to submit a baseline monitoring report, permit
application, or data disclosure form). This notification should identify an
individual who will be the contact person for the industrial users.
2. Contents of Notification Package for Submittal of BMR or Permit Applica-
tion or Data Disclosure Form
This notification package can vary depending on whether Federal standards
have been promulgated and whether the municipality will use a permit system or
rely on the ordinance to control the industrial users. The following examples
outline both scenarios.
A. Contractual Agreement as the Enforcement Mechanism
In the case where Federal regulations are not promulgated and the muni-
cipality elects to use this mechanism in lieu of a permit, the POTW's local
limits, established in its sewer use ordinance, will initially be enforced on
categorical as well as noncategorical industrial users. The notification
package should:
• Describe the local limits and how the POTW will enforce them
• Advise the categorical industrial users that Federal standards will be
promulgated and that they may apply if they are more stringent than
the local limits
• Indicate that the industrial users must sample their wastewater to
determine compliance with local limits
• Indicate that the industrial users must submit a compliance schedule
if they are out of compliance
• Contain a data disclosure form with complete instructions on filling
out the form correctly (see Attachment 6.1 for example form)
• Contain a deadline date for submittal of all required information.
This step can be omitted if an industrial user is already being con-
trolled.
The POTW can elect to sample the industrial user and charge the user
for the cost of the sample collection and analysis.
6-3
-------
D/Reg 10///11
In the case where Federal regulations are promulgated, and the munici-
pality elects to use a contract in lieu of a permit, local limits will apply
to noncategorical industrial users, and the Federal limits will apply to the
categorical industrial users unless local or State limits are more stringent
(see Chapter 4 for discussion on applying limits to industrial users). The
notification package for:
• Noncategorical industrial users should contain basically the same
information discussed under the example given on page 6—3, except for
reference to the federal categorical standards.
• Categorical industrial users should:
- Describe that the POTW will apply the more stringent limit to the
industrial users' discharge. A general explanation may be usefull.
- Describe the different types of variance requests in regulation
with their associated deadline date (categorical determination
request: 403.6(a); FDF.-403.13; net gross: 403.15). The notifica-
tion package in Attachment 6.2, contains an example of these types
of requests.
- Describe the use of the combined wastestream formula for facilities
that are integrated (i.e., covered by more than one Federal stan-
dard) or have a combined discharge of regulated, unregulated, and
dilution water. Chapter 5 provides a description and examples of
how the combined wastestream formula can be used,
- Require the industrial user to submit flow data and a schematic so
that the POTW can adjust Federal limits to determine which limits
are more stringent (see Chapter 4 for discussion of technique).
- Contain a data disclosure form or a BMR form with instructions (see
Attachments 6.1 and 6.2 for examples).
If the POTW must compare local limits vs Federal limits, then the
industrial user cannot sample nor determine compliance until the
POTW provides the applicable limits to it (i.e., once the POTW
calculates and compares the limits as described in Chapter 4).
Once this has been accomplished, the industrial uaer can sample and
report compliance in the BMR or data disclosure form.
The municipality may elect to sample the industrial user and charge
it accordingly.
- Indicate that the industrial user must sample its wastewater and
report compliance.
6-4
-------
D/Reg 10///11
- Indicate that a compliance schedule must be submitted if the
industrial user is out of compliance with the applicable stan-
dard(s).
- Stipulate a compliance date for subraittal of completed BMR or data
disclosure form. The Regulations (40 CFR 403.12(b)) stipulates
that within 180 days from promulgation of the standard a report
containing the required information be submitted.
If the industrial user elects to meet local limits or Federal
standards at the end of its regulated process lines, or if the POTW
elects to have ite local limits apply at the end of the regulated
process line, then there is no need for an interim step whereby the
POTW must obtain flow data, perform some adjustments and convey
"applicable limits" to the industrial user so that it can sample
its vastewaters and report compliance. All that is needed in this
case is for the POTW to evaluate its limits vs Federal limits and
convey in the notification package the more stringent limits to the
categorical industrial user.
Permit/Industrial Waste Acceptance Form (IWA) as the Enforcement Mecha-
nism
In the case where Federal regulations are not promulgated, and the
municipality elects to use a perrait/IWA, the municipality will initially
enforce its local limits on categorical as well as noncategorical SIDs. The
notification package should:
• Describe the local limits and how the POTW will enforce them
• Advise the categorical industrial users that Federal standards will be
promulgated and if they are more stringent than the local limits, the
industrial users will have to comply to the Federal standards
• Indicate that the industrial users must sample their wastewater to
determine compliance with local limits
• Indicate that the industrial users must submit a compliance schedule
if they are out of compliance
• Contains a data disclosure form or a permit application with complete
instructions. If a permit system is being used, a permit application
would be included (See Attachments 6.1 and 6.3 for example forms)
• Contains a deadline date for submittal of all information.
A data disclosure form or permit application form can be utilized in
lieu of a BMR if it contains all the necessary information required in
40 CFR 403.12(b).
6-5
-------
D/Reg 10///11
In the case where Federal regulations are promulgated, and the municipal-
ity elects to use a perrait/IWA, the municipality will apply local limits to
the noncategorical industrial users and the Federal limits will apply to the
categorical industrial users, unless local or State limits are more stringent
(see Chapter 4 for discussion on applying limits to industrial users). The
notification package for:
• Noncategorical industrial users should contain basically the same
information as previously discussed on page 6-3, except for reference
to the Federal categorical standards
• Categorical industrial users should contain the information as
outlined on pages 6-4 and 6-5.
A data disclosure form or permit application form can be utilized in
lieu of a BMR if it contains all the necessary information required in
40 CFR 40S.12(b).
If a POTW has already issued a permit3 contractt or an IWA to a
categorical industrial user and EPA promulgates a Federal standard for
the particular categorical user' then the POTW may need to notify the
user utilizing the notification process discussed above in a slightly
simplified manner since the key in this situation would be that the
POTW only needs to obtain flow information to determine if local or
Federal standards are more stringent.
3. Contents of Periodic Notification
This type of notification should be straightforward. The format of the
notification will be dependent on the type of information being forwarded to
the industrial user. If for example, the POTW is sending a reminder about the
compliance deadline date, the notification may reintroduce the appropriate
pretreatment standard and the requirement for the submittal of a final
compliance report.
REVIEW OF SID INFORMATION
Whether or not a POTW utilized a BMR, a data disclosure form or a permit
application, an industrial user should provide the following information
required in 40 CFR 403.12(b).
• Name of firm and location
• Standard industrial classification code (SIC code)
6-6
-------
D/Reg 10///11
• Description of various manufacturing processes
• Product information
• Flow information (including whether all flows are separate or if flows
from more than one process are combined before discharge to the sewer)
• Schematic of each manufacturing process with associated flows
• List of raw materials and chemicals utilized in the manufacturing
process
• Description of all treatment systems
• Listing of environmental control permits
i
• Wastewater constituents (the industrial user is responsible for
sampling its wastewaters. The sampling point will depend on whether
the facility needs to comply with local or Federal standards)
• Statement regarding compliance
• Compliance schedule, if warranted
• Signatory requirement attesting to validity of information.
Review of the information submitted by an industrial user is very
important. The following principles should be followed:
• The review should be thorough.
• The reviewer should have some knowledge of the industry in order to
ascertain whether information is correct. The EPA publishes technical
development and guidance documents for categorical industries that
characterizes the facility and its wastewaters.
• Inspections of the facility may be useful, especially where informa-
tion is questionable.
• Pay particular attention to how the industrial user sampled and who
analyzed the samples.
• Watch for inconsistent information such as flows not corresponding, or
a facility which indicates its discharge is in compliance with a
Federal or local standard but it has no treatment system (it is
unlikely that its raw waste would be in compliance unless it is being
diluted).
• Be extremely careful with integrated facilities. Become familar with
the application of the combined wastestream formula, and the indus-
trial facility.
6-7
-------
D/Reg 10///11 %
• Be aware of the time factor for review. Many sewer use ordinances
require that an industrial user obtain a permit within a specified
time period.
• Follow-up as needed.
• Ensure compliance schedules for categorical industrial users do not
extend beyond those specified in promulgated standards. (Compliance
deadline dates formating local limits are established by POTWs.)
Once the information is deemed correct and complete, the POTW will issue
the permit/IWA, or contract indicating what limits apply.
PROCEDURAL OUTLINE FOR NOTIFYING SIDS
The following procedural outline assumes that the POTW has just received
pretreatment authority, and that it is controlling, through the use of a
permit, categorical and noncategorical industrial users by applying the
appropriate pretreatment standards (i.e., local/State/Federal).
1. The POTW program is approved.
2. The POTW receives from the EPA Regional Office or State Pretreatment
Coordinator all BMRs, progress reports, and any final compliance
reports from industrial users.
3. Within (30) days of receiving program authority, the POTW sends an
initial notification letter to industrial users.
4. Within (60) days of receiving program authority, the POTW will notify
all existing industrial users to submit a permit application.
• The POTW will determine which categorical pretreatment standards
have been promulgated, and which industries will be affected by
them.
• The notificaiton package will instruct the affected users of which
pretreatment standards apply, provide a synopsis of local and/or
Federal categorical standards, appropriate compliance deadline
dates, and sampling and reporting requirements. A copy of the
permit application along with instructions will be part of the
notification package. For categorical industrial users, the
notification will summarize the different type of variance
requests available.
The permit application will serve as the BMR for the categorical
industries.
6-8
-------
D/Reg 10///11
The POTW will enforce the mope applicable (or stringent) limita-
tion (local/State/Federal) on categorical and nonoategorical type
industries.
• If the Federal standards have been promulgated, the POTW will
indicate in its notification to a categorical industrial user that
the more stringent standard will apply (i.e., local limitations or
Federal limitations). The POTW will need to work closely with the
effected user and utilize the combined waetestream formula to
determine which standards are more stringent, (see Chapter 4)
0 If Federal categorical standards have not been promulgated at the
time of notification, the POTW will indicate to the affected
categorical type industry that local limits apply.
0 For noncategorical affected users, the POTW will instruct them
that local limits apply.
For categorical facilities, which are integrated and have promul-
gated categorical standards, the POTW will work closely with the
affected user and employ the combined wastestream formula, if
appropriate.
5. The affected users will be required Co submit the permit application
within (90 days/180 days) of receipt of the POTW's notification
package.
6. For New Source Dischargers, the POTW will notify the affected user to
submit a permit application. The notification package will describe
that the POTW will make a determination as to whether the user will
be issued a permit. The affected user will not be allowed to dis-
charge until it receives a determination from the POTW. If a permit
is determined to be needed, the affected user (if a categorical
industry) will be required to comply with the promulgated pretreat-
ment standard upon commencement of discharge. The POTW will use
discretion regarding whether a new.noncategorical discharge will be
required to comply with local limitations upon commencement of a dis-
charge.
7. Review of a Permit Application
• The affected users will be required to submit all required data.
Example permit application forms can be found in Attachment 6.3.
• The affected user, being notified by the POTW of which standards
(local/State/Federal) apply, will sample its wastewater to de-
termine if it complies with the applicable standards. A compli-
ance schedule will be provided for users indicating noncompliance.
• Upon receipt of the permit application, the POTW will create a
file for each affected user. (Note: Data will be entered in the
POTW's computer system, if an ADP system is utilized).
6-9
-------
D/Reg 10/#11
All data will be reviewed carefully. The POTW will pay particular
attention to which standards apply to the affected user, as well
as, compliance data.
For affected users out of compliance with the applicable standard,
the POTW will evaluate the user's compliance schedule. For cate-
gorical industries, the POTW will insure that the affected user's
schedule does not exceed the promulgated standard's final com-
pliance date. For noncategorical industries, or categorical
industries for which Federal categorical standards have not been
promulgated, the POTW will insure that the affected user's sched-
ule is reasonable.
For categorical industries for which Federal categorical standards
have not been promulgated, the POTW will determine the status of
the Federal regulation that would apply to the affected user(s)t
and may wait for promulgation of the standard if it will be prom-
ulgated in a relatively short period of time. This would allow
the POTW to determine if Federal or local standards are more
stringent and would eliminate the need to modify the permit.
Follow-up activities will be undertaken for incorrect, inaccurate
or missing data.
The POTW will inform the affected user of acceptance of the permit
application by issuance of a permit.
6-10
-------
Attachment 6.1
Example Data Disclosure Forms
• City of Boise, Idaho
• City of Sandpoint, Idaho
-------
CITY OF BOISE
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT DISCLOSURE FORM
COMPLETE ALL APPLICABLE SECTIONS. INFORMATION MUST BE TYPEWRITTEN OR CLEARLY
PRINTED. ATTACH REQUESTED INFORMATION AS NEEDED. SIGNING OFFICIAL MUST HAVE
AUTHORIZATION TO PROVIDE SUCH INFORMATION ON BEHALF OF THE COMPANY. CORPORA-
TION, OR PARTNERSHIP.
1. COMPANY NAME:.
2. DIVISION NAME: (If applicable) .
3. MAILING ADDRESS: a. STREET OR P.O. BOX
b. CITY. STATE. AND ZIP CODE
4. FACILITY ADDRESS: a. STREET OP P.O. BOX
b. CITY. STATE. AND ZIP CODE
5. FOUR-DIGIT SIC (STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION) CODE FOR FACILITY •
6. WASTEWATER CONSTITUENTS: (Attach additional sheet if necessary)
PARAMETER • CONCENTRATION (MG/LJ
7. WASTEWATER FLOW:
a. AVERAGE DAILY DISCHARGE: Process -
Sanitary.
Cooling -
b. MAXIMUM DAILY DISCHARGE
c. DAILY. MONTHLY. SEASONAL VARIATIONS
8. TIME AND DURATION OF DISCHARGE
9. DISCHARGE TO SEWERAGE SYSTEM: ATTACH AS EXHIBIT "A" A PLAN TO THE PROPERTY SHOWING
ACCURATELY THE SITE PLAN. FLOOR PLAN, SEWERS. SEWER CONNECTIONS. INSPECTION MANHOLES.
AND SAMPLING CHAMBERS BY SIZE. LOCATION. AND ELEVATION.
10. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY: ATTACH AS EXHIBIT "8" A DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTIVITIES. FACILITIES. AND
PLANT PROCESSES INCLUDING ALL MATERIALS DISCHARGED TO THE SEWERS OR TREATMENT FACILITIES.
11. PROHIBITED POLLUTANTS BEING DISCHARGED AS REGULATED BY CITY INDUSTRIAL USER ORDINANCL.
(Ansch additional sheets if necessary)
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION (MG/L)
DAILY MAXIMUM DAILY AVERAGE
Figure 6-4. Example Disclosure Form
CH2M
BOISE INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM ! "SHILL
B12430.LO CITY OF BOISE. IDAHO I
-------
12. IS INDUSTRY IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT ORDINANCE?.
13. IS ADDITIONAL PRETREATMENT REQUIRED? •—
IF YES. DESCRIBE PRETREATMENT NECESSARY
14. COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE: (Must conform to requirements of City pretreatment ordinance. Attach additional sheets as
necessary)
15. PRODUCTS PRODUCED: (Attach additional sheets as necessary)
TYPE AMOUNT AND RATE OF PRODUCTION PROCESS
16. RAW MATERIALS USED. TO INCLUDE CHEMICALS USED IN PROCESS THAT COULD BE DISCHARGED TO
SANITARY SYSTEM: (Attach additional sheets a* necessary)
AMOUNT UTILIZED
TYPE AVERAGE/DAY MAXIMUM/DAY
17. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL PERMITS: Lin any environmental control permits held by or for your facility.
The information contained in this discourse statement is familiar to me and to the best of my
knowledge and belief, such information is true, complete, and accurate.
Signature: ', Date:.
Organization/Title: _________________________
Address: ________
Telephone:.
Figure 6-4. (Continued)
BOISE INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
B12430.LO CITY OF BOISE. IDAHO
-------
CITY OF SANDPOINT
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT DISCLOSURE FORM
COMPLETE ALL APPLICABLE • SECTIONS. INFORMATION MUST BE
TYPEWRITTEN OR CLEARLY PRINTED. ATTACH REQUESTED
INFORMATION AS NEEDED. SIGNING OFFICIAL MUST HAVE
AUTHORIZATION TO PROVIDE SUCH INFORMATION ON BEHALF OF THE
COMPANY, CORPORATION, OR PARTNERSHIP.
1. Company Name/Telephone:_
2. Mailing Address: a. Street or P.O. Box_
b. City, State, and Zip Code
3. Facility Address (if different from mailing address):
a. Street or P.O. Box
b. City, State and Zip Code_
4. Standard industrial classification number (four digit SIC code) for
facility
5. Wastewater constituents and characteristics including but not limited to
those mentioned in the City of Sandpoint Wastewater Use Ordinance
Appendices A, B and C- (Attach additional sheet if necessary)
Constituents and Characteristics Concentration (mg/1)
6. Time and Duration of Discharge
7. Wastewater Flow (Including sanitary and cooling water flows):
a. Average Daily Discharge
b. Maximum Daily Discharge
Daily, Monthly, Seasonal Variations
8. Discharge to sewerage system: Attach as Exhibit "1" a plan to the
property showing accurately the site plan, floor plan, mechanical and
plumbing plans and details to show all sewers, sewer connections,
FIGURE 6-2. EXAMPLE DISCLOSURE FORM
-------
inspection manholes, and sampling chambers and appurtenances by size,
location and elevation.
9. Description of facility: . Attach as Exhibit "2" a description of the
activities, facilities, and plant processing including all materials discharged
to the sewers to or treatment facilities.
10. Prohibited pollutants being discharged as regulated by City Waste water
User Ordinance (Attach additional sheets if necessary):
Pollutant Concentration (mg/1)
Daily Max. Daily Avg.
11. If additional pretreatment and/or operation and maintenance activities are
required to comply with the City's Wastewater User Ordinance, the
discharger shall provide a compliance schedule which will conform to the
requirements presented in the City's Wastewater User Ordinance (Attach
additional sheets as necessary):
12. Products Produced (Attached additional sheets as necessary):
Amount and Rate of
Type Production Process
FIGURE 6-2 (cont.)
-------
13. Chemicals and Raw Materials Used that could be discharged to the
Sanitary System (Attach additional sheets as necessary):
Amount Utilized
Type Average/Day Maximum Day
14. Environmental Control Permits: List any /environmental control permits
held by or for your facility.
The information contained in this discourse statement is familiar to me and to
the best of my knowledge and belief, such information is true, complete, and
accurate.
Signature: Date:
Organization/Title:
FIGURE 6-2 (cont.)
-------
Attachment 6.2
Example Notification Package for Submittal
of BMR Data
-------
GUIDANCE ON IMPLEMENTATION
OF
BASELINE MONITORING REPORT REQUIREMENTS
October 1984
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water Enforcement and Permits
NPDES Programs Branch
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document was prepared by JRB Associates under
EPA Contract No. 68-01-6514 with guidance from EPA
Headquarters, Office of Water Enforcement and Permits,
and EPA Regional Offices, particularly materials
prepared by U.S. EPA Regions 11 and V.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
1. OVERVIEW OF BASELINE MONITORING REPORTS 1-1
1.1 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.2 OVERVIEW OF THE BMR STRATEGY 1-4
1.3 CONTENTS OF THE BMR INFORMATION PACKAGE... 1-4
1.4 OVERVIEW OF CONTROL AUTHORITY RESPONSIBILITIES 1-5
1.4.1 Identifying Industrial Users 1-7
1.4.2 Notifying Industrial Users 1-7
1.4.3 Reviewing Baseline Monitoring Reports and Taking
Follow—up Action 1 1-8
2. BMR STRATEGY 2-1
3. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 3-1
4. BMR FORM 4-1
5. BMR REVIEW CHECKLIST AND SUMMARY FORM 5-1
6. NOTIFICATION LETTERS 6-1
7. SAMPLE CORRESPONDENCE... 7-1
APPENDICES - SUMMARIES OF CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
A. ALUMINUM FORMING
B. BATTERY MANUFACTURING
C. COIL COATING
D. COPPER FORMING
E. ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (PHASE I)
F. ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (PHASE II)
G. ELECTROPLATING AND METAL FINISHING
H. INORGANIC CHEMICAL MANUFACTURING (PHASE I)
I. INORGANIC CHEMICAL MANUFACTURING (PHASE II)
J. IRON AND STEEL MANUFACTURING
K. LEATHER TANNING AND FINISHING
L. METAL MOLDING AND CASTING (FOUNDRIES)
M. NONFERROUS METALS FORMING .
N. NONFERROUS METALS MANUFACTURING (PHASE I)
0. ORGANIC CHEMICALS AND PLASTICS AND SYNTHETIC FIBERS
P. PESTICIDE CHEMICALS
Q. PETROLEUM REFINING
R. PHARMACEUTICAL MANUFACTURING
S. PORCELAIN ENAMELING
T. PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD AND BUILDERS' PAPER AND BOARD MILLS
U. STEAM ELECTRIC
V. TIMBER PRODUCTS PROCESSING
-------
x- 1. OVERVIEW OF BASELINE MONITORING REPORTS
\
1.1 INTRODUCTION
All industrial users (lUs) subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards
must comply with the reporting requirements contained in the General Pre-
treatment Regulations in Section 403.12 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. The first report required of an IU subject to the standards is
the Baseline Monitoring Report (BMR), which is to be submitted to the Control
Authority within 180 days after the effective date of an applicable Categori-
cal Pretreatment Standard. The Control Authority, which will be responsible
for receiving and reviewing these BMRs, is defined in Section 403.12(a) as the
publicly owned treatment works (POTW) if the POTW has an approved local
pretreatment program, or in the absence of an approved local program, the
State, if it has been delegated pretreatment authority, or the EPA Region.
The information in BMRs will glay an important role in the application
and enforcement of Categorical Pretreatment Standards, as well as the overall
National Pretreatment Program, such as:
V
• Ensuring that all categorical industries are aware of their responsi-
bilities to comply with Categorical Pretreatment Standards
• Providing an opportunity for POTWs and their lUs to establish contact
with one another
• Determining the compliance status of each IU subject to Categorical
Standards
• Disseminating information to States, POTWs, and categorical lUs.
Because of the estimated number of lUs subject to Categorical Pretreatment
Standards (15,000) and the number of POTWs and States that will be acting as
Control Authorities (approximately 1,700), EPA has developed a BMR Strategy
and guidance for EPA Regions, States, and POTWs to use in implementing BMR
requirements. Table 1 shows the status of the various Categorical Standards,
the estimated number of affected industrial users, and the regulatory due
dates for the submission of BMRs. The table is organized in alphabetical
order by industrial category. A table with the same data organized by
-------
Revised 10-17-84
TABLE I
SUMMARY STATUS OF NATIONAL CATEGORICAL PRETKEATHENT STANDARDS: MILESTONE DATES
FINAL REGULATIONS
Industry Category
Timber Products
Electroplating
Textile Hills4
Metal Finishing
Pulp, Paper, Paperboard
Steam Electric
Electrical Components I
Iron and Steel
Inorganic Chenlcals 1
Leather Tanning
Porcelain Enanellng
Petroleum Refining
Coll Coating I
Copper Fora Ing
Aluminum Forming
Pliarnaceut Icats
Coll Coating (Canmaklng)
Estimated
Hunter of
Indirect
Dischargers
*7
10,200
—2
250
93
240
96
44
140
89
S3
32
32
72
270
~6
Promulgation
Date
1-26-81
1-28-81
9-2-82
7-15-83
11 -18-82
11-19-82
4-8-83
5-27-82
6-29-82
11-23-82
11-24-82
10-18-82
12-1-82
8-15-83
10-24-83
10-27-83
11-17-83
Effective
Date
3-30-81
3-30-81
10-18-82
8-29-83
1-3-83
1-2-83
5-19-83
7-10-82
8-12-82
1-6-83
1-7-83
12-1-82
1-17-83
9-26-83
12-7-83
12-12-83
1-2-84
BUR Due Date
9-26-81
9-26-81 (Nontnteg.)
6-25-83( Integrated)
4-16-83
2-25-84
7-2-83
7-1-83
11-15-83
4-6-83
5-9-83
7-5-83
7-6-83
5-30-83
7-16-83
3-25-84
6-4-84
6-9-84
6-30-84
PSES
Compliance
Date
1-26-84
4-27-84 (Nonlnteg.)
6-30-84 (Integrated)
__l
6-30-84 (Part 433, TTO)2
7-10-85 (Part 420. TTO)
2-15-86 (Final)
7-1-84
7-1-84
7-1-84 (TTO)3
11-8-85 (As)
7-10-85
8-12-85
11-25-85
11-25-85
12-1-85
12-1-85
8-15-86
10-24-86
10-27-86
11-17-86
-------
Revised 10-17-84
TABLE I (Continued)
SUMMARY STATUS OF NATIONAL CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS: MILESTONE DATES (Continued)
PROPOSED REGULATIONS
Industry Category
Battery Manufacturing
Nonferrous Metals I
Electrical Components II
Inorganic Chemicals II
Pesticides
Organic Chemicals
Metal Holding and
Casting (Foundries)
Plastics Molding and
Forming
Nonferrous Metals forming
Nonferrous Metals II
Estimated
Number of
Indirect
Dischargers
190
63
—5
7
38
470
355
1,117
113
—8
Promulgation
Date
3-9-84
3-8-84
12-14-83
8-22-84
deferred
deferred
(6-84)
(9-84) .
(10-84)
(11-84)
Effective
Date
4-18-84
4-23-84
1-27-84
10-5-84
deferred
• deferred
(8-84)
(11-84)
(12-84)
(1-85)
BMR Due Date
10-15-84
10-20-84
7-25-84
4-3-85
deferred
deferred
(2-85)
(5-85)
(6-85)
(7-85)
PSBS
Compliance
Date
3-9-87
3-9-87
7-14-87
6-29-85
8-22-87 (CuSO.,
N1SO.)
deferred
deferred
(8-87)
(11-87)
(12-87)
(1-88)
Proposed
Date
11-30-82
3-21-83
11-15-82
2-15-84
3-5-84
6-27-84
Parentheses Indicate expected milestone dates for categories that do not yet have final standards.
Footnotes;
(I) No numerical pretreatment limits have been established for tfie Textile Mills industrial category, and
there Is no final compliance date for categorical pretreatment standards. Firms In this Industry are
required to comply only with the General Pretreatraent Regulations In 40 CFR 403.
(2) Existing sources that are subject to the Metal Finishing standards in 40 CFR Part 433 must comply only
with the Interim limit for Total Toxic Organ Ics (TTO) by June 30, 1984. Plants also covered by 40 CFR
Part 420 must comply with the Interim TTO limit by July 10, 1985. The compliance date for Metals,
Cyanide, and final TTO Is February 15, 1986 for all sources.
(3) The compliance date for existing Phase I Electrical and Electronic Components manufacturers for TTO is
July I, 19H4. The compliance date for arsenic Is November 8, 1985.
(4) No numerical pretreatment standards were established for this Industrial category. However, Indirect
dischargers in the Textile Mills Industry are required to comply with the General Pretreatment
Regulations In 40 CTK Part 403.
Note: The compliance dale for any New Source (PSNS) Is the same date as the commencement of the discharge.
-------
chronological order according to the compliance date is given in Section 2
(pages 2-12 - 2-13).
The following sections discuss EPA's strategy for BMR implementation, the
responsibilities of the Control Authority, and the contents of this guidance
package. Questions about BMRs should be directed to the appropriate EPA
Regional Pretreatment Coordinator.
1.2 OVERVIEW OF THE BMR STRATEGY
EPA Headquarters, with significant input from the Regions, has outlined a
national strategy for implementing BMR requirements for industrial users
subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards (see Section 2 of this docu-
ment). The BMR Strategy outlines Control Authority requirements for notifica-
tion, receipt, and review of BMRs; provides an overview of the contents of a
BMR; and suggests a plan for Regions and States to follow in implementing the
strategy.
Overall, the BMR Strategy recommends that the EPA Regions and States give
POTWs the responsibility for identifying and notifying IDs and receiving and
reviewing BMRs. POTWs with approved local pretreatment programs, or those
making significant progress in developing programs, are in the best position
to identify Ills subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards from their
industrial waste surveys and to verify the information contained in BMRs. The
BMR Strategy stresses providing sufficient guidance to POTWs through States
and EPA Regions so that they can assume BMR responsibilities. This guidance
package is to be used in training POTWs to enforce BMR requirements.
1.3 CONTENTS OF THE BMR INFORMATION PACKAGE
The BMR Strategy called for developing this BMR Information Package,
which contains materials that can be passed on to Control Authorities. The
components of this package are:
• BMR Strategy - A copy of EPA's plan for administering BMRs is pre-
sented in Section 2.
-------
• Regulations for BMR Reporting Requirements - For quick reference, 40
CFR 403.12(a)-(d) is provided in Section 3.
• Sample BMR Form and Instructions - A sample BMR form is shown in
Section 4. The form requests all of the information required to be
submitted by 40 CFR 403.12(b)(l-7). Accompanying the sample form are
instructions on how to complete it.
• BMR Review Checklist and Summary Comment Form - A checklist and
summary form are provided in Section 5 for use in reviewing and
tracking BMRs. The checklist is keyed to the sample form in Section
4.
• Sample Notification Letter - A sample notification letter for request-
ing BMRs from industrial users is given in Section 6. An example
letter is also provided.
• Sample Follow-up Correspondence - Industrial users may fail to submit
BMRs upon request or may submit incomplete BMRs. Section 7 contains
sample letters that can be used to correspond with lUs that are
noncompliant.
• Categorical Pretreatment Standard Summaries - The appendix is sub-
divided into sections that correspond to each industry group "for which
Categorical Pretreatment Standards have been proposed or promulgated.
Each section contains a summary of the particular Categorical Pre-
treatment Standard. The summaries are intended to be sent to indus-
trial users along with their notification letters (Section 6) to
assist them in understanding the standards. The Categorical Standard
Summaries provide information on:
- Important dates, including BMR due dates and discharge compli-
ance dates
- Federal Register citations
- Regulated subcategories
- Regulated pollutants and applicable discharge limits
- Special considerations.
Note that this information package is intended to provide examples for Control
Authorities. Each Control Authority should tailor the letters, BMR form,
review checklist, and other materials to its specific needs.
-------
1.4 OVERVIEW OF CONTROL AUTHORITY RESPONSIBILITIES
Figure 1 is a flow diagram of the steps through which a Control Authority
proceeds in carrying out its BMR responsibilities. The steps include
identifying industrial users, notifying the Ills of their requirements,
reviewing BMRs as they are submitted, and taking appropriate action in cases
of noncompliance. These activities are discussed below.
1.4.1 Identifying Industrial Users
The first step in implementing the BMR strategy is identifying industrial
users under the jurisdiction of the Control Authority that are subject to
i
Categorical Pretreatment Standards. If the Control Authority is a POTW, a
list of lUs may be available from the industrial waste survey (IWS) conducted
during pretreatment program development. In cases where the Control Authority
does not have access to an IWS, a list of lUs can be developed through the use
of State and local industrial directories or lists maintained by States or EPA
Regions. The Control Authority should note that the latter sources probably
will not indicate whether an industry is a direct or indirect discharger.
•
Once lUs have been identified, the Control Authority should classify them
by industry category and segregate, where possible, lUs that are not regulated
by Categorical Pretreatment Standards. SIC codes, which are often given in
industrial directories, can aid in classifying industrial users. Table 2
presents a listing of SIC codes for industrial users regulated by the
categories and subcategories for which Categorical Pretreatment Standards have
been promulgated or proposed. This table can be used as a reference for the
Control Authority to segregate its categorical lUs. The Control Authority
should also look for lUs that may be covered by more Chan one Categorical
Pretreatment Standard.
1.4.2 Notifying Industrial Users
After the Control Authority has identified its lUs, it should notify the
industries of the requirement to submit BMRs. A notification package can be
sent to each industrial user, consisting of:
-------
Control Authority
Identifies Industrial
BMR Notification
Package Sent to
Industrial User
Review BMR tor
Completeness
Return to IU With
Explanatory Letter
Technical Review of
BMR i Determination of
Cotnoliance
SXR Filed for 3 years
Periodic Reports
Monitored
IU Must Submit a
Compliance Schedule
With the BMR
Compliance Schedule
.Follow-up
FIGURE 1.
ADMINISTRATION OF BMRs
-------
TABLE 2
REGULATED INDUSTRIAL SUBCATEGORIES WITH ASSOCIATED SIC CODES
Industry Category SIC Codes
Aluminum Forming
A. Rolling with Emulsions 3353, 3355
B. Rolling with Neat Oils 3353, 3355
C. Extrusion 3354
D. Forging 3463
E. Drawing with Neat Oils 3353, 3355
F. Drawing with Emulsions or Soaps 3354, 3355, 3357
Battery Manufacturing
A. Cadmium 3691, 3692
B. Lead 3691, 3692
C. Leclanche 3691, 3692
D. Lithium 3691, 3692
E. Magnesium 3691, 3692
F. Zinc 3691, 3692
Coil Coating
A. Steel Basis Material Coating 347SL, 3497
B. Galvanized Basis Material Coating 3479, 3497
C. Aluminum Basis Material Coating 3479, 3497
D. Canmaking 3411
Copper Forming
All processes 3351, 3497
Electrical and Electronic Components
(Phase I)
A. Semiconductors 3674
B. Electronic Crystals 3679
Electrical and Electronic Components
(Phase II)
C. Cathode Ray Tube 3671
D. Luminescent Materials 3672
Sources: (1) Summary of Rulemaking Activities, EPA Effluent Guidelines
Division, July 1983; (2) Preambles to various Final Rules; (3) List
of Major Industries, prepared by EPA, NEIC, Golden, CO, October
1982.
-------
TABLE 2 (Continued)
REGULATED INDUSTRIAL SUBCATEGORIES WITH ASSOCIATED SIC CODES
Industry Category
SIC Codes
Leather Tanning and Finishing (Continued)
D. Retan-Wet Finish-Sides
E. No Beamhouse
F. Through-the-Blue
G. Shearling
H. Pigskin
I. Retan-Wet Finish-Splits
Metal Finishing (see also Electroplating)
All processes
Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing (Phase I)
B. Primary Aluminum Smelting
C. Secondary Aluminum Smelting
D. Primary Copper Smelting
E. Primary Electrolytic Copper Refining
F. Secondary Copper
G. Primary Lead
H. Primary Zinc
I. Metallurgical Acid Plants
J. Primary Tungsten
K. Primary Columbium Tantalum
L. Secondary Silver
M. Secondary Lead
Petroleum Refining
A. Topping
B. Cracking
C. Petrochemicals
D. Lube
E. Integrated
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
A. Fermentation Products
B. Extractions
C. Chemical Synthesis Products
D. Mixing/Compounding and Formulation
Porcelain Enameling
A. Steel Basis Material
B. Cast Iron Basis Material
C. Aluminum Basis Material
3111
3111
3111
3111
3111
3111
3471, 3479
3334
3341
3331
3331
3341
3332
3333
3331, 3332, 3333
3339
3339
3341
3341
2911
2911
2911
2911
2911
2833, 2831
2831, 2833
2833
2834
3631, 3632, 3633, 3639, 3469,
3479, 3431
3631, 3431
3469, 3479, 3631
-------
TABLE 2 (Continued)
REGULATED INDUSTRIAL SUBCATEGORIES WITH ASSOCIATED SIC CODES
Industry Category
SIC Codes
Porcelain Enameling (Continued)
D. Copper Basis Material
Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
Part 430
A. Unbleached Kraft
B. Semi-Chemical
D. Unbleached Kraft-Neutral Sulfite
Semi-Chemical (Cross Recovery)
E. Paperboard from Wastepaper
F. Dissolving Kraft
G. Market Bleached Kraft
H. BCT Bleached Kraft
I. Fine Bleached Kraft
J. Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash)
K. Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
M. Groundwood - Thermo-Mechanical
N. Groundwood - CMN Papers
0. Groundwood - Fine Papers
P. Soda
Q. Deink
R. Nonintegrated - Fine Papers
S. Nonintegrated - Tissue Papers
T. Tissue from Wastepaper
U. Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
V. Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
W. Wastepaper Molded Products
X. Nonintegrated - Lightweight Papers
Y. Nonintegrated - Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
2. Nonintegrated - Paperboard
Part 431
A. Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Steam Electric Power Generating
All processes
Timber Products
G. Wood Preserving - Steam
H. Wood Preserving - Boultonizing
3469, 3479, 3631
2611, 2621, 2631
2611, 2621, 2631
2611, 2621, 2631
2631, 2661
2611
2611
2611, 2621, 2631
2611, 2621
2611, 2621
2611
2611, 2621, 2631
2611, 2621
2611, 2621
2611, 2621
2611, 2621
2621
2631
2611, 2621, 2647
2611, 2621
2611, 2621, 2631
2611, 2621, 2631, 2646
2611, 2621
2621
2631
2661
4911, 4931
2491
2491
10
-------
• Cover letter to the IU explaining: 1) requirement to submit a BMR, 2)
where the BMR should be sent, 3) due date of the BMR, and 4) other
pertinent dates for the industrial category
• Summary of the applicable Categorical Pretreatment Standard to assist
the IU in determining its compliance status
• BMR form to be completed by the IU
• Instructions for completing the BMR.
A sample BMR Report Form, instructions for completing the form, a sample
notification letter and summaries of the various Categorical Pretreatment
Standards are provided in Sections 4, 6, and in the appendices.
1.4.3 Reviewing Baseline Monitoring Reports and Taking Follow-up Action
Each baseline monitoring report must meet the requirements set forth in
40 CFR 403.12(b)(l-7). To determine compliance with these requirements, the
reviewer must first check the BMR for completeness. If a BMR is incomplete,
the Control Authority should notify the IU of the requirement to submit
additional information. Follow-up letters, as shown in Section 7, can be sent
to industries that have submitted Inadequate BMRs. If an IU fails to submit
its BMR, the Control Authority must contact the IU, and should specify a due
date for the report.
The person who reviews the BMR must determine whether the IU is in
compliance with applicable pretreatment standards. If the BMR indicates that
the industry is not in compliance, the industry is required to submit a
schedule of activities that it will conduct to achieve compliance. Compliance
schedules must meet the requirements in 40 CFR 430.12(c) and must be approved
by the Control Authority.
11
-------
2. BMR STRATEGY
EPA has developed a strategy that It will follow in implementing BMR
requirements nationwide. However, this strategy has not been officially
approved, and subsequently is not available at this time.
-------
3. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
The General Pretreatment Standards set forth BMR requirements in 40 CFR
403.12(b)(l-7). This section contains a copy of all of the general pretreat-
ment reporting requirements In 40 CFR 403.12(a~d).
-------
9452 Federal Register / VoL 46. No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28. 1981 / Rides and Regulations
{403.12 Reporting rvqulrenMnts for
POTWs and Industrial UMT*.
(a) Definition. The term "Control
Authority" as it is used in this section
refer* to: (1) The POTW if the POTWs
Submission for its pretreatment program
(j 40&3(t)(l)) has been approved in
accordance with the requirements of
1403.M: or (2) the Approval Authority if
the Submission has not been approved.
(b) Reporting requirement for
industrial users upon effective date of
categorical pretreatment standard—
baseline report. Within 180 days after
the effective date of a categorical
Pretreatment Standard, or 180 days after
the final administrative decision made
upon a category determination
submission under S 403.6(a)(4),
whichever is later, existing Industrial
Users subject to such categorical
Pretreatment Standards and currently
discharging to or scheduled to discharge
to s POTW shall be required to submit
to the Control Authority a report which
contains the information listed in
paragraph (b)(lH7J of this section.
Where reports containing this
information already have been
submitted to the Director or Regional
Administrator in compliance with the
requirements of 40 CFR 128.140(b), the
Industrial user will not be required to
submit this information again. New
sources shall be required to submit to
the Control Authority a report which
contains the information listed in
paragraphs (b)(lHS) of this section:
(1) Identifying information. The User
shall submit the name and address of
the facility including the name of the
operator and owners;
(2) Permits. The User shall submit a
Hit of any environmental control pern-
held by or for the facility:
(3) Description of operations. The
User shall submit a brief description of
the nature, average rate of production.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9453
and Standard Industrial Classification of
/ :he operation(s) carried out by such
Industrial User. This description should
include a schematic process diagram
which indicates points of Discharge to
the POTW from the regulated processes.
(4) Flow measurement. The User shall1
submit information showing the
measured average daily and maximum
daily flow, in gallons per day. to the
POTW from each of the following:
(i) regulated process streams: and
(ii) other streams as necessary to
allow use of the combined wastestream
formula of i 403.6(e). (See paragraph
(b)(5](v) of this section.)
The Control Authority may allow for
. verifiable estimates of these flows
where justified by cost or feasibility
considerations.
(5) Measurement of Pollutants, (i) The
user shall identify the Pretreatment
Standards applicable to each regulated
process;
(ii) In addition, the User shall submit
the results of sampling and analysis
identifying the nature and concentration
(or mass, where required by the
Standard or Control Authority) of
regulated pollutants in the Discharge
from each regulated process. Both daily
maximum and average concentration (or
I mass, when required) shall be reported.
The sample shall be representative of
daily operations:
(iii) Where feasible, samples must be
obtained through the flow-proportional
composite sampling techniques specified
in the applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standard. Where
composite sampling is not feasible, a
grab sample is acceptable:
(iv) Where the flow of the stream
being sampled is less than or equal to
950,000 liters/day (approximately
230,000 gpd). the User must take three
samples within a two-week period.
Where the flow of the stream being
sampled is greater than 950.000 liters/
day (approximately 250.000 gpd). the
User must take six samples within a
two-week period:
(v) Samples should be taken
immediately downstream from
pretreatment facilities if such exist or
immediately downstream from the
regulated process if no pretreatment
.exists. If other wastewaters are mixed
with the regulated wastewater prior to
pretreatment the User should measure
the flows and concentrations necessary
to allow use of the combined
wastestream formula of i 403.6(e) in
order to evaluate compliance with the
Pretreatment Standards. Where an
alternate concentration or mass limit
has been calculated in accordance with
8 4O3.6(e) this adjusted limit along with
supporting data shall be submitted to
the Control Authority:
(vi) Sampling and analysis shall be
performed in accordance with the
techniques prescribed in 40 CFR Part 136
and amendments thereto. Where 40 CFR
Part 136 does not contain sampling or
analytical techniques for the pollutant in
question, or where the Administrator
determines that the Part 136 sampling
and analytical techniques are
inappropriate for the pollutant in
question, sampling and analysis shall be
performed by using validated analytical
methods or any other applicable
sampling and analytical procedures.
including procedures suggested by the
POTW or other parties, approved by the
Administrator.
(vii) The Control Authority may allow
the submission of a baseline report
which utilizes only historical data so
long as the data provides information
sufficient to determine the need for
industrial pretreatment measures:
(viii) The baseline report shall
indicate the time, date and place, of
sampling, and method* of analysis, and
shall certify that such sampling and
analysis is representative of normal
work cycles and expected pollutant
Discharges to the POTW;
(6) Certification. A statement.
reviewed by an authorized
representative of the Industrial User (as
defined in subparagraph (k) of this
section) and certified to by a qualified
professional, indicating whether
Pretreatment Standards are being met
on a consistent basis, and. if not
whether additional operation and
maintenance (O and M) and/or
additional pretreatment is required for
the Industrial User to meet the
Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements: and
(7) Compliance Schedule. If additional
pretreatment and/or O and M will be
required to meet the Pretreatment
Standards: the shortest schedule by
which the Industrial User will provide
such additional pretreatment and/or O
and M. The completion date in this
schedule shall not be later than the
compliance date established for the
applicable Pretreatment Standard.
(I) Where the Industrial User's
categorical Pretreatment Standard has
been modified by a removal allowance
(§ 403.7). the combined wastestream
formula (} 403.6(e)). and/or a
Fundamentally Different Factors
variance (§ 403.13) at the time the User
submits the report required by
paragraph (b) of this section, the
information required by paragraphs
(b)(6) and (7) of this section shall pertain
to the modified limits.
(ii) If the categorical Pretreatment
Standard is modified by a removal
allowance (§ 403.7). the combined
wastestream formula (§ 403.6(e)). and/or
a Fundamentally Different Factors
variance (§ 403.13) after the User
submits the report required by
paragraph (b) of this section, any
necessary amendments to the
information requested by paragraphs
(b)(6) and (7) of this section shall be
submitted by the User to the Control
Authority within 60 days after the
modified limit is approved.
(c) Compliance Schedule for Meeting
Categorical Pretreatment Standards.
The following conditions shall apply to
the schedule required by paragraph
(b](7) of this section:
(1) The schedule shall contain
increments of progress in the form of
dates for the commencement and
completion of major events leading to
the construction and operation of
additional pretreatment required for the
Industrial User to meet the applicable
categorical Pretreatment Standards (e.g..
hiring an engineer, completing
preliminary plans, completing final
plans, executing contract for major
components, commencing construction.
completing construction, etc.).
(2) No increment referred to in
paragraph (c)(l) of this section shall
exceed 9 months.
(3) Not later than 14 days following
each date in the schedule and the final
date for compliance, the Industrial User
shall submit a progress report to the
Control Authority including, at a
minimum, whether or not it complied
with the increment of progress to be met
on such date and. if not the date on
which it expects to comply with this
increment of progress, the reason for
delay, and the steps being taken by the
Industrial User to return the
construction to the schedule established.
In no event shall more than 9 months
elapse between such progress reports to
the Control Authority.
(d) Report on compliance with
categorical pretreatment standard
deadline. Within 90 days following the
date for final compliance with
applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standards or in the case of a New
Source following commencement of the
introduction of wastewater into the
POTW. any Industrial User subject to
Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements shall submit to the
Control Authority a report indicating the
nature and concentration of all
pollutants in the Discharge from the
regulated process which are limited by
Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements and the average and
maximum daily flow for these process
-------
9454 Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
units in the Industrial User which are
limited by such Pretreatment Standards
and Requirements. The report shall state
whether the applicable Pretreatment
Standards or Requirements are being
met on a consistent basis and if not.
what additional O and M and/or
pretreatment is necessary to bring the
Industrial User into compliance with the
applicable Pretreatment Standards or
Requirements. This statement shall be
signed by an authorized representative
of the Industrial User, as defined in
paragraph (k) of this section, and
certified to by a qualified professional
(e) Periodic reports on continued
compliance. (1) Any Industrial User
subject to a categorical Pretreatment
Standard, after the compliance date of
such Pretreatment Standard, or. in the
case of a New Source, after
commencement of the discharge into the
POTW. shall submit to the Control
Authority during the months of June and
December, unless required more
frequently in the Pretreatment Standard
or by the Control Authority or the
Approval Authority, a report indicating
the nature and concentration of
pollutants in the effluent which are
limited by such categorical Pretreatment
Standards. In addition, this report shall
include a record of measured or
estimated average and maximum daily
flows for the reporting period for the
Discharge reported in paragraph (b}(4)
of this section except that the Control
Authority may require more detailed
reporting of flows. At the discretion of
the Control Authority and in
conaideraton of such factors as local
high or low flow rates, holidays, budget
cycles, eta. the Control Authority may
. agree to alter the months during which
the above reports are to be submitted.
(2) Where the Control Authority has
imposed mass limitations on Industrial
Users as provided for by { 403.6(d). the
report required by paragraph (e)(l) of
this section shall indicate the mass of
pollutants regulated by Pretreatment
Standards in the Discharge from the
Industrial User.
(f) Notice of slug loading. The
Industrial User shall notify the POTW
immediately of any slug loading, as
defined by-f 4034(b)(4). by the
Industrial User.
(g) Monitoring and analysis to
demonstrate continued compliance. The
reports required in paragraphs (b)(5).
(d). and (e) of this section shall contain
the results of sampling and analysis of
ths Discharge, including the flow and
the nature and concentration, or
production and mass where requested
by the Control Authority, of pollutants
contained therein which are limited by
the applicable Pretreatment Standards.
The frequency of monitoring shall be
prescribed in the applicable
Pretreatment Standard. All analyses
shaO be performed in accordance with
procedures established by the
Administrator pursuant to section 304(g)
of the Act and contained in 40 CFR Part
136 and amendments thereto or with any
other test procedures approved by the
Administrator. Sampling shall be
performed in accordance with the
techniques approved by the
Administrator. Where 40 CFR Part 136
does not include sampling or analytical
techniques for the pollutants in question.
or when the Administrator determines
that the Part 136 sampling and analytical
techniques are inappropriate for the
pollutant in question, sampling and
analyses shall be performed using
validated analytical methods or any
other sampling and analytical
procedures, including procedures
suggested by the POTW or other parties.
approved by the Administrator.
(h) Compliance schedule for POTWs.
The following conditions and reporting
requirements shall apply to the
compliance schedule for development of
an approvable POTW Pretreatment
Program required by J 403.8.
(1) The schedule shall contain
increments of progress in the form of
dates for the commencement and
completion of major events leading to
the development and implementation of
a POTW Pretreatment Program (e.g..
acquiring required authorities.
developing funding mechanisms.
acquiring equipment):
(2) No increment referred to in
paragraph (h)(l) of this section shall
exceed nine months:
(3) Not later than 14 days following
each date in the schedule and the final
date for compliance, the POTW shall
submit a progress report to the Approval
Authority including, as a minimum.
whether or not it complied with the
increment of progress to be met on such
date and. if not the date on which it
expects to comply with this increment of
progress, the reason for delay, and the
steps taken by the POTW to return to
the schedule established. In no event
shall more than nine months elapse
between such progress reports to the
Approval Authority.
(i) Initial PQTW report on compliance
with approved-removal allowance. A
POTW which has received authorization
to modify categorical Pretreatment
Standards for pollutants removed by the
POTW in accordance with the
requirements of § 403.7 must submit to
the Approval Authority within 60 days
after the effective date of a Pretreatment
Standard for which authorization to
modify has been approved, a report
which contains the information required
by §§403.7(d)(2). 403.7{d)(5) and
403.7(d)|6). A minimum of one sample
per month during the reporting period is
required.
(j] Periodic reports by POTW to
demonstrate continued compliance i\;:h
removal allowance. The reports referred
to in paragraph (i) of this section will be
submitted to the Approval Authority a:
6-month intervals beginning with the
submission of the initial report referred
to in paragraph (i) of this section unless
required more frequently by the
Approval Authority.
(k) Signatory requirements for
industrial user reports. The reports
required by paragraphs (b). (d). and («?)•
of this section must be signed by an
authorized representative of the
Industrial User. An authorized
representative may be:
(1) A principal executive officer of HI
least the level of vice president, if the
Industrial User submitting the reports
required by paragraphs (b). (d) and (e) of
this section is a corporation.
(2) A general partner or proprietor if
the Industrial User submitting the report
required by paragraphs (b). (d) and (e) of
this section is a partnership or sole
proprietorship respectively.
(3) A duly authorized representative
of the individual designated in
subparagraph (1) or (2) of this paragra;
if such representative is responsible for
the overall operation of the facility from
which the Indirect Discharge originates.
(I) Signatory requirements for POTIV
reports. Reports submitted to the
Approval Authority by the POTW in
accordance with paragraphs (h), (i) and
(j) of this section must be signed by a
principal executive officer, ranking
elected official or other duly authorized
employee if such employee is
responsible for overall operation of the
POTW.
(m) Provisions governing fraud ar.ct
false statements. The reports required
by paragraphs (b). (d). (e). (h). (i) and !;)
of this section shall be subject to tr.c-
provisions of 18 U.S.C. section lOtn
relating to fraud and false statemer.-.t
and the provisions of section 309(c)CI of
the Act governing false statements.
representations or certifications in
reports required under the Act.
(n) Record-keeping requirement*.
(1) Any Industrial User and POTU
subject to the reporting requirement?
established in this section shall
maintain records of all information
resulting from any monitonng activities
required by this section. Such records
shall include for all samples:
ii) The date, exact place, method, anc
time of sampling and the names of the
person or persons taking the samples:
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9455
(U) The dates analyses were
erformed:
(iii) Who performed the analyses:
(ivj The analytical techniques/
methods use: and
(v) The results of such analyses.
(2) Any Industrial User or POTW
subject to the reporting requirements
established in this section shall be
required to retain for a minimum of 3
years any records of monitoring
activities and results (whether or not
such monitoring activities are required
by this section) and -hall make such
records available for inspection and
copying by the Director and the
Regional Administrator (and POTW in
the case of an Industrial User). This
• period of retention shall be extended
during the course of any unresolved
litigation regarding the Industrial User
or POTW or when requested by. the
Director or the Regional Administrator.
(3) Any POTW to which reports are
submitted by an Industrial User
pursuant to paragraphs (b). (d), and (e)
of this section shall retain such reports
for a tnininmm of 3 years and shall make
such reports available for inspection
and copying by the Director and the
Regional Administrator. This period of
retention shall be extended during the
course of any unresolved litigation
Ygarding the discharge of pollutants by
ne Industrial User or the operation of
the POTW Pretreatment Program or
when requested by the Director or the
Regional Administrator.
-------
4. SAMPLE BMR FORM AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE FORM
Following is a sample form that can be supplied to industries that must
submit BMRs. By providing a standard form, the Control Authority will receive
information from its industrial users in a consistent format, which facili-
tates review, tracking, recordkeeping, and preparing summary reports* Note
that it is important for industries to read the accompanying instructions when
completing the form.
The informational requirements of the sample BMR form follow the regula-
tory BMR requirements in 40 CFR 403.12. The Control Authority may wish to
request additional information concerning the facility. Such information
could include a description of hazardous waste disposal practices or the
availability of a spill prevention control and countermeasures plan (SPCC) or
other spill control plan.
-------
I
INDUSTRIAL USER BASEUKE NOIITaillK REPOtT
Itrucfions: Pleas* complete this form In as much detail as possible. Include additional information on attached sheets as necessary. Refer :o :.-e
plemental Instructions and return this report to the address shown In the instructions.
COMPANY INFORMATION
A. Legal Name:
Mailing Address:
B. Facility Name:
Location:
_Z1p
Z'3
C. Name of Owner(s)
0. Name of Operators
1. Facility Contact (provide the name, title and pnone numoer of a designated person to contact 1f additional information is necessary. ,'
F. Number of Employees
G. Num&er of Shifts
H. Number af <
-------
Unregulated Processes
Average
Flow Rate (and)
Maximum
Flow Rate (gpd)
Type of Discharge
(batcn. continuous, none)
Cooling Hater • —
Sanitary Wastewater
C. Provide on a separate sheet:
1) a schematic drawing of flow chart of each regulated process that generates wastewater
2) a schematic drawing showing £]_!_ wastewater flows (regulated and unregulated), location of any treatment system, and sampling locations.
i. NATURE AMD"CONCENTRATION OF POLLUTANTS
A. Analysis of Regulated Flows
The Industrial user must perform sampling and analysis of the effluent from all regulated processes (after treatment, if applicable).
.Provide the analytical data for the regulated processes In the space provided below. Attach additional sneets if necessary. Only trose
pollutants specifically regulated by the applicable category need be reported.
Regulated Process:
mg/1
Maximum
Average
Ag
Cd
CM .A
CN.T
Cr
Cu
N1
Pb
PH
TM
in
•
TTO
Sample Location: ^^^^_^___^________^________^^^_
Sample Type (composite samples are required except where not feasible):
Number of Samples and Frequency Collected: _^_____^^^_^^_____
Analytical Methods Used:
3. Analysis of Total Plant Flow (if aopropriate)
An Industrial User may sample and analyze the total plant flow and calculate an equivalent concentration limit using the combined wascestresn
formula if regulated process flows are mixed with other flows prior to treatment and/or sampling. Record the analytical results for all re-
gulated pollutants below. Record the calculated concentration limits as well as the actual measured concentrations.
mg/1
MEC'
AEC-
AMMC*
AAAC*
A?
Cd
CN.A
CN.T
Cr
Cu
N1
Pb
PH
TM
Zn
Sample Location: '
no
! •
!
i
i
i
i
!
1
Sample Type:
Number of Samples and Frequency Collected: ^__^^^^_^^_^__^__^__^^^^_^^_^_
Analytical Methods Used:
•NEC - Ma> -JK Equivalent Concentration (derived through the combined oastestream formula)
•AEC - Average Equivalent Concentration (derived through the combined wastestream formula)
•AMMC - Actual Measured Maximum Concentration
•AAAC - Actual Measured Average
-------
HASTEMATER TREATMENT
Briefly describe »ny and »11 wastewater treatment utilized (show treatment system location in relation to process f!o« on schematic :raw:n3
required by Questions 3.C.)
ENVtRONMEHTAL CONTROL PERMITS
Describe all environmental control permits held by or for the facility:
Describe Title of the Permit
f
Permit Number
i
Issuing Agency
i
l.'3'rjvr- ~>.-.i
.
NO
COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
A. Is the facf'lity meeting applicable categorical aretreatment standards on a consistent Oasis? YES
9. If no, do you require:
1) additional operation and maintenance (04M) to achieve compliance? YES _ NO _
2) new or additional pretreatrnent facilities to achieve compliance? YES _ NO _
C. If additional OSM or new or additional pretreatment will be required to ?:eet categorical aretreafsent standaros 3n i :.;r.s- ^snt sasis.
attach a schedule on a seoarate sheet projecting increments of progress indicating dates for the commencement ins ;cmp!e::;n of ia;or
events leasing to compliance with :he stanaard. Note: the final compliance date in this schedule snail net ;e 'its' fan :"» ::n-
oliance date for the applicable aretreatment standard, written progress reports are reouirgd within 14 days of eac- :-~ :-e .::-pi-5«ca
fates specified in the compliance sc-ecule.
SMSATORY ^
I certify under penalty of law that I lave personally examined and am faniliar with the inf:~-ation in :iis aoolicsvon tr.z i'.' ittic — s
and that, based on my inquiry of those persons immediately responsible for obtaining the 1n-:r-iation contained in ;»e its'. • Z3~- -n . '. :°'.
tr;at the information is true, accurate and ::mplete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for admitting -'ilss •-•: — •-< :-.
including tne possibility of fine ana
NAME • AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
OFFICIAL TITLE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
INDUSTRIAL USER BASELINE MONITORING REPORT
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
Please complete the attached form and return tt by to the following address:
If you have any questions, please contact Che following person(s):
SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS
Item 1. A.-H. Provide all requested information about the facility producing the discharge of
wastewaters.
Item 2. A.-B. Provide a listing of all primary raw materials and chemicals used in the facility's
operations. Avoid use of trade names of chemicals. If trade names are used, provide
information regarding the active ingredients. C. Self-explanatory
0. List each regulated process, the production race (i.e., 10,000 Ibs. of (product name)/
year), the category and subpart of Che applicable Categorical Pretreatmenc Standard as well
as the SIC code for each process.
Item 3. A. Provide the total plant flow rate (average and maximum) to the sanitary sewer in
gallons per day (gpd). If accurate flow measurements are unavailable, provide Che best
estimate.
B. Provide a breakdown of the sources of the total plant flow co the sanitary sewer
including regulated and unregulated flows, sanitary vastewacer, cooling water, etc. Also
Indicate the flow rate (gpd) and the type of discharge (batch, continuous or none).
C. In order to provide the reviewing agency a complete understanding of the facility's
processes, location of precreatment facilities and sampling points, the discharger is
required co submit a schematic of each process and a schematic of wastewacer flows, "low
rates may be estimated. Refer Co Figures I and 2 for example schematics. Be sure co
indicate on the flow or process schematic where samples are taken.
0. Self-explanatory
Item 6. A. The facility must sample, analyze and report the concentration of all regulated
poll..ants for the regulated processes. If the flow of the was test re am being sampled is
less than or equal to 250,000 gallons per day, at lease chree samples within a two-week
period must be collected and analyzed. If the flow is greacer Chan 250,000 gallons oer
day, at least six samples must be collected and analyzed within a two week period. In any
case, all samples must be representative of normal operations and be of sufficient number
to allow comparison with the applicable Categorical Pretreataent Standard. Samples should
be collected immediately after the regulated process (after treatment, if applicable)
before being combined with other wastestreams. Type of sample (i.e., grab, composite),
sample location, number of samples and methods of analysis should be adequately described.
If analytical data is provided for more Chan one sampling point. Identify the location of
all sampling points in the schematic diagram required in question 3.C above.
B. If the facility is unable to sample the wascevater from Che regulated processes before
being mixed with other wastewacer flows, the facility may sample the total plant flow and
calculate an equivalent concentration Halt using Che combined wascescream formula. These
results may be shown in Part 48. Figure 3 provides information on the use of the combined
wascescream formula.
6, 7,8 and 9 - Self-explanatory
. This report must be signed by an authorized representative, which may Include a principal
executive officer of at least the level of vice president; a general partner or proprietor;
or a duly authorized representative that is responsible for the overall operation of the
facility.
-------
EXAMPLE 1 - EXAMPLE SCICHATIC OF A REGULATED PROCESS
ALKALINE
CLEAH
1
1
ACID
oir
1
1
CYAHIDt
corn* mm
1
1
ACIO
oir
1
ACID
corrw
1
1
• ICHL MJtTt
I
I
CMKMIIM
fLATI
1
(IN1I AMD
"
HturmALiil A
fUCiriTATt
•a
OIIDItl
CXAMIDI
1
unu -.
ILUW*
-
ructriTATt
• ICML UIO COI
m
ttauct
f
riteititAn
CIKWIUH
1
nun* mm
F
NOTE: U mass-based standards (as opposed to concentration-based) are
used according to agreements set up with the control authority
or specified in the categorical pretreatment standard, the pro-
duction rate in units specified by the standard should be in-
d ' in the schematic above.
EXAMPLE 2 - EXAMPLE MASTEUATER FLOW SCHEMATIC
Cadmium plating
(regulated process)
Phosphating •
(regulated process)
Vc
Vz
Zinc plating
(regulated process)
Treatment System
Cooling water-
VCM
Vts
Vo
Vs
> Other manufacturing
process wastewaters
Saaltary wastes
Vt
SEWER
Where: Vx " Flowrates, Sx - Sampling Locations
TOTAL PLANT FLOW (Vt) - Vts + Vcw * Vo + Vs (Vts = Vc + Vp + Vz)
REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLING In this example:
a. If regulated lines are treated only, samples should be taken after
treatment, but prior to mixing with other wastewaters at point*
S,.
B. If samples cannot be taken at S] and other wastewaters are mixed
with the regulatded wastestreams, then S2 could be used as a
sampling point. However, an alternative equivalent concentration
limit would have to be calculated using the combined wastestream
formula as shown In Figure 3.
NOTE; For purposes of the baseline monitoring report, estimates of
total plant flw can be obtained from the facility's water meter.
-------
FIGURE 3
( APPLICATION OF THE COMBINED WASTESTREAM FORMULA
Industrial users (lUs) frequently have several production lines Chat produce different wasce-
s creams. Some of the was teat reams may be regulated by one categorical pretreatment standard, while
others are regulated by a different categorical standard or not regulated at all. The IU may com-
bine all the process vastestreams and treat them in a single vastewater treatment facility.
The combined wastestrean formula (CWF), described in Section 403.6(e) of Che General Pretreat-
ment Regulations, is a mechanism for adjusting the effluent Units (concentration or mass) In cate-
gorical pretreataent standards for use when a regulated process wastestream is combined, prior to
treatment and sampling, with another process wastestream (either regulated or unregulated), result-
ing in a mixed effluent from the treatment facility. The CWF should only be used in Instances where
sampling cannot take place at the end of a regulated process (after treatment) and before mixing
with other was tea creams. The CWF is applied to the mixed effluent to account for the presence of
the additional flow not contributed by the regulated process wtstescreara. The combined wascescream
formulas for concentration and mass limits, along with example applications of each, are provided.
Definitions
Regulated Process Wastestream - An industrial process wastestreaa regulated by a national Categori-
cal Pretreatment Standard.
Unregulated Process Wastestream - An Industrial process,wastescream that is not regulated by a
Categorical Standard.
Dilute Wastestream - Boiler blowdown, sanitary wastewater, noneontact cooling water or blowdown, and
Paragraph 8 excluded wastestreams containing none of the regulated pollutant or only a trace amount
of it.
Note: Definitions apply to individual pollutants. A wastestreaa from a process may be "regulated"
for one pollutant and "unregulated" for another pollutant.
COMBINED WASTESTREAM FORMULAS
Alternative Concentration Limit Formula;
C • alternative concentration limit for the pollutant
C • Categorical Pretreatment Standard concentration limit for .the pollutanc In regulated stream t
F*' • average daily flow (at least 3O day average) of regulated stream i
F. • average daily flow (at least 30 day average) of dilute wastestream(s)
F • average daily flow (at least 3O day average) through the combined treatment facility
(Including regulated, unregulated and dilute wastestreams)
N • total number of regulated streams
Alternative Mass Limit Formula
X / F - F,
M - /* M\
t ^1 ij
N F
A '
M - alternative mass limit for the pollutant
\fL~ • Categorical Pretreatment Standard mass limit for the pollutant In regulated scream 1 (the
categorical pretreatment mass Halt multiplied by Che appropriate measure of production)
F » average daily flow (at least 3O day average) of regulated stream 1
F • average daily flow (at least 30 day average) of dilute wastestream(s)
F • average daily flow (at least 30 day average) through the combined creacaenc faclllcy
(Including regulated, unregulated and dilute wastestreams)
M • total number of regulated streams
-------
Examole Calculation of an Alternative Concentration Limit for a Pollutant
Average Daily Categorical Standard
Plow (1 /day) for Pollutant (m«/l)
Wastestn
(ReguU
Wastcscri
(Other
tfastestn
(Oiluti
tarn I
ited)
saa II
Regulated)
iaa III
i)
Vaatestreaa I
(Regulated)
1000 I/day
1
1,000
1 .000
1. 000
Was test ream II
(Other Regulated)
1000 I/day
I -
2.0
3.0
Waatestreaa III
(Dilute)
1000 I/day
'
If the IU combines wastestreaa I, II and III:
(2.0 mg/1 x 1.000 I/day) + (3.0 mg/1 x 1.000.I/day) 3.000 1/dav - I.OOP 1/dav
ct 2.000 I/day x 3,000 I/day
Cc - 2.5 mg/1 x .66
C£ - 1.65 ng/1
The alternative concentration limit (C ) is to be uaed when determining compliance with an
applicable pretreataent standard and completing the BMR form.
Example Calculation of an Alternative Mass Limit for g Pollutant
Average Daily Categorical Standard for
Flow (I/day) Pollutant (ag/sq m operation
Waatestr
(Regul
Uastestr
(Other
Wastestr
(Dilut
earn I
ated)
earn II
Regulated)
earn III
e)
Uastestream I
(Regulated)
1000 I/day
i
1,000
1,000
1. 000
Waatestreaa II
(Other Regulated)
1000 I/day
1
100
ISO
tfastestream III
(Dilute)
1000 I/day
*
Production Rate
(sq m ooeration/dav)
500
500
If the IU combines wastes cream I, II and III:
Mt - (100 «g/s, m X 500 sq m/d) > (ISO «g/,q m X 500 sq m/d) X
MC - 125,000 mg/d X 1
M - 125 g/d
3'°Q°
The alternative concentration limit (M ) is to be used when determining compliance with an
applicable pretreatment standard and completing the BMR form.
For more information concerning the combined wastestream formula, contact the EPA Regional
office. State, or local POTW.
-------
5. BMR REVIEW CHECKLIST AND SUMMARY FORM
This section contains a BMR review checklist that Is keyed to the sample
BMR form In Section 4. It also provides two example forms for use in tracking
BMR information as it is received from industries.
-------
Company Ni
BASELINE MONITORING REPORT R2VIEH CHECKLIST
Reviewer:
Date:
BMK REQUIREMENT
1. COMPANY INTORXATIOH
•. Adequate Information on company
name, location, milling address,
name of owner and operator, facility
contact?
b. Does the report Identify the POTW
receiving wastes from the facility?
(If not applicable, consent on where
veetewater it discharged)
2. NATURE OF OPERATION
a. Adequate Information to evaluate raw
Materials, chemicals, processes and
products?
b. Are regulated processes adequately
defined?
3. WASTEWATER PLOWS
a. Adequate intonation on total flow
rate as well as individual process
flow rates and type of discharge?
b. Are schematic diagraas provided of
the facility's wastewater flows and
regulated process(es)?
4. NATURE AND CONCENTRATION OF POLLUTANTS
a. Are analytical results provided for
all regulated pollutants?
b. Is sampling data information pro-
vided in sufficient detail (number,
type, and frequency of samples,
analytical methods)?
c. Is it sufficiently clear where
samples were taken?
d. If total flow was sampled, was the
combined wastestream formula used
properly based on available Informa-
tion?
e. Was a sufficient number of samples
taken?
5. WASTEWATER TREATMENT
a. Are existing wastewater treatment
practices adequately described?
6. ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS
a. Are environmental control permits
adequately identified. If appli-
cable?
7. COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION
a. Does the report indicate whether or
not the facility is consistently
meeting the standards?
b. Has the facility Indicated whether
or not additional O&M or new or
additional treetment is required?
c. Has the facility submitted an
adequate compliance schedule?
8. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENT
a. Is the report signed and dated by an
appropriate representative?
YES
NO
,
S/A
coKMzyrrs
-------
EXAMPLE 1
BMR SUMMARY FORM
COMPANY NAME/
LOCATION
BHR SUBMITTED
(IF YES,
DATE)
SUBJECT TO
REGULATION (IF
YES, INDICATE
STANDARD IN
COMMENTS)
EXISTING PRETREAT-
HENT (IF YES,
INDICATE TYPE IN
COMMENTS)
COMPLIANCE SCHE-
DULE SUBMITTED
(IF YES,
DATE)
PROGRESS
REPORTS SUB-
MITTED (IF
YES, DATE)
FINAL COM-
PLIANCE
ACHIEVED (IF
YES, DATE)
COMMENTS
-------
EXAMPLE 2
BASELINE MONITORING REPORT SUMMARY FOR THE
Conpany Name
•nd Location
(Receiving POTU|
Date
BMR
Submitted
Avg. and
Max. Reg.
Procesa
Flow
(GPD)
Applicable
Regulation
and
Coup)lance
Date
Facility Compliance
•Type Status
(JS. PC. Stated Eva).
C(I/NI)' (V/N) (Y/N)
Compliance
Schedule
Submitted
(Show
Significant
Dates)
fronreaa
Reporta
Submitted
-------
6. NOTIFICATION LETTERS
In this section is a sample notification letter that can be sent to
industrial users in each category that are required to submit BMRs. The
letter should be tailored for each category, 'using the data in the appropriate
summary to fill in the brackets in the letter. An example of a notification
letter for the Electroplating Category is also provided. The notification
letters should be accompanied by the appropriate categorical pretreatment
summary given in the appendices. The summaries contain important dates,
regulated pollutants, SIC codes, subcategories, and numerical pollutant limits
in the relevant categorical pretreatment standard.
-------
BMR NOTIFICATION LETTER
Dear [Name of Company Representative]:
[Control Authority] has reason to believe that your firm discharges
process wastewater to a publicly owned sewage treatment works. If so, you may
be required to comply with Federal and local industrial wastewater pretreat-
ment regulations.
The regulations that may apply to your firm are part of the National
Pretreatment Program, which was prescribed by Congress in the Clean Water Act
of 1977. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated the
General Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR Part 403) on June 26, 1978, and sub-
sequently amended them on January 28, 1981. The purpose of the program is to
control toxic and incompatible pollutants discharged to sanitary sewer systems
by non-domestic users of the systems. These pollutants can cause adverse
effects on human health and the environment by interfering with sewage treat-
ment plant processes, contaminating sewage sludge, or passing through the
treatment plant untreated into receiving waters. As part of the pretreatment
program, EPA also has established or will establish National Categorical
Pretreatment Standards for 25 industry categories. These standards limit the
quantity or concentration of some or all of the 126 toxic pollutants that
these 25 categories may discharge to sanitary sewer systems. Industries in
these categories that discharge to a sewage treatment system are required to
comply with applicable categorical standards as well as with the General
Pretreatment Regulations and local pretreatment standards.
On [Promulgation Date], EPA promulgated categorical standards for the
[Industrial Category] (40 CFR Part [Citation Number (3 digits)]). The stan-
dards became effective on [Effective Date]. Attachment A provides information
that can help you determine whether your firm must comply with the [Industrial
Category] standards. It also lists important dates, regulated processes and
-------
pollutants, and discharge limits for regulated pollutants. For further infor-
mation or if you have any questions, please contact [Control Authority].
As the first step in complying with categorical standards, firms dis-
charging to a sewage treatment system that are also engaged in [Industrial
Category] are required by Part 403.12 of the General Pretreatment Regulations
to submit a Baseline Monitoring Report to [Control Authority] by [BMR Due
Date]. This report must contain the information required by 40 CFR 403.12(b)
(1-7). I have enclosed a Baseline Monitoring Report form with this letter
i
(Attachment B). Instructions for completing the report are attached to the
form.
If your firm does not engage in any [Industry Category] operations,
please provide the information required by Items 1 and 2 on the report form
and return it to [Control Authority] within 15 days after you receive this
letter.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
[Control Authority Representative]
-------
EXAMPLE NOTIFICATION LETTER
ELECTROPLATING CATEGORY
John Orion
Omega Platers
101 Main Street
Adam City, MA 01010
Dear Mr. John Orion:
Adam City Sanitary Commission has reason to believe that your firm
discharges process wastewater to a publicly owned sewage treatment works. If
so, you may be required to comply with Federal and local industrial wastewater
pretreatment regulations.
The regulations that may apply to your firm are part of the National
Pretreatment Program, which was prescribed by Congress in the Clean Water Act
of 1977. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated the
General Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR Part 403) on June 26, 1978, and sub-
sequently amended them on January 28, 1981. The purpose of the program is to
control toxic and incompatible pollutants discharged to sanitary sewer systems
by non-domestic users of the systems. These pollutants can cause adverse
effects on human health and the environment by interfering with sewage treat-
ment plant processes, contaminating sewage sludge, or passing through the
treatment plant untreated into receiving waters. As part of the pretreatment
program, EPA also has established or will establish National Categorical
Pretreatment Standards for 25 industry categories. These standards limit the
quantity or concentration of some or all of the 126 toxic pollutants that
these 25 categories may discharge to sanitary sewer systems. Industries in
these categories that discharge to a sewage treatment system are required to
comply with applicable categorical standards as well as with the General
Pretreatment Regulations and local pretreatment standards.
On January 28, 1981, EPA promulgated categorical standards for the
Electroplating industrial category (40 CFR Part 413). The standards became
effective on March 30, 1981. Attachment A provides information that can help
-------
you determine whether your firm must comply with the Electroplating standards.
It also lists important dates, regulated processes and pollutants, and dis-
charge limits for regulated pollutants. For further information or if you
have any questions, please contact Harvey Goddard of my staff at 897-8987.
As the first step in complying with categorical standards, firms dis-
charging to a sewage treatment system that are also engaged in Electroplating
are required by Part 403.12 of the General Pretreatment Regulations to submit
Baseline Monitoring Reports to the Adam City Sanitary Commission. The due
dates for these reports were September 26, 1981, for non-integrated facili-
ties, and June 25, 1983 for integrated facilities. The reports must contain
the information required by 40 CFR 403.12(b) (1-7). I have enclosed a
Baseline Monitoring Report form with this letter (Attachment B). Instructions
for completing the report are provided on the form. Because the due date has
passed, please submit your report within 30 days after you receive this
letter.
If your firm does not engage in any Electroplating operations, please
provide the information required by Items 1 and 2 on the report form and
return it to this office within 15 days.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Ray Topper
Pretreatment Unit Chief
Adam City Sanitary Commission
-------
7. SAMPLE CORRESPONDENCE
This section provides sample letters that a Control Authority may use in
corresponding with industrial users about BMRs. Included are letters for non-
respondents, companies that submit adequate BMRs, and companies that submit
inadequate BMRs.
-------
FOLLOW-UP LETTER FOR NON-RESPONDENTS
Name of Company Representative
Company Name
Mailing Address
Dear [Name of Company Representative]:
On [date that BMR letter and report form were sent to the company],
[Control Authority] sent [Name of Company] a letter explaining the Baseline
Monitoring Report (BMR) requirements that the company must fulfill under the
Pretreatment Regulations established by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Attached to that letter were a summary of the standards for the [Name of
Industry] category to which [Name of Company] may be subject and a BMR form,
which you were to complete and return to this office by [date that BMR was
due, 30 days after the company received the letter]. Our records indicate
that [Name of Company] has not submitted its report.
We have enclosed another copy of the summary of the standard and the
report form with this letter. Please submit the completed form to this
office within 15 days. Note that your failure to comply with this reporting
requirement may result in enforcement action against [Name of Company] by
[Control Authority].
If you have any questions, please contact [Control Authority] at [tele-
phone number] immediately. Your prompt attention to this matter is necessary.
Sincerely,
[Control Authority Representative]
-------
LETTER TO COMPANIES
SUBMITTING ADEQUATE BMRS
Name of Company Representative
Company Name
Mailing Address
Dear [Name of Company Representative]:
[Control Authority] has reviewed [Name of Company]'s Baseline Monitoring
Report (BMR) for completeness and accuracy. Based on the Information re-
ceived, we consider the report complete. However, If for any reason there Is
an Increase In the volume of wastewater or any pollutant that your company
discharges, [Name of Company] must submit a new Baseline Monitoring Report to
this office. You should also note that progress reports are required for each
event in your compliance schedule. These reports must be submitted to this
office no later than 14 days following the scheduled date of the event.
[These last two sentences apply to Industrial users submitting BMRs with
compliance schedules.]
Please be aware that within 90 days following the date for final compli-
ance with the applicable Categorical Pretreatment Standard [or indicate date
report is due], you must submit a report to [Control Authority] containing the
following items:
• Nature and concentration of all regulated pollutants In the discharge
from each of the regulated processes
• Average and maximum daily flow rates for these processes
• Statement signed by an authorized representative and certified by a
qualified professional specifying whether the applicable Pretreatment
Standards are being met on a consistent basis and, if not, what
additional O&M and/or pretreatment is necessary to bring the Indus-
trial user into compliance with the standards.
-------
Further, periodic reports on your compliance status must be submitted to
this office during the months of June and December. A detailed description of
these reporting requirements is given in 40 CFR 403.12.
Your cooperation is appreciated. We look forward to your continued
effort in controlling water pollution.
Sincerely,
[Control Authority Representative]
-------
LETTER TO COMPANIES
SUBMITTING INADEQUATE BMRS
Name of Company Representative
Company Name
Mailing Address
Dear [Name of Company Representative]:
This letter is to inform you that [Name of Company] *s Baseline Monitoring
Report (BMR) has been received by [Control Authority]. Upon review, the BMR
has been determined to be Inadequate* Refer to the attached checklist for the
additional information that is required. This information is needed to assess
whether [Name of Company] is in compliance with applicable pretreatment
standards [40 CFR A03.12(b)].
You must submit this additional information within thirty (30) days of
receipt of this letter. If you have any questions, contact [Control Author-
ity].
Sincerely,
[Control Authority Representative]
-------
Attachment 6.3
Example Industrial Permit Application
• Tacoma, Washington
• Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, Oregon
• Completed Model Application
-------
CITY OF TACOMA
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMEMT PERMIT APPLICATION
NOTE TO SIGNING OFFICIAL: Make sure all blanks in Sections I through III are completed. Information must be
typewritten or clearly printed. Attach additional sheets keyed to section and item number if needed to provide
complete information. Signing official must have authorization to provide such information on behalf of the
company, corporation or partnership. Please complete a survey form for each facility that discharges to the City
sanitary sewer system. Additional copies of this form are available from the Tacoma Sewer Utility, telephone (206)
591-5588.
SECTION I — GENERAL INFORMATION
A. INDUSTRIAL USER—GENERAL
1. Company name .
2. Division name (if applicable)
3. Mailing address:
a. Street or P.O. Box •
b. City, state, and zip code.
4. Facility address:
a. Street address
b. City, state, and zip code.
5. Name, title, and telephone number of signing official
a. Name
b. Title i
c. Telephone number ;
B. CONFIDENTIALITY
Please indicate those sections of this questionnaire that you wish to remain confidential and your basis for
requiring confidentiality.
I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and attachments.
Based upon my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information reported
herein, I believe that the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are
significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and/or imprisonment.
PWK 5237 0001 (02/83)
Date Signature of Official
(Seal if Applicable)
-1-
-------
SECTION II — WATER/WASTEWATER DATA
A. WATER SOURCES
1. Municipal system
2. Recycled
3. Private wells
4. Other (specify)
Average Volume
(gallons per-day) .
TOTAL
B. WATER USAGE
1. Cooling water
2. Boiler makeup
3. Process water
4. Sanitary purposes (5200 gal/emp/yr)
5. Other (specify) '
6. Other (specify)
Average Volume
(gallons per day)
TOTAL
C. WATER DISCHARGE/LOSS
1. Municipal sewer/sanitary
a. Process
b. Sanitary
c. Cooling
2. Natural receiving water/storm drain
3. Waste hauler
4. Evaporation
5. Contained in product
6. Recycled
7. Other (specify) ,
Average Discharge
(gallons per day)
Peak Flow/Est'd. Duration
(gallons per minute/time)
Peak Flow/Est'd. Duration
(gallons per minute/time)
Peak Discharge/Est'd. Duration
(gallons per minute/time)
TOTAL
D. DO YOU HAVE A NPDES PERMIT FOR A SURFACE WATER DISCHARGE? D YES D NO
PERMIT NO. _
E. LIST PLANT SEWER OUTLETS, SIZE AND FLOW (assign sequential reference number to each sewer starting
with No. 1):
Reference No.
Sewer Size
(inches)
Descriptive location of sewer
connection or discharge point
Avg. flow
(GPD)
-2-
-------
F. SCHEMATIC PROCESS DIAGRAM
Attach a schematic process diagram of your facility showing locations of sewers referenced in Section E
• above and the location of the SIC processes listed in Section III - B. Show locations of possible sampling
points for sewers and SIC process effluents. For reference and field orientation, include a North arrow and
show location of buildings, streets, alleys, and other pertinent physical structures.
G. DO YOU HAVE AUTOMATIC SAMPLING EQUIPMENT OR CONTINUOUS WASTEWATER FLOW METERING
EQUIPMENT CURRENTLY IN USE OR INCLUDED IN FUTURE PLANS?
Current: Flow Metering D Yes D No Sampling Equipment D Yes D No
Planned: Flow Metering D Yes D No Sampling Equipment QYesDNo
If so, please indicate the present or future location of this equipment on the sewer schematic and describe the
equipment below:
H. DOES YOUR FACILITY PRETREAT ANY WASTEWATER PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO A SANITARY SEWER?
D Yes Q No
If so. please show locations of pretreatment processes on attached schematic process diagram and describe
below:
I. DO YOU HAVE A SPILL PREVENTION. CONTAINMENT AND CONTROL PLAN (SPCC) FOR YOUR PLANT?
D Yes D No
J. DO YOU DISPOSE OF ANY CHEMICALS. SOLVENTS. SLUDGES. OR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TO
LOCATIONS OTHER THAN MUNICIPAL SEWERS OR SURFACE WATERS? (Example: landfill, hazardous
waste site, or chemical recyclers)
D Yes D No
If so. provide a description of each material, giving the composition, solids content, annual quantity, means of
disposal, and ultimate disposal location:
-3-
-------
SECTION III — PLANT/PROCESS DATA
A.- PLANT OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
Average Seasonal Peak
1. Number of shifts per work'day: _^
2. Number of work days per week:
3. Employees per shift: Shift start times:
1st : a.m./p.m.
2nd a.m./p.m.
3rd ' a.m./p.m.
Total a.m./p.m.
4. ARE MAJOR PROCESSES BATCH OR CONTINUOUS?
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BATCHES PER 24 HOUR DAY;
5. ARE YOUR PROCESSES SUBJECT TO SEASONAL VARIATION?
If so, explain below, indicating month(s) of peak operation and products:
B. PRODUCT(S) OR SERVICE(S)
List all products manufactured or services provided by your facility, along with the corresponding SIC
(Standard Industrial Classification) code. If you don't know what your SIC code is, you may find out from the
City of Tacoma Sewer Utility by calling (206) 591-5588.
4-digit 4-digit
Product or service SIC code Product or service SIC code
1. . 6.
2. 7.
3 8.
4. • 9.
5 10.
C. DESCRIPTION OF PRODUCTION OR SERVICE PROCESSES
Provide a separate description of the individual processes used in your facility that result in a wastewater
discharge to a sanitary sewer:
-4-
-------
RAW MATERIALS — LIST ALL PRINCIPAL MATERIALS (cleaning agents, solvents, plating solutions.
catalysts, process chemicals, etc.) that are regularly used in your facility and that might be present in your
wastewater discharge to a sanitary sewer, including accidental spills.
Annual use
Generic type amount Principal chemical constituents (if known)
Example: Degreaser 53 ga/. Trychloroethylene
E. QUESTIONS. REMARKS. COMMENTS:
-5-
-------
F. PRIORITY POLLUTANT INFORMATION
1. Please indicate by placing an "X" in the appropriate box by each listed chemical whether it is Suspected to
be Absent, Known to be Absent, Suspected to be Present, or Known to be Present in your manufacturing or
service activity or generated as a byproduct. Some compounds are known by other names. Please refer to
Attachment A for those compounds which have an asterisk (°).
ITEM
NO.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34
35.
36
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42
43.
44.
45.
46.
CHEMICAL COMPOUND
ammonia
asbestos (fibrous)
cyanide (total)
antimony (total)
arsenic (total)
beryllium (total)
cadmium (total)
chromium (total)
copper (total)
lead (total)
mercury (total)
nicttsl (total)
selenium (total)
silver (total)
thallium (total)
zinc (total)
acenaphthene
acensphthyleno
acrolein
ucrylonitrile
aldrin
anthracene
benzene
benzidine
benzo(8)onthracene°
benzo(a)pyrene°
benzo(b)fluoranthene
benzo(g.h,i)perylene°
benzol h)l luoronthene°
a-BHC (alpha)
b-BHC (beta)
d-BHC (delta)
g-BHC° (gamma)
bis(2-chloroethyl)ether°
bis(2-chloroethony)methane°
bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether°
bis(chloromettiyl)ether°
bis(2-ethylheuyl)phthalate°
bromodichloromethane0
bromoform"
bromomethana"
4-bromophenylphenyl other
butylbenzyl phthalate
carbon tetrachloride°
chlordane
4-chloro-3-methylphonol°
SUSPECTED 1
ABSENT 1
KNOWN
ABSENT
SUSPECTED
PRESENT
KNOWN
PRESENT
ITEM
NO.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
161.
62.
63.
64.
I 65.
1
1
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
H 93.
CHEMICAL COMPOUND
chiorobenzene
chioroethane0
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
chloroform0
chloromGthano0
2-chloronQphthalene
2-chlorophenol°
4-chlorophenylphenyl ether
chrysene0
4.4--DDD0
4.4'-DDE°
4.4--DDT0
dibenzo(a.h)anthracene°
dibromochloromethans"
1 ,2-dichlorobenzan8°
t .S-dichlorobsnzans"
1 .4-dichlorobenzena"
3.3'-dichlorobenzidine
dichtorodifluoromethane"
i,l-dichloroethane°
1 .2-dichloroethana°
1 .1-dichlorosthsne"
trans-1 ,2-dichloroathene°
2,C-dichlorophenol
1 ,2-dichloropropana°
(cis & trans) 1.3-dichlo-
ropropona0
dieldrin
diathyl phthalate0
2,4-dimethylphenol°
dimethyl phthalate
di-n-butvl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate0
4.6-dinitro-2-mefhylphenol°
2,4-dinitrophenol
2.4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinifrotoulene
1 ,2-diphenylhydrazine°
endosulfan I"
endosulfan II"
endosulfan sulfate
endrin
endnn aldehyde
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
fluorene"
heptachlor
heptachlor eponida
SUSPECTED
ABSENT
KNOWN
ABSENT
SUSPECTED
PRESENT
KNOWN
PRESENT
-6-
-------
ITEM
NO.
94
95
96
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
CHEMICAL COMPOUND
hexachloroberuene*
hexachlorobutadiene
hexachlorocyclopentadiena*
hexachloroethane*
indeno(1.2.3-cd)pyrene*
isophorone*
methylene chloride*
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
2-nitrophenol*
4-nitrophenol*
n-nitrosodimethylamine*
n-nitrosodipropylamine*
n-nitrosodiphenylamine*
PCB-1016*
PCB-1221*
PCB-1232*
PCB-1242*
SUSPECTED
ABSENT
KNOWN
ABSENT
SUSPECTED
PRESENT
KNOWN
PRESENT
ITEM
NO.
112.
113.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
CHEMICAL COMPOUND
PCB-1248*
PCB-1254*
PCB-1260*
pentachlorophenol
phenanthrene
phenol
pyrene
2.3,7.8-tetrachlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin*
1 .1 ,2.2-tetrachloroethane*
tetrachloroethene*
toluene*
toxaphene
1 .2.4-trichlorobenzene
1.1.1-trichloroethane*
1 .1,2-trichloroethane*
trichloroethene*
trichlorofluoromethane*
2.4.6-trichlorophenol
vinyl chloride*
SUSPECTED
ABSENT
KNOWN
ABSENT
SUSPECTED
PRESENT
KNOWN
PRESENT
2. For chemical compounds in E-1 above which are indicated to be "Known Present," please list and provide
the following data for each: (attach additional sheets if needed)
ITEM
NO.
CHEMICAL COMPOUND
(ri
§§
\\
u>
ESTIMATED
LOSS TO
SEWER
LBS./YR.
ITEM
NO.
CHEMICAL COMPOUND
ANNUAL
USAGE (LBS.)
ESTIMATED
LOSS TO
SEWER
LBS/YR.
-7-
-------
ATTACHMENT A - PRIORITY POLLUTANT SYNONYM LISTING
00
CHEMICAL COMPOUND
benzo(a)anlhfacene
benzo(a)pyrene
ben7o(g.h.i)perylene
benzo(k)lluoranthene
g-BHC(gamma)
bis(2-chloroelhyl)elher
bts(2-chloroelhoxy)melhane
bls(2-chloroisopropyl)elher
bis(chloromethyl)ether
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phlhalate
bromodichloromethane
bromoform
bromomelhane
carbon lelrachloride
4-chloro-3-melhylphenol
chlorrelhane
chloroform
chloromethane
2-chlorophenol
chrysene
4.4'-DDD
4.4--DDE
4.4--DDT
dibenzo(a.h)anlhracene
dibromochloromethane
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1,3-dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzena
dichlorodilluoromelhane
1,1-dichloroethane
1,2-dichloroethane
1.1-dichloroethene
(Irans)-l ,2-dichloroethene
1,2-dichloropropane
(cis & trans) 1,3-dichloropropene
dielhyl phthalate
2,4-dimethylphenol
SYNONYM
1,2-benzanlhracene
2.3-benzphenanlhrene
3.4-benzopyrene
1,12-benzoperylene
11.12-benzolluoranlhena
lindane
2,2'-dichloroelhyl ether
2.2'-dichloroelhyoxy methane
2.2'-dichloroisopropyl ether
(sym)dichloromethyl ether
2.2'-diethylhexyl phthalate
dichlorobromomethane
trlbromomethane
methyl bromide
letrachloromethane
para-chloro-meta-cresol
ethylchloride
trichloromethane
methyl chloride
para-chlorophenol
1.2-benzphenanthrene
dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane
p.p'-TDE
tetrachlorodiphenylethane
dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene
p.p'-DDX
dichlorodiphenyllrichloroethane
1,2.5.6-dibenzanlhracene
chlorodibromomethane
ortho-dichlorobenzene
mela-dichlorobenzene
para-dichlorobenzene
dilluorodichloromethane
fluorocarbon-12
ethylidene chloride
elhylene chloride
ethylene dichloride
1.1-dichloroethylene
acetylene dichloride
1,2(trans)-dichloroethylene
propylene dichloride
(cis & trans) 1,3-dichloropropylene
ethyl phthalate
2.4-xylenol
CHEMICAL COMPOUND
di-n-octyl phthalate
4,6-din!tro-2-methylphenol
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
endosullan I
endosullan II
lluorene
hexachlorobenzene
hexachlorocyclopentadiene
hexachloroethane
indeno( 1,3.3-cd)pyrene
Isophorone
methylene chloride
2-nltrophenol
4-nltrophenol
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nltrosodipropylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
PCB-1016
PCB-1221
PCB-1232
PCB-1242
PCB-1248
PCB-12S4
PCB-1260
2.3.7.8-letrachlorodibenzo-
p-dioxin
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroelhane
tetrachloroethene
toluene
1.1,1-trichloroethane
1,1,2-trichloroethane
trichloroethene
trichlorofluoromethane
vinyl chloride
SYNONYM
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
4,6-dinitro-ortho-cresol
hydtazobenzene
a-endosullan-alpha
b-endosullan-beta
(alpha)-diphenylene methane
perchlorobenzene
perchlorocyclopentadiene
perchloroethane
2.3-ortho-phenylene pyrene
3.5.5-trimethyl-2-cyclohexen-1-one
dichloromelhane
para-nitrophenol
ortho-nltrophenol
dimethyl-nitrosoamine
N-nltroso-di-n-propylamine
diphenyl-nitrosoamine
Arochlor-1016
Arochlor-1221
Arochlor-1232
Arochlor-1242
Arochlor-1248
Arochlor-1254
Arochlor-1260
TCDD
acetylene tetrachloride
perchloroethylene
tetrachloroethylene
melhylbenzene
toluol
methyl chloroform
vinyl trichloride
trichloroelhylene
lluorocarbon-11
lluorotrichloromethane
chloroethene
chloroethylene
-------
unified
agency
150 North First Avenue
Hillsboro, Oregon 97123
503 648-8621
Part A-Application
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
SECTION I. APPLICATION
Return the completed application by:
(Further instructions: See reverse side)
Al. Applicant Business Name
A2. a. Address of premises discharging wastewater:
Street
City Zip
b. SIC Nos.
c. Assessor's Map and Tax Lot Number
USA USE
Date Application
Received
A9a. Permit No.
A9b. Acct. No.
SIC Nos.
BASIN.
A3. Business Address (If different than above)
a. Street
City
Zip
b. Mailing
City
A4. Chief Business Official
Name
Mailing Address
State .
Title
. City .
Zip
State
Zip
AS. Person to be contacted about this application
Name Title
AS. Person to be contacted in case of emergency
Name
Phone
Title
Day Phone
Night Phone
A7. Type of Application
A. [ | Wastewater discharge is other than domestic or sanitary.
B. | [ Wastewater discharge exceeds 25,000 gallons per day flow.
C. |[ Both of the above.
A8. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information above and on the following pages is true
and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Print Name
Title
Signature
Date
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING PART A
SECTION 1. APPLICATION
Type or print the Information requested.
A1. Applicant Business Name—Enter the name or title of your business.
A2a. Address of Premise Discharging Wastewater—Enter the full street
address of the building or premise which Is producing the waste-
water pertinent to this Application.
A2b. Standard Identification Classification code number— Include
all numbers that apply to business.
A2c. Include the Assessor's Tax Hap Number and Tax Lot Numbers that
apply.
A3. Business Address—Enter the business street address and the full
mailing address.
A4. Chief Business Official—Enter the name, title and full mailing
address of the Applicant's Chief Business Official 1n the home
office. (This Is often not the same address as given In A3).
AS. Person to be contacted about this Application—Give the name of
the person who Is thoroughly famllar with the facts reported
on these forms and who can be contacted by the staff of the Agency.
A6. Person to be contacted 1n case of an Emergency—Give the name,
title and telephone number(s) of the responsible person who can
be contacted In case of an emergency (e.g. spilling of a
prohibited substance).
A7. Type of Application
A. Indicate 1f wastewater discharged contains anything other
than domestic or sanitary wastes (I.e. floor drains, wash
down drains, batch drains, process drains, etc). •
B. Indicate If wastewater discharge 1s going to be more than
25,000 gallons per day on a regular basis.
C. Indicate here If both of the above characteristics and
flows apply.
AS. Certification—The Application must be signed and dated by an
officer, employee, or other agent of the business who has legal
authority to bind the Applicant business. Also print or type
the name and title of the person signing the Application.
•2-423*
-------
Business Name
Part B-Business Description
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
PURPOSE — The business description 1s primarily used to determine the
substances which may enter Into the wastewater discharge
from the business activity.
USA Use:
Permit No.
Bl. BUSINESS ACTIVITY (Complete a separate Part B for each major business activity on premises.
ACTIVITY SIC Nos
(a) PRODUCT:
TYPE OF PRODUCTS
(Brand Names)
QUANTITIES
PAST CALENDAR YEAR
Amts. Per Day
Avg.
Max.
•
Dally
Units
EST. THIS CALENDAR YR.
Amts. Per Day
Avg.
Max.
Uaily
Units
(b) DESCRIPTION —Describe the waste water generating operations. Indicate variations In
production and operations during the year. (Use additional sheets as necessary)
(c) SUBSTANCES DISCHARGED — Give common and technical names of each major raw material
and product that may be discharged to the sewer. Briefly describe the physical
and chemical properties of each substance and product.
NAME
DESCRIPTION
B2. DISCHARGE PERIOD
(a) Hours/Day Operated:
(b) Time Duration of Discharge:
Sat
Sat
Sun
Sun
B3. VARIATION OF OPERATION
Indicate whether the business activity 1s:
f""I Continuous through the year, or
l~l Seasonal— Circle the months of the year during which discharge occurs:
JFMAMJJASOND
COMMENTS:
84. OTHER LIQUID WASTES — List and types and volume of liquid waste or sludges removed from
the premises by means other than public sewers.
DESCRIPTION
VOLUME (Gals. /Mo. )
REMOVED BY (Name and Address)
INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING PART B:
General Instructions — Type or print the Information. A separate Part B Is to be completed for each
major business activity. Examples of major business activities are: Paint manufacturing, metal
plating, food canning, etc.
Bl. Business Activity — Describe the principal activity on the premise. For the purpose of
completing this Part, an activity Is a major business class of manufacture (see examples
above). Enter the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code Number, as found In the
1972 Edition of Standard Industrial Classification Manual prepared by the Executive Office
of the President. Office of Management and Budget, which 1s available from the Government
Printing Office at Washington, D.C., or at San Francisco, California DO NOT USE PREVIOUS
EDITIONS OF THE MANUAL. Copies are also available for examination at most public libraries.
(a) Product —List the types of products, giving ttie common or brand name and the proper
or scientific name. Enter from your records the average and maximum amounts produced
dally for the activity for the previous calendar year, and the estimated daily
production for this calendar year. Attach additional pages if necessary.
(b) Description—Describe the wastewater generating process occurring on the premises,
including any seasonal variation in wastewater discharge volumes, plant operations,
raw materials, and chemicals used In process and/or production.
(c) SUBSTANCE DISCHARGED — Give common (brand names) and technical names (chemical,
scientific or proper names) of each raw material and product that may be discharged
to the sewer. Briefly describe the physical, (e.g. color) and chemical, (e.g.
reacts with water) properties of each substance.
B2. Discharge Period:
A. Enter the hours of the day for each day, during which waste from this Business Activity
will be discharged to the sewer: e.g. from 0600 to 1700 hours (not 6 a.m. to 5 p.m.).
B. Enter the time and duration of discharge other than continuous flows. (15 minutes every hour)
B3. Variation In Operation;
Indicate whether the business activity Is continuous throughout the year or if it is seasonal.
If the activity is seasonal, circle the months of the year during which discharge occurs. Make
any comments you feel are required to describe the variation in operation of your business activity.
B4. Other Liquid Wastes — List the type and volume of liquid wastes removed from the premises other
than by the community sewer. Under description, Indicate the types of materials (scientific
and common names) In the waste. Also, In the column headed "REMOVED BY," write the name and
address of the company who hauls this material. If you do your own removal and disposal,
Indicate by writing your "Business Name."
82-4238
-------
Part C - Schematic Flow Diagram
Business Name INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
PURPOSE-The Schematic Flow Diagram shows the flow pattern of products
through the facility and the various sources of wastewater.
USA Use
Permit No.
Schematic Flow Diagram-For each major activity 1n which wastewater 1s generated, draw a diagram of
the flow of materials and water from start to completed project, showing all unit processes generating
wastewater. Number each unit process having wastewater discharges to the conmunlty sewer. Use these
numbers when showing this unit process 1n the building layout 1n Part D.
INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING PART C
General Instructions — Type or print the Information.
for each major business activity described in Part B.
A separate Part C should be completed
A line drawing (schematic flow diagram) of each major business activity described in Part B
is to be completed in the space below or drawn 1n on an attached sheet of paper (all sheets
should be letter size). Number each process which generates wastewater using the same numbering
as in the building layout or plant site plan shown in Part D. An example of drawing required is
shown below in Figure 1.
To determine your average daily volume and maximum daily volume of wastewater flow you may have
to read water meters, sewer meters, or make estimates of volumes that are not directly measurable.
FIGURE, I
ACTIVITY- Meat Processing
Cleanout
Wastewater
Avg. ISO GPO
Max. 200 GPO
Leakage
Wastewater
Avg. 30 GPO
Max. 30 GPO
Avg. 4000 GPO
Max. 9000 GPO
Leakage
Wastewater
Avg. 30 GPO
Max. 30 GPO
Cooling Water
Wastewater
Water
Evaporater
Avg. 150 GPD
Max. 300 GPO
Dried
Meal
Product
By Products
Concentrated
Meat
Product
•2-423C
-------
Part D-Building Layout
Business Name INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
PURPOSE—The building layout shows the wastewater generating operations
which contribute to each side sewer. Permit No
USA Use
Building Layout-Draw to scale the location of each building on the premises. Show location of all
water meters, storm drains, numbered unit processes (from Part C), community sewers and each side
sewer connected to the community sewers. Number each side sewer and show possible sampling locations.
An attached blueprint or drawing of the facilities showing the above Items may be substituted for a
drawing on this sheet.
INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING PART 0
General Instructions-Type or print the Information.
Building Layout-A building layout or plant site plan of the premise Is required to complete Part 0.
Approved building plans may be substituted for Part 0. An arrow showing North as well as the map
scale must be shown. The location of each existing and proposed sampling manhole and side sewer
must be clearly Identified as well as all sanitary and wastewater drainage plumbing. Number each
unit process discharging wastewater to the community sewer. Use the same numbering system shown In
Part C (Schematic Flow Diagram). An example of the drawing required 1s shown below 1n Figure 2.
FIGURE 2
ANYBODY'S MEAT CO.
(SCALE: t"»,IOO')
PROPERTY
SAMPLING
MANHOLE No.
8" Side Sewer No. 1
PARKING
3" WATER,/
METER
-------
Business Name
Part E-Water Source & Use
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
PURPOSE—The Water Source and Use Information will enable USA to determine
the Volumes and Sources of wastewater discharged to the USA sewer.
USA Use:
Permit No.
El. Water use and distribution — Estimate the average quantity of water received and waste-
water discharged'dally.
Water Used For:
Sanitary
Processes
Boiler
Cooling
Washing
Irrigation
Other (Describe)
TOTAL
SUPPLY FROM
Water District
ga/day
Other
gal /day
source
1
DISCHARGED TO
Comm. Sewer
gal /day
Other
gal /day
disch. to
Describe
E2. Number of Employees
TOTAL
Week day
Saturday
Sunday
Seasonal
OFFICE
No.
Hours
to
to
to
to
PRODUCTION (number of employees per shift)
Day Shift
No.
Hours
to
to
to
to
Swing Shift
No.
Hours
to
to
to
to
Night Shift
No.
Hours
to
to
to
to
E3. Source of Water Discharged
Water Meter
Number
Use
Code
Percent (Z) Discharged to:
No. 1
No. Z
No. 3
Total X
Discharged to
all side sewers
COMMENTS:
INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING PART I
General Instructions -Type or print the Information. Part E Is to be completed by all dischargers
who require a permit. (Wastewater Strength and Flow Estimations)
PROVIDE CALCULATIONS TO SUPPORT ALL FIGURES IN TABLES El AND E3
El. Water Use and Disposition — Estimate the water received and wastewater discharged 1n gallons per
day for the preceding year. For the water that Is received from Water District services or
discharged to other than community sanitary sewers, enter the appropriate letter In the column
headed "Source" or "Discharge To."
E2. Number of Employees — Enter the average number of office and production employees at the premises
dally during the preceding year. If there 1s more than one shift per day, enter the average
number of employees per shift and the duration. A row 1s provided for seasonal periods, 1f applicable.
E3. Source of Wastewater Discharged — Item E3 shows the percentage of source water on each water meter
used for computing the sewage disposal service charge.
Step 1 Enter the number of each meter serving the premise.
Step 2 For each meter enter the percentage of metered water discharged to each side sewer. If you have
more than one side sewer, SHOW ON A SEPARATE PAGE THE METHOD AND CALCULATIONS USED TO DETERMINE
THE PROPORTIONING to the side sewers.
Step 3 Enter the total percentage discharged to all side sewers for each water meter by adding the
figures In each side sewer column.
Step 4 Enter the appropriate use code as described below In the use code column.
METER USE CODES
I — Irrigation
S —Sanitary
F — Sewage Flow
W —Well
C — Cooling Tower
B-Boiler
X — Product
T —Time Elapse
•2-4Z3C
-------
Part F-Side Sewer Discharge
Business Name
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
PURPOSE —The Side Sewer Discharge Information will Identify for USA the
variation In flow rate and the type of constituents and
characteristics of the discharge for each side sewer.
USA Use
Permit No
Sampling Loc.
Fl. Side Sewer No.
(From Part D)
F2. Wastewater Flow Rate
PEAK HOURLY
Gallons/Minute
MAXIMUM DAILY
Gallons/Day
ANNUAL DAILY AVERAGE
Gallons/Day
IF OPERATIONS ARE SEASONAL
. AVERAGE DAILY (GALLONS/DAY)
Seasonal M1n.
Seasonal Max.
F3. IF BATCH DISCHARGE, INDICATE:
a. Number of batch discharges:
F4.
'per month
b. Time of batch discharges:
at
(days of week) (hours of day)
c. Average quantity per batch: _________ gallons
d. Flow rate: _____ gallons/minute
WASTEWATER CONSTITUENTS —If any of the following constituents, characteristics or substances
1s or can be present in your wastewater discharges as a result of your operations, Indicate
by placing an x in the open box.
CONSTITUENTS
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Bromide
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
CONSTITUENTS
Cyanide
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenium
Nickel
Phenols
Radioactivity
Selenium
Silver
CONSTITUENTS
Solvents
Sulfate
Sulflde
Sulfite
Titanium
Tin
Vanadium
Z1nc
Or any of those items on
the E.P.A. Priority
Pollutant list as shown
on the reverse side.
At the discretion of the Agency, it may require that an Engineer be obtained to perform
a treatabillty study to be submitted with the application.
Identify the Chemical Compounds or Elements
Conments:
INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING PART F
General Instructions —Part F 1s to be completed by all businesses who require Wastewater Strength
Determination. Use a separate sheet for each side sewer that discharges wastewater to a community
sewer. (NOTE: A side sewer 1s a sewer conveying the wastewater of a discharger from a building or
structure to a community sewer.)
Fl.
F2.
F3.
Side Sewer No.— Enter the side sewer number for which this sheet of Part F has been completed.
Use the same number as shown on PART 0.
Wastewater Flow Rate-Estimate the peak hourly discharge rates from the premise (I.e. the
quantity which might be discharged during any one hour). The maximum dally discharge rate
1s the greatest flow which might be discharged In any one work day. The annual dally average
1s the flow for an average workday taken over one year of operation. A season Is defined as
a period of one month or longer. Hourly and dally water supply meter readings may be used,
provided the filling and discharge of storage tanks, process vats, etc.. are taken Into con-
sideration.
Batch Discharge -A batch discharge Is one which results from the draining of storage tanks or
process tanks; Intermittent boiler blowdown. etc.. to the side sewer.
Enter the number of batch discharges per month during the operating season of maximum flow.
Enter the days of the week the discharge occurs and the times of the day the discharge
usually occurs.
Enter the average gallons discharged during each batch discharge operation.
Enter the rate of flow In the side sewer from the batch discharges.
a.
b.
c.
d.
(I.e. Rate of flow frc. the batch discharge -
single discharge)
F4.
Wastewater Constituents -Indicate those Items that you use that are Included In the Environ-
mental Protection Agency's 65 priority pollutants.
Acenaphthene
Acroleln
Acrylon1tr1le
Aldr1n/01e1dr1n
Antimony & compounds1
Arsenic & compounds
Asbestos
Benzene
BenZ1d1ne
Beryllium & compounds
Cadmium & compounds
Carbon tetrachlorlde
Chlordane
Chlorinated benzenes
Chlorinated ethanes
Chi oralkyl ethers
Chlorinated naphthalene
Chlorinated phenols
Chloroform
2-chlorophenol
Chromium & compounds
Copper ft compounds
Cyanides
E.P.A. 65 Priority Pollutants
DDT & metabolites
Dlchlorobenzenes
D1chlorobenz1d1ne
Dlchloroethylenes
2.4-d1chlorophenol
Dlchloropropane & dlchloro-
propene
2.4-d1methy1phenol
Dlnltrotoluene
Olphenylhydrazlne
Endosulfan & metabolites
Endrln & metabolites
Ethylebenzene
Fluoroanthene
Haloethers
Halomethanes
Heptachlor & metabolites
Hexachlorobutadlene
Hexachlorocyclohexane
Hexachlorocyclopentad1ene
Isophorone
Lead & compounds
Mercury & compounds
Naphtahalene
Nickel & compounds
Nitrobenzene
Nltrophenols
N1trosam1nes
Pentachl orophenol
Phenol
Phthalate esters
Polychlorinated blphenyls
Polynuclear aromatic hydro-
carbons
Selenium & compounds
Silver & compounds
2.3,7,8-Tetrachl orodlbenzo-
p-d1ox1n
Tetrachloroethylene
Thallium S compounds
Toluene
Toxaphene
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
Z1nc 4 compounds
82-423M
As used throughout this 11st the term "compounds" shall Include organic and
Inorganic compounds.
-------
Business Name
Part F-Side Sewer Discharge (Cont'd)
Side Sewer No..
(From Part 0)
F5. WASTEWATIR STRENGTH ESTIMATES— Enter the average annual and maximum wastewater
strength for the side sewer for each of the following elements of wastewater
strength for the period covered by the permit.
USA Use
Permit
No
ELEMENTS OF WASTEWATER STRENGTH
UNIT
AVERAGE
PH (Range to be placed In Maximum Column)
Suspended Sol Ids
Total Chemical Oxygen Demand
Oil and Grease
Mg/1
Mg/1
Mg/1
MAXIMUM
If data from a laboratory was used to determine the values, please give the name and address
of the laboratory.
Name.
Street Address.
City
Zip.
F6. POLLUTION ABATEMENT PRACTICES
a. WASTEWATER PRETREATMENT — Check the type of treatment. If any, given wastewater from this
side sewer before it 1s discharged to the public sewer:
n none, Q holding tank, Q grease trap, Q oil and water separator, Q grinding,
O sedimentation, Q pH adjustment, Q biological treatment, Q screening,
C3 chlorfnatlon, or CD other.
DESCRIPTION
Describe the loading rates, design capacity, physical size. etc. of each pretreatment facility
checked above.
b. PLANNED WASTEWATER PRETREATMENT IMPROVEMENTS -Describe any changes in treatment or disposal
methods planned or under construction for the wastewater carried by this side sewer. Please
include estimated completion dates.
INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING PART F
• General Instructions — Part F 1s to be completed by all businesses who require Wastewater Strength
Determination. Use a separate sheet for each side sewer that discharges wastewater to a community
sewer. (NOTErA side sewer 1s a sewer conveying the wastewater of a discharger from a building or
structure to a community sewer.)
F5. Wastewater Strength Estimates -Enter the average and maximum concentration of each of the
Indicated elements of wastewater strength for this side sewer. The average strength should
approximate the flow-composited strength during the year.
— • ---- -•-- Tota1 "riTHoTams of substance discharged for year\
strength- Tota, annua| vg]tm j^ter cHschargld in Ut»n)
F6. Polutlon Abatement Practices.
a. Wastewater Pre treatment.
Check the type of treatment. If any, given the wastewater from this side sewer before 1t
Is discharged to the community sewer.
Description. The treatment facility should be described In sufficient detail to enable
an estimation of the facility's effectiveness. This will require a description of the
physical characteristics and size of the facility. (Use additional sheets as necessary.)
b. Planned Wastewater Treatment Improvements.
Describe any additional treatment or changes 1n wastewater disposal methods planned or
under construction.
U-423FB
-------
WASTEWATER SURVEY FOR NONRESIDENTIAL ESTABLISHMENTS:
APPLICATION FOR WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT
SECTION A - GENERAL INFORMATION
For POTW Use
Application Date: 3/24/83
A.I. Company name, mailing address, and telephone number:
A-l Electroplating, Inc.
1 Plating Drive
Steel Town, Ind.
Zip Code 07345 Telephone No.( 123) 123-2227
A.2. Address of production or manufacturing facility.
same as above
Zip Code Telephone No.( )
A.3. Name, title, and telephone number of person authorized to represent this firm
in official dealings with the Sewer Authority and/or City:
J. J. Smith. Chief Engineer (123) 123-2222
A.4. Alternate person to contact concerning Information provided herein
Name J-J- ^°nes Title President xei. No. (123) 123-2222
A. 5. Identify the type of business conducted (auto repair, machine shop, electro-
plating, warehousing; painting, printing., meat packing, food processing, etc.).
Electroplating
mote to Signing Official: In accordance with Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations Part 403 Section 403.14t information and data provided in this ques-
tionnaire which identifies the nature and frequency of discharge shall be avail-
able to the public without restriction. Requests for confidential treatment of
other information shall be governed by procedures specified in 40 CFR Part 2.
Should a discharge permit be required for your facilityt the information in thit
questionnaire will be used to issue the permit.
I I
I This is to be signed by an authorized official of your firm after adequate \
\completion of this form and review of the information by the signing official.}
I /
I have personally examined and am familiar with the information sub-
mitted in this document and attachments. Based upon my inquiry of
those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the informa-
tion reported herein, I believe that the submitted information is
true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant
penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility
of fine and/or imprisonment.
3/20/83
Date Signature of Official
(Seal if applicable)
-------
A.6. ' Provide a brief narrative description of the manufacturing, production, or
service activities your firm conducts.
Chromium plating of zinc die castings
A. 7.
Standard Industrial Classification Number(s) (SIC Code) for your facilities:
3471
A.8. This facility generates the following types of wastes (check all that apply):
Average gallons
per day *
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
[X| Domestic wastes 1500 GPD
(rest rooms, employee showers, etc.)
[ ] Cooling water, non-contact
[ ] Boiler/Tower blowdown
[ ] Cooling water, contact
IX.] Process 11,500
[ j Equipment /Facility Washdown
[ ] Air Pollution Control Unit
[ ] Storm water runoff to sewer
[ ] Other (describe)
fc
[
[
[
[
I
[
I
I
3j estimated
] estimated
] estimated
] estimated
] estimated
] estimated
] estimated
] estimated
] estimated
t ]
[ 1
[ 1
I J
KX]
t J
measured
measured
measured
measured
measured
measured
measured
measured
measured
Total A.8.1 - A.8.9
13,000 GPD
A.9. Wastes are discharged to (check all that apply):
fxj Sanitary sewer
[ J Storm sewer
[ ] Surface water
[ 1 Ground water
[x j Waste haulers
[ j Evaporation
[ ] Other (describe)
Average Gallons
>er day
£6
13,
000
50
estimated
[ J estimated
[ ] estimated
[ ] estimated
[ ] estimated
[ ] estimated
[ ] estimated
[ ] measured
[ ] measured
[ ] measured
[ ] measured
Kx] measured
[ ] measured
[ ] measured
Provide name and address of waste hauler(s), if used.
ABC Waste Haulers
101 Hall Road, Plater Town
A. 10. Is a Spill Prevention Control and Counter-measure Plan prepared for the facility?
H yes [] no
ftote: If your facility did not check one or more of the items
listed in A.8.4 through A.8*9 above, then you do not need to
complete any further sections in this survey/application*
If any items A.8.4 through A.8.9 were checkedf complete the
remainder of this survey/application.
-------
SECTION B - FACILITY OPERATION CHARACTERISTICS
B.I Hours of operation: 7:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. [ ] continuous
B.2 Number of employee shifts worked per 24-hour day is 2 .
Average number of employees per shift is 2 shifts of 20 and 10 employees respectively,
B.3 Starting times of each shift: 1st 7:00 am 2nd am 3rd am
pm 4:00 pm pm
Note: The following -information in this section must be completed for
each product line.
B.4 Principal product produced: chromium plated zinc die castings
B.5 Raw materials and process additives used':
biosulfate, chromic acid, sodium cyanide, copper sulfate, nickel sulfate,
hydrochloric acid, aluminum sulfate
B.6 Production process is:
[ ] Batch [X] Continuous [ ] Both % Batch % Continuous
Average number of batches per shift 1st 2nd 3rd
B.7 Is production subject to seasonal variation? [ ] yes [X] no
If yes, briefly describe seasonal production cycle.
E.8 Are any process changes or expansions planned during the next three years?
[ ] yes [X] no
If yes, attach a separate sheet to this form describing the nature of planned
changes or expansions.
-------
SECTION C - WASTEWATER INFORMATION
C.I If your facility employs processes in. any of the 34 industrial categories or busi-
ness activities listed below and any of these processes generate vastewater or waste
sludge, place a check beside the category or business activity (check all that apply).
A. 34 Industrial Categories
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
I 1
.[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
[ J
[ 1
Adhesives
Aluminum Forming
Auto & Other Laundries
Battery Manufacturing
Coal Mining
Coil Coating
Copper Forming
Electric & Electronic Components
Electroplating
Explosives Manufacturing
Foundries
Gum & Wood Chemicals
Inorganic Chemicals
Iron & Steel
Leather Tanning & Finishing
Mechanical Products
Nonferrous Metals
Ore Mining '
Organic Chemicals
Faint & Ink
Pesticides
Petroleum Refining
Pharmaceuticals
Photographic Supplies
Plastic & Synthetic Materials
Plastics Processing
Porcelain Enameling
Printing & Publishing
Pulp & Paper
Rubber
Soaps & Detergents
Steam Electric
Textile Mills
Timber
B. Other Business Activity
[ ] Dairy Products
•
[ ] Slaughter/Meat Packing/Rendering
[ ] Food/Edible Products Processor
[ ] Beverage Bottler .
-------
C.2 Pretreatment devices or processes used for treating vascewacer or sludge
discharged to the POTW system (check as many as appropriate)
[ ] Air flotation
[ ] Centrifuge
[XX] Chemical precipitation
[ ] Chlorination
[ ] Cyclone
] Filtration
Flow Equalization
Grease or oil separation, type
Grease trap
Grit Removal
Ion Exchange
Neutralization, pH correction
Ozonation
Reverse Osmosis
[ ] Screen
|XX] Sedimentation
[ ] Septic tank
Solvent separation
Spill protection
] Sump
[ 1
[
[ ] Biological treatment, type
[ ] Rainwater diversion or storage
Other chemical treatment, type pH adjustment^ _chemical seduction
] Other physical treatment, type
[ ] Other, tvpe
[ ] No pretreatment provided
C.3 If any wastewater analyses have been performed on the wastewater discharge(s)
from your facilities to the POTW system, attach a copy of the most recent data
to this questionnaire. Be sure to include the date of the analysis, name of
laboratory performing the analysis, and location (s) from which sample (s) were
taken (attach sketches, plans, etc., as necessary).
AAA Laboratory Service
201 Apple Lane
Steel Town
Results of certified laboratory analysis from 4/13/83, 18 hour flow proportioned
composite samples. One sample per hour. No flow from 1:00 AM through 7:00 AM,
therefore, no samples taken.
Parameter
Al
Cr -i- 6
Cr Total
CN, Amenable
CN, Total
Cu
Concentration (mg/1)
.3
.04
.5
.1
.2
.2
Parameter
Ni
Zn
TSS
Total Metals
ph
Concentrator
.07
.05
9
1.9
7.3
I
-------
rum
srsst
C7AHX9Z
C3??t3t S7XXXZ
a:?
ACI3
XZ8SZ
NXOCZL ?LATt
CSWHITO
RIMSZ AMD
OXT
MTDT**iISZ MIS
PUZCUTTATZ
OXI9IZZ
01
01
O)
1/1
o
SAMPLING
LOCATION
srrrii
1 '
SLOOOZ
PWCSJITXTt
MXOOL AND CSPPt*
uooc:
CHXOMZCh
CHJWOTM
A-l Electroplaters Flow Schematic
6
S«»wer
-------
C.4 Priority Pollutant Information: Please indicate by placing an "x" in the appro-
priate box by each listed chemical1 whether it is "Suspected to be Absent,"
"Known to be Absent," "Suspected to be Present," or "Known to be Present" in
your manufacturing or service activity or generated as a by-product.
CHEMICAL «"«s
COMPOUND ,_«««
o i-
-------
711.
51.
62.
63.
54..
55.
56.
57.
53.
59.
70.
72.
73.
"i.
75.
75.
77 ,
73.
79.
30.
31.
32.
33,
34.
35.
36.
VIII.
37.
33.
39.
90.
91.
92.
12.
93.
94.
95.
C3211C.U.
COMPOUNDS
2ALOC2HAT2S ALZPSATICS
Me t haae , b rano-
Me t haae , chio r a-
Ma thane, dichloro
Methane , chle rodibraao
Ma t hane , di chio rob ramo
Ma z hane , : ri b raoa
Methane, trier. Lara
Methane, cstracaiaro
Mathaae, tri chio rat luora
Methaae, dichlarodifluora
It haae, 1,1-dichiora
ithane, 1,2-dicalora
I thane, 1 , i, 1-trlcaioro
i-hane , 1,1, 2-crichlora
ithane, 1, 1 ,2, 1-tatrachlora
Ethane, haxachlara
Ethane, chioro
Etaeae, 1,1-dicaiora
Etheae, traas-dicaiaro
itheae, tricolors
itheaa, tatracaiora
Propane, 1 ,2-dicalaro
Prapeae, 2,4-dicaloro
Siitadieae, hexacaiora
Cyciapeasadiese , hexacalaro
PHTEALATi EST22S
Phthaiata, di-c-oethyl
Pathaiate, di-r.-«thyi
3Kathalapa di— butyl
Phthaiata, di-a-octyi
Phthaiata, bis(2-*thyLhe3cyl)
Phthaiata, butyl benzyl
POL'fCYClIC AROMATIC
•£?rROCA*30NS
Acanaphtheae
Acanapdthyieaa
Aathracaaa
1 ,
ij
¥
(]
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
CI
Cl
c:
C ]
Ci
Ci
f '
Cl
Ci
Ci
( ]
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
[t
I i
Cl
( ]
(]
[ j
Cl
,_
u w
c.^
Ul '_«
en" "
(3
Cl
[ ]
Cl
Cl
[ ]
Cl
C!
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
CI
Ci
CI
Cl
Cl
fl
Cl
CI
Cl
Cl
Cl
[1
Cl
r ]
Cl
r i
I 4
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
j
i
•= -Ji
n
CI
Cl
CI
Cl
Cl
(1
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
CJ
Cl
Cl
Cl
ci
Cl
Cl
CI
II
Cl
Cl
CI
Cl
Cl
f 1
1 J
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
CI
Cl
•J
•J -
— .1
vi _;
= <,
v:
la
Ci
a
a
a
a
a
M
C2J
^
B
3
C3
n
a
fl9
M
N
33
JS
R
fl
M
3J
•S
R
H
,jj
cq
X3
S
S
X]
jq
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
•01.
102.
10'3.
' 104,
105.
106.
107.
108.
I.
109.
110.
111.
-112.
LU.
lii.
115.
115.
117.
113.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
125.
127.
123.
129.
CZSSICAL . i
; j
•i
3eazo (a) aathricane
3«aza (b) flucraatheae
Senzo (<) fluaraathena
3«azo (ghi) aerylaae
Seaza (a) pyraca
Ciryaaae
Dibeaza (a, a.) aathracane
Fluorantheae
n-jo raaa
ladaao (t,2,3-cd) ayraaa
Naphthalene
Phenanthraae
Pyraaa
FESTICI-ES
Acraiaia
Aldrta
SEC (Alpha)
SEC (3eta)
3EC (Gansa) sr r.iadaae
3HC (Delta)
diordaaa
ODD
DDE
DDT
Sieidria
ladosulfan (Alpha)
Eadosulfaa (3«ca)
Eadosulfaa Suifata
ladria
ladria aldehyde
Haptachlcr
Heptachior axpoxide
laophorar-e
TCOD (or Diaxia)
Taxapheae
—
~* 2 Z
I
I
:\
i
i
I
ii
f ]
• j
u
f »
* !
* 1
k J
tl
U
. j
Cl
,- r
i j
•' ;
tl
f I
ii
C!
[ ]
r ;
ii
* i
ci
j
a ~
U. Z~
}
}
•
i
i
i
T
I
i
CI
(!
Cl
C ]
n
[ ]
ii
ii
r 1
'. j
c:
CI
C!
Ci
Cl
Cl
[ ]
r ]
ci
CJ
CI
Cl
r *
t 1
C!
Ci
Cl
rs
ii a :
•11 c^
Zi -i_
c: -'
'f.
i i
f *
*
'
I
(
f
C
f
r
I
r, i
Cl
Cl
II
f !
C!
! 1
. j
Cl
Cl
Cl
(1
C!
Ci
tl
r i
ii
CI
Cl
f i
ii
c
.'
Cl
j
i
t
y
3
•3
N
N
rs
^?
r:i
(S
(~k
ii
:T
(i
'"3
ia
ia
ia
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
•3
,"*
SB
ca
a
55
31
3
.^
C.5 Lf you ara unable :a identify cae chesical caas:ic--ent3 of praducts you use :hac are
discharged ia your w&atawacer, at:aca capias of the aacariais safety data aheats far
such products.
-------
SECTION D - OTHER WASTES
0.1 Are any liquid wastes or sludges from this firm disposed of by means other than
discharge to the sewer system?
bod yes f 1 no
If "no," skip remainder of Section E.
If "yes," complete items 2 and 3.
D.2 These wastes may best be described as:
Estimated Gallons or Pounds/Year
[] Acids and Alkalies
M Heavy Metal Sludges 12.500 Cal/yr.
[] Inks/Dyes
[] Oil and/or Grease
[ ] Organic Compounds _________________
[] Paints
[] Pesticides
{] Plating Wastes
[] Pretreatment Sludges
[] Solvents/Thinners _______________
[j Other Hazardous Wastes (specify)
[] Other wastes(specify)
D.3 For the above checked wastes, does your company practice:
W on-site storage
[] off-site storage
[] on-site disposal
$ off-site disposal
Briefly describe the method(s) of storage or disposal checked above.
Sludges from precipitation operations are stored in steel drums. Every
two weeks a contract disposal service comes to pick them up and dispose
of them at a chemical waste facility.
-------
C/REG. 10/95
CHAPTER 7
POTW INDUSTRIAL USER CONTROL MECHANISMS
Under 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1 )(iii), the POTW must have the authority to
control, through permit, contract, or similar means, the contribution to the
POTW from each industrial user to ensure compliance with applicable pretreat-
raent standards and requirements. A POTW must be able to control the discharge
of each industry even when that industry is located in an outlying jurisdic-
tion. It is strongly recommended that a control mechanism, such as a permit
system, be established for the program. A contractual mechanism, whereby the
POTW provides its services subject to mutually agreeable terms, is also
acceptable. Both of these mechanisms establish a legal framework for con-
trolling the volume and constituents discharged by an industry, and will be
discussed below. Greatest attention will be given to permitting since the
majority of POTWs have adopted this system.
Many POTWs in Idaho and Washington are utilizing a Data Disclosure Form
to collect data from industrial users and an Industrial Waste Acceptance Form
in lieu of a permit application and permit. However, both systems are very
close. The main difference is terminology.
Whatever system is employed, it should integrate the following compo-
nents.
• A mechanism for obtaining information from the regulated user
• Specific conditions, subject to modification, on the user's discharge
(e.g., limitations, sampling and reporting requirements)
• Limited duration allowing for compliance review
• Nontransferability
• Revocability to make the system an effective compliance tool.
POTW Permit System
The establishment of procedures to issue sewer use permits to industries
discharging to the POTW system generally provides the most effective control
mechanism available to regulate industrial users. The concept of the sewer
7-1
-------
C/REG. 10///5
use permit system is very flexible and can be tailored to the particular needs
of almost any municipality. In addition, it can effectively accomodate
changes in environmental regulations for industrial processes. Since no two
industrial users are the same, a permit system provides an efficient means for
varying limitations, monitoring and reporting requirements.
Deadline for Permit Issuances
A. POTW's sewer use ordinance normally describes a timeframe for issuance
of a permit. Once the permit application review process is complete, the POTW
should draft a permit, send it to the industrial user for review and comment,
then issue the final permit. (There may be a need for the user and POTW staff
to meet, discuss and negotiate the conditions in the draft permit.) The
process should take no more than 60 days (from review of permit to issuance of
final permit). Thirty-days is preferable.
Contents of Permit
The permit should contain:
• Cover page describing the facility, with effective date, expiration
date, and signature of responsible POTW staff
• Applicable pretreatment standards (discharge limits)
• Compliance deadline date or effective date of limits
• Sampling protocol (sampling frequency and type: grab, 24-hr, compos-
ite, flow proportion composite)
• Compliance schedule, if appropriate (the POTW would generally insert
the schedule supplied in the permit application by the industrial user
• Requirement for submittal of an Accidental Spill Prevention Plan
(ASPP)
• Reporting requirements, as appropriate (compliance progress reports,
final compliance reports, self-monitoring reports, accidental spill or
upset reports)
• Requirement for submittal of plans and specifications for pretreatment
facility construction and for sampling manhole construction
• Standard conditions
• Statement on non-transferability
7-2
-------
C/REG. 10/#5
• Modification authority
• Revocation authority.
Discharge limits: for categorical industrial users, limits are
expressed in the permit as maximum monthly average and daily maximums •
(electroplating is a maximum four-day average). The applicable
standard or more stringent standard applies. (See Chapter 4 for
discussion of how to decide on appropriate limits.)
Compliance Deadline Date: The deadline date for categorical indus-
trial users cannot go beyond the published date for the categorical
standard. Deadline dates for noncategorioal industrial users are
individually determined by the POTW. They should be reasonable.
Sampling Protocol: Sampling protocol is individually determined by
the POTW. Sampling frequency and type should be based on the dis-
charger wastewater characteristics, type discharge (batch vs. continu-
ous) t and operational characteristics (8 hour vs. 24-hour operation).
See Chapter 9 under self-monitoring for further discussion of sampling
protocol. A POTW may elect to sample the user's wastewaters in lieu
of the user, and charge the cost accordingly. If this is the case,
the semi-annual report submitted by the user would be a compilation of
sampling results from the POTW.
Standard Conditions: "Boiler-plate language." See Attachment 7.1 for
typical conditions in a typical permit.
Reporting Requirements: Discussed in Chapter 9. If sampling manhole
or pretreatment facilities are constructed, the POTW should inspect
the facilities once the project is complete.
Period of Duration
The period of duration should be explicitly defined in the permit,
indicating both the effective date and expiration date. The determination of
the period of permit validity should be related to the POTW's industrial user
classification scheme. Those industrial users that have high potential for
impacting POTW operations or undergoing process or waste discharge charac-
teristic changes should be placed on a shorter permit renewal cycle than other
users. In all cases, permit duration in the range of one to five years is
recommended. The permit renewal process enables the POTW to keep up-to-date
records on the industrial dischargers to its system. The POTW should require
an update of the permit application form before the renewal of any industry's
permit. If a permit is for an indefinite period, the POTW should at least
7-3
-------
C/REG. 10///5
review it annually, in light of data obtained from self-monitoring and
compliance monitoring.
Nontransferability
For the protection of the POTW, all permits should be issued with the
condition that their validity applies only to the specific owner and indus-
trial facility to which they were issued. Any transfer of ownership, change
in industrial processes or significant change of wastewater quality or
quantity should void the permit.
Revocation
The termination of sewer discharge rights through the revocation of an
industry's discharge permit can be a powerful enforcement mechanism. A
statement of the POTW's authority to invoke this measure should be included in
the permit. This procedure should serve as a deterrent to illegal discharges,
falsification of self-monitoring reports, tampering with monitoring equipment
and methods, refusal to allow timely access to industrial premises and any
other activities that would be detrimental to the integrity of the POTW
pretreatment program. Conditions for revocation, including the ones stated
here, may be incorporated in the permit.
Permit Modification
Permits may be modified for the following reasons:
• User changes its manufacturing operation or wastewater characteristics
• Newly promulgated Federal pretreatment standards
• Need for more stringent limits or monitoring requirements to protect
the POTW operation.
The affected industry should be given adequate notice of permit modifica-
tion especially if it concerns the development of new discharge conditions or
limits.
7-4
-------
C/REG. 10///5
Enforcement of Permits
Although not necessarily required as a written section of the permit, it
is recommended that the POTW provide clear notification to regulated indus-
trial users of the sequence of enforcement actions that will be taken by the
POTW in response to user violations. This information can be presented in
writing or verbally communicated in a meeting with industrial users of the
system.
The following attachments provide example of permits and typical condi-
tions:
Attachment 7.1: Example permit with standard conditions.
Attachment 7.2: Permit for noncategorlcal industrial user (Food Proc-
essor) discharging high loading of conventional wastes
into the POTW.
Attachment 7.3: Permit for noncategorical industrial user (galvanizer)
discharging high levels of zinc.
Attachment 7.4: Permit for categorical industrial user (electroplating
job shop >10,000 gals/day), but Federal standards not
promulgated yet.
Attachment 7.5: Permit for categorical integrated industrial user
(electroplating job shop >10,000 gals/day) with Federal
standards promulgated.
Attachment 7.6: Permit for categorical integrated user facility >10,000
gals/day. Industry regulated by published Federal
electroplating and metal finishing standard. Metal
finishing compliance deadline date two years later than
electroplating.
Attachments 7.7 and 7.8 provide examples of permits and Industrial Waste
Acceptance Forms from other POTWs.
Industrial User Contracts
Contracts between a POTW and an industrial user are common and may be the
least cumbersome mechanism if only a few industries are to be regulated.
Because they are individually negotiated, they may be highly refined to meet
specific needs. Also, for the same reason, they are generally not subject to
7-5
-------
C/REG. 10///5
challenge. Contracts are also appropriate between the POTW and outside
jurisdictions served (see handout). They are particularly appropriate for
industrial users in unincorporated areas since jurisdiction is not an issue
with contracts. In these situations, however, the POTW must remember that
referencing the ordinance in the contract is not sufficient. Contracts with
industrial users outside the municipality's jurisdiction must include the
following:
• Authority to enter the user's premises for the purpose of inspection,
sampling and record examination
• Liquidated damages for violation of pretreatment standards and
requirements
• Agreement by the user to submit to the remedy of specific performance
for breach of contract.
POTWs electing to utilize contracts rather than a permit system should
also bear in mind that, since they are subject to negotiation, it may be
difficult for the administrator to set the terms he feels are necessary and
have them accepted. In addition, baseline data are not usually an inherent
part of a contract and contracts may differ considerbly from one industry to
another. Therefore, they do not lend themselves easily to data management for
larger POTWs.
7-6
-------
ATTACHMENT 7.1
TYPICAL PERMIT WITH STANDARD CONDITIONS
-------
Page i of 7
Permit No.:
City of
Department of Public Works
Wastewater Discharge Permit
Company Name:
Division Name (If Applicable)
Mailing Address
Street or P.O. Box
City, state and Zip code
Facility Address
Street Address
City, State and Zip Code
The above Industrial User is authorized to discharge industrial
wastewater to the City of sewer system in compliance with
the City's Ordinance Number , any applicable provisions of
Federal or State law or regulation, and in accordance with discharge
point(s), effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth herein.
This permit is granted in accordance with the application filed
on , 19 in the office of the , and in
conformity with plans, specifications, and other data submitted to the
City in support of the above application.
Effective Date:
Expiration Date:
Director, Public Works
-------
Page 2 of 7
Permit No.:
PART I - Wastewater Discharge Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
The industrial user shall comply with the effluent limitations
specified below by 19 .
MAXIMUM
MONTHLY SAMPLE SAMPLE
PARAMETER AVERAGE DAILY MAX FREQUENCY TYPE
mg/l UDS/day) mg/H IDs/day)
note
Part I may require 2 sets of limitations: interim and final limits.
Example: A facility covered by 2 sets of regulations with compliance
schedules 2 years apart.
-------
Page 3 of 7
Permit No.:
PART II - SPECIAL CONDITIONS/COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES (Examples)
1. If the results of sampling reported in the permit application for Total
Toxic Organic (TTO) are below .01 mg/1 (10 ppb), the Industrial User can
develop a solvent management plan. If the User elects to develop a plan, it
will be developed within 90 days from the effective date of this permit.
The plan will be submitted to the City for review and approval. Once
approved, the Industrial User must comply with the plan and any reporting
requirements specified by the city.
2. The Industrial User shall develop,'within 6 months of the effective date
of this permit, an accidental spill prevention plan to eliminate or minimize
the accidental or slug discharge of pollutants into the sewer system, which
could have an effect on the City's treatment plant, sludge, or cause the
City to violate its NPOES permit.
3. The Industrial User shall construct a sampling manhole within 9 months
of the effective date of this permit.
4. In order to meet the wastewater discharge limitations specified in Part
I, the Industrial User will be required to make in-plant process
modifications and install a treatment facility. The following construction
schedule shall be adhered to and reports on progress shall be submitted to
the City, as outlined in Part III:
1. Investigate in-plant process modifications 3 months
and end of pipe treatment options
2. Complete preliminary A 4 E 6 months
«
3. Go out to bid 9 months
4. Secure equipment and begin construction 12 months
5. Complete installation 16 months
6. Pretreatment system start-up 17 months
7. Achieve final compliance 18 months
5. Discharge limitations in Part I are adjusted categorical standards
derived from the Combined Wastestream Formula (Section 403.6(e) of the
General Pretreatment Regulations). The Industrial User shall monitor on a
monthly basis the individual flows that were utilized in the Combined
Uastestream Formula.
-------
Page 4 of 7
Permit No.:
PART III - REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. The Industrial User shall notify the City immediately upon any
accidental or slug discharge to the sanitary sewer as outlined in the
Accidental Spill section of the City's Ordinance Number .
Formal written notification discussing circumstances and remedies shall
be submitted to the city within 5 days of the occurence.
2. The Industrial User shall notify the City prior to the introduction
of new wastewater or pollutants or any substantial change in the volume
or characteristics of the wastewater being introduced into the POTW
from the User's industrial processes. Formal written notification
shall follow within 30 days of such introduction.
3. Any upset experienced by the Industrial User of its treatment that
places it in a temporary state of non-compliance with wastewater
discharge limitations contained in this permit or other limitations
specified in the City's Ordinance shall be reported to the City within
24 hours of first awareness of the commencement of the upset. A
detailed report shall be filed within 5 days.
4. The Industrial User is required to submit to the City quarterly
reports on the results of its sampling of the pollutants specified in
Part I of this permit. This report shall also contain monthly flows as
required in Part 11.5.
5. Not later than fourteen (14) days following each date in the
compliance schedule, the Industrial User shall submit a progress report
to the City. This report must indicate whether or not the increment of
progress was met on the date, the reason(s) for any delay, and what
steps are being taken by the User to return to the schedule
established. In no event shall more than (9) months elapse between
such progress reports to the City.
6. Within 90 days following the final compliance date specified in
Section I of this permit, the Industrial User shall submit a final
compliance report. The Industrial User will be required to sample its
wastewater for the pollutants specified in Section I, and report
compliance. Any reasons for not complying and any steps being taken by
the User to comply shall be part of the report.
7. The Industrial User shall report completion of its
sampling/monitoring manhole.
3. All reports shall be submitted to the following address:
-------
Page 5 of
Permit No.:
PART IV - STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. The Industrial User shall comply with all the general prohibitive
discharge standards in Section of the City Ordinance.
2. RIGHT OF ENTRY -
The Industrial User shall, after reasonable notification by the
City, allow the City or its representatives, exhibiting proper credentials
and identification, to enter upon the premises of the User, at all
reasonable hours, for the purposes of .inspection, sampling, or records
inspection. Reasonable hours in the context of inspection and sampling
includes any time the Industrial User is operating any process which results
in a process wastewater discharge to the City's sewerage system.
3. RECORDS RETENTION
The Industrial user shall retain and preserve for no less than
three (3) years, any records, books, documents, memoranda, reports,
correspondence and any and all summaries thereof, relating to monitoring,
sampling and chemical analyses made by or in behalf of the user in
connection with its disharge.
b. All records that pertain to matters that are the subject oP
special orders or any other enforcement or litigation activities brought by
the City shall be retained and preserved by the Industrial User until all
?-ifD.-;».!i»it j;>i >':;":>•; M-.ive jj:Klj:]»jil dn-i ill psriods of limitation with
•"- ;;>-}.:!: to any and all appeals have expired.
4. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Except for data determined to be confidential under Section of
the City's Ordinance, all reports required by this permit shall be avaif able
for public inspection at the office of the .
5. RECORDING OF RESULTS
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements
of this permit, the user shall record the following information:
a) The exact place, date, and time of sampling;
b) The dates the analyses were performed;
c) The person(s) who performed the analyses;
d) The analytical techniques or methods used; and
e) The results of all required analyses.
-------
Page 6 of 7
Permit No.:
6. DILUTION
No Industrial User shall increase the use of potable or process
water or, in any way, attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or complete
substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with the limitations
contained in this permit.
7. PROPER DISPOSAL OF PRETREATMENT SLUDGES AND SPENT CHEMICALS
The disposal of sludges and spent chemicals generated shall be
done in accordance with Section 405 of the Clean Water Act and Subtitles C
and D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
8. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS
All reports required by this permit shall be signed by a principal
executive officer of the User, or his designee.
9. REVOCATION OF PERMIT
The permit issued to the Industrial User by the City may be
revoked when, after inspection, monitoring or analysis it is determined that
the discharge of wastewater to the sanitary sewer is in violation of
Federal, State, or local laws, ordinances, or regulations. Additionally,
falsification or intentional misrepresentation of data or statements
pertaining to the permit application or any other required reporting form,
shall be cause for permit revocation.
10. LIMITATION ON PERMIT TRANSFER
Wastewater discharge permits are issued to a specific user for a
specific operation and are not assignable to another user or transferrable
to any other location without the prior written approval of the City. Sale
of a User shall obligate the purchaser to seek prior written approval of the
City for continued discharge to the sewerage system.
11. FALSIFYING INFORMATION OR TAMPERING WITH MONITORING EQUIPMENT
Knowingly making any false statement on any report or other
document required by this permit or knowingly rendering any monitoring
device or method inaccurate, may result in punishment under the criminal
laws of the City, as well as being subjected to civil penalties and relief.
12. MODIFICATION OR REVISION OF THE PERMIT
a) The terms and conditions of this permit may be subject to
modification by the City at any time as limitations or requirements as
identified the City's Ordinance, are modified or other just cause exists.
b) This permit may also be modified to incorporate special
conditions resulting from the issuance of a special order.
-------
Page 7 Of 7
Permit No.:
c) The terms and conditions may be modified as a result of EPA
promulgating a new federal pretreatment standard.
d) Any permit modifications which result in new conditions in the
permit shall include a reasonable time schedule for compliance of necessary.
13. DUTY TO REAPPLY
The City shall notify a User one hundred and eighty (180) days
prior to the expiration of the User's Permit. Within ninety (90) days of
the notification, the User shall reapply for reissuance of the permit on a
form provided by the City.
14. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision
of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any
circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other
circumstances, and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected
thereby.
15. PROPERTY RIGHTS
The Issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in
either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it
authorize any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal,
State or Local regulations.
-------
ATTACHMENT 7.2
PERMIT FOR NONCATEGORICAL USER DISCHARGING
HIGH LOADING OF CONVENTIONALS
-------
FACT SHEET
1. Facility manufactures french fries.
2. Capable of discharging high loadings of
3. Slug loads and accidental discharges frequently occur upsetting the
operation of the treatment plant. Better control over spillage is
needed.
4. The City will do all the monitoring for the industry and charge costs
to the facility. However, a sampling manhole is needed.
5. The City's local limits will apply.
-------
Page 1 of 7
Permit No.: M-0001
City of Hilton
Department of Public Works
Wastewater Discharge Permit
Company Name: ABC Food Products
Division Name (If Applicable)
Mailing Address 14 Palmer Ave
Street or P.O. Box
, Milton Wa 12560
City, State and Zip Code
Facility Address same as above
Street Address
City, State and Zip Code
The above Industrial User is authorized to discharge industrial
wastewater to the City of Milton's sewer system in compliance with the
City's Ordinance Number 1089 , any applicable provisions of Federal or
State law or regulation, and in accordance with discharge point(s),
effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set
forth herein.
This permit is granted 1n accordance with the application filed
on October 1 , 1983 in the office of the Public Works Dept., and in
conformity with plans, specifications, and other data submitted to the
City in support of the above application.
Effective Date: November 30, 1983
Expiration Date: November 30, 1988
Director, Public Works
-------
Page 2 of 7
Permit No.: M-0001
PART I - Wastewater Discharge Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
The industrial user shall comply with the effluent limitations
specified below by December 1, 1984.
30 DAY SAMPLE SAMPLE
PARAMETER AVERAGE DAILY MAX FREQUENCY TYPE
mg/Ulbs/day) mg/l(lbs/day)
Flow(lOOOgpd) daily measurement
BOD5 500 (2)
F.O.G. 100
note
(1) F.O.G. stands for fats, oil, and grease.
(2) The city will sample and charge the permittee for the cost of
sampling and analysis.
-------
Page 3 of 7
Permit No.: M-0001
PART II - SPECIAL CONDITIONS/COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
1. The Industrial User shall develop, within 6 months of the effective date
of this permit, an accidental spill prevention plan to eliminate or minimize
the accidental or slug discharge of pollutants into the sewer system, which
could have an effect on the City's treatment plant, sludge, or cause the
City to violate its NPDES permit.
2. The Industrial User shall construct a sampling manhole within 9 months
of the effective date of this permit.
-------
Page 4 of 7
Permit No.: M-0001
PART III - REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. The Industrial User shall notify the City immediately upon any
accidental or slug discharge to the sanitary sewer as outlined in the
Accidental Spill section of the City's Ordinance Number 1089 . Formal
written notification discussing circumstances and remedies shall be
submitted to the city within 5 days of the occurence.
2. The Industrial User shall notify the City prior to the introduction
of new wastewater or pollutants or any substantial change in the volume
or characteristics of the wastewater being introduced into the POTW
from the User's industrial processes. Formal written notification
shall follow within 30 days of such introduction.
3. The Industrial User shall report completion of its
sampling/monitoring manhole.
8. All reports shall be submitted to the following address:
Mr. John Ashton
Public Works Director
City of Miton
P.O. Box 001
Milton Wa 12560
-------
Page 5 of 7
Permit No.: M-0001
PART IV - STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. The Industrial User shall comply with all the general prohibitive
discharge standards in Section_4_of the City Ordinance.
2. RIGHT OF ENTRY
The Industrial User shall, after reasonable notification by the
City, allow the City or its representatives, exhibiting proper credentials
and identification, to enter upon the premises of the User, at all
reasonable hours, for the purposes of inspection, sampling, or records
inspection. Reasonable hours in the context of inspection and sampling
includes any time the Industrial User is operating any process which results
in a process wastewater discharge to the City's sewerage system.
3. RECORDS RETENTION
The Industrial user shall retain and preserve for no less than
three (3) years, any records, books, documents, memoranda, reports,
correspondence and any and all summaries thereof, relating to monitoring,
sampling and chemical analyses made by or in behalf of the user in
connection with its disharge.
b. All records that pertain to matters that are the subject of
special orders or any other enforcement or litigation activities brought by
the City shall be retained and preserved by the Industrial User until all
enforcement activities have concluded and all periods of limitation with
respect to any and all appeals have expired.
4. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Except for data determined to be confidential under Section 10 of
the City's Ordinance, all reports required by this permit shall be available
for public inspection at the office of the Public Works Director .
5. RECORDING OF RESULTS
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements
of this permit, the user shall record the following information:
a) The exact place, date, and time of sampling;
b) The dates the analyses were performed;
c) The person(s) who performed the analyses;
d) The analytical techniques or methods used; and
e) The results of all required analyses.
-------
Page 6 of 7
Permit No.: M-0001.
6. DILUTION
No Industrial User shall Increase the use of potable or process
water or, in any way, attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or complete
substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with the limitations
contained in this permit.
7. PROPER DISPOSAL OF PRETREATMENT SLUDGES AND SPENT CHEMICALS
The disposal of sludges and spent chemicals generated shall be
done in accordance with Section 405 of the clean Water Act and Subtitles C
and D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
8. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS
All reports required by this permit shall be signed by a principal
executive officer of the User, or his designee.
9. REVOCATION OF PERMIT
The permit issued to the Industrial User by the City may be
revoked when, after inspection, monitoring or analysis it is determined that
the discharge of wastewater to the sanitary sewer is in violation of
Federal, State, or local laws, ordinances, or regulations. Additionally,
falsification or intentional misrepresentation of data or statements
pertaining to the permit application or any other required reporting form,
shall be cause for permit revocation.
10. LIMITATION ON PERMIT TRANSFER
Wastewater discharge permits are issued to a specific user for a
specific operation and are not assignable to another user or transferable
to any other location without the prior written approval of the City. Sale
of a User shall obligate the purchaser to seek prior written approval of the
City for continued discharge to the sewerage system.
11. FALSIFYING INFORMATION OR TAMPERING WITH MONITORING EQUIPMENT
Knowingly making any false statement on any report or other
document required by this permit or knowingly rendering any monitoring
device or method inaccurate, may result in punishment under the criminal
laws of the City, as well as being subjected to civil penalties and relief.
12. MODIFICATION OR REVISION OF THE PERMIT
a) The terms and conditions of this permit may be subject to
modification by the City at any time as limitations or requirements as
identified the City's Ordinance, are modified or other just cause exists.
b) This permit may also be modified to incorporate special
conditions resulting from the issuance of a special order.
-------
Page 7 of 7
Permit No.: M-0001
c) The terms and conditions may be modified as a result of EPA
promulgating a new federal pretreatment standard.
d) Any permit modifications which result in new conditions in the
permit shall Include a reasonable time schedule for compliance of necessary.
13. DUTY TO REAPPLY
The City shall notify a User one hundred and eighty (180) days
prior to the expiration of the User's Permit. Within ninety (90) days of
the notification, the User shall reapply for reissuance of the permit on a
form provided by the City.
14. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision
of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any
circumstance, 1s held invalid, the application of such provision to other
circumstances, and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected
thereby.
15. PROPERTY RIGHTS
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in
either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it
authorize any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal,
State or Local regulations.
-------
ATTACHMENT 7.3
PERMIT FOR NONCATEGORICAL USER DISCHARGING
HIGH LEVELS OF ZINC
-------
FACT SHEET
1. Facility manufactures pails. The only process discharge is from the
galvanizing operation.
2. Discharge 1s batched.
3. Facility cannot meet local limit for In (4.0 mg/1). A small
treatment system will be constructed.
4. Accidental discharges and spills of spent solution and chemicals is
possible.
t
5. The user will conduct its own sampling.
6. A sampling manhole needs to be constructed.
-------
Page 1 of 7
Permit No.: M-0002
City of Hilton
Department of Public Works
Wastewater Discharge Permit
Company Name: ABC Metal Products
Division Name (If Applicable) ._
Mailing Address 34 Spa!ding St
Street or P.O. Box
' Milton Ua 12560
City, State and Zip Code
Facility Address (same as above)
Street Address
City, State and Zip Code
The above Industrial User is authorized to discharge industrial
wastewater to the City of Hilton's sewer system in compliance with the
City's Ordinance Number 1089 , any applicable provisions of Federal or
State law or regulation, and in accordance with discharge point(s),
effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set
forth herein.
This permit is granted in accordance with the application filed
on June 1 , 1983 in the office of the Public Works Dept., and in
conformity witTTplans, specifications, and other data submitted to the
City in support of the above application.
Effective Date: July 15. 1983
Expiration Date; July 15. 1988
Director, Public Works
-------
Page 2 of 7
Permit No.: M-0002
PART I - Wastewater Discharge Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
The industrial user shall comply with the effluent limitations
specified below by October 15,1984.
30 DAY SAMPLE SAMPLE
PARAMETER AVERAGE DAILY MAX FREQUENCY TYPE
mg/l(lbs/day) mg/1 Ubs/day)
Flow(lOOOgpd) daily recording
In 4.0 1/month 24-hr
composite
-------
Page 3 of 7
Permit No.: M-0002
PART II - SPECIAL CONDITIONS/COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
1. The Industrial User shall develop, within 6 months of the effective date
of this permit, an accidental spill prevention plan to eliminate or minimize
the accidental or slug discharge of pollutants into the sewer system, which
could have an effect on the City's treatment plant, sludge, or cause the
City to violate its NPDES permit.
2. The Industrial User shall construct a sampling manhole within 9 months
of the effective date of this permit.
3. In order to meet the wastewater discharge limitations specified in Part
I, the Industrial User will be required to make in-plant process
modifications and install a treatment facility. The following construction
schedule shall be adhered to and reports on progress shall be submitted to
the City, as outlined in Part III:
1. Investigate in-plant process modifications 3 months
and end of pipe treatment options
2. Complete preliminary A & E 6 months
3. Go out to bid 7 months
4. Secure equipment and begin construction 9 months
5. Complete installation 13 months
6. Pretreatment system start-up 14 months
7. Achieve final compliance 15 months
-------
Page 4 of 7
Permit No.: M-0002
PART III - REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. The Industrial User shall notify the City immediately upon any
accidental or slug discharge to the sanitary sewer as outlined in the
Accidental Spill section of the City's Ordinance Number 1089 . Formal
written notification discussing circumstances and remedies shall be
submitted to the city within 5 days of the occurence.
2. The Industrial User shall notify the City prior to the introduction
of new wastewater or pollutants or any substantial change in the volume
or characteristics of the wastewater being introduced into the POTW
from the User's industrial processes. Formal written notification
shall follow within 30 days of such introduction.
'3. [Any upset experienced by the Industrial User of its treatment that,,.
places it in a temporary state of non-compliance with wastewater
discharge limitations contained in this permit or other limitations
specified in the City's Ordinance shall be reported to the City within
24 hours of first awareness of the commencement of the upset. A
detailed report shall be filed within 5 days.
4. The Industrial User is required to submit to the City quarterly
reports on the results of its sampling of the pollutants specified in
Part I of this permit.
5. Not later than fourteen (14) days following each date in the
compliance schedule, the Industrial User shall submit a progress report
to the City. This report must indicate whether or not the increment of
progress was met on the date, the reason(s) for any delay, and what
steps are being taken by the User to return to the schedule
established. In no event shall more than (9) months elapse between
such progress reports to the City.
6. Within 90 days following the final compliance date specified in
Section I of this permit, the Industrial User shall submit a final
compliance report. The Industrial User will be required to sample its
wastewater for the pollutants specified in Section I, and report
compliance. Any reasons for not complying and any steps being taken by
the User to comply shall be part of the report.
7. The Industrial User shall report completion of its
sampling/monitoring manhole.
8. All reports shall be submitted to the following address:
Mr John Ashton, Director
Public Works Dept.
City of Milton
P.O. Box 001
Milton Wa 12560
-------
Page. 5 of 7
Permit No.: M-0002
PART IV - STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. The Industrial User shall comply with all the general prohibitive
discharge standards in Sect1on_4_of the City Ordinance.
2. RIGHT OF ENTRY
The Industrial User shall, after reasonable notification by the
City, allow the City or its representatives, exhibiting proper credentials
and identification, to enter upon the premises of the User, at all
reasonable hours, for the purposes of inspection, sampling, or records
inspection. Reasonable hours in the context of inspection and sampling
includes any time the Industrial User is operating any process which results
in a process wastewater discharge to the City's sewerage system.
3. RECORDS RETENTION
The Industrial user shall retain and preserve for no less than
three (3) years, any records, books, documents, memoranda, reports,
correspondence and any and all summaries thereof, relating to monitoring,
sampling and chemical analyses made by or in behalf of the user in
connection with its disharge.
b. All records that pertain to matters that are the subject of
special orders or any other enforcement or litigation activities brought .by
the City shall be retained and preserved by the Industrial User until all
enforcement activities have concluded and all periods of limitation with
respect to any and all appeals have expired.
4. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Except for data determined to be confidential under Section 10 of
the City's Ordinance, all reports required by this permit shall be available
for public inspection at the office of the Public Works Director .
/ §. RECORDING OF RESULTS
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements
of this permit, the user shall record the following information:
a). The exact pl-ace, date, and time of sampling;
\
^ b)-. The dates the analyses were performed;
c)- The person(s) who performed the analyses;
d) The analytical techniques or methods used; and
e) The results of all required analyses.
-------
Page 6 of 7
Permit No.: M-0002
6. DILUTION
No Industrial User shall Increase the use of potable or process
water or, 1n any way, attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or complete
substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with the limitations
contained in this permit.
7. PROPER DISPOSAL OF PRETREATHENT SLUDGES AND SPENT CHEMICALS
The disposal of sludges and spent chemicals generated shall be
done in accordance with Section 405 of the Clean Water Act and Subtitles C
and D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
8. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS
All reports required by this permit shall be signed by a principal
executive officer of the User, or his designee.
X 9. REVOCATION OF PERMIT
The permit issued to the Industrial User by the City may be
revoked when, after inspection, monitoring or analysis it is determined that
the discharge of wastewater to the sanitary sewer is in violation of
Federal, State, or local laws, ordinances, or regulations. Additionally,
falsification or intentional misrepresentation of data or statements
pertaining to the permit application or any other required reporting form,
shall be cause for permit revocation.
10. LIMITATION ON PERMIT TRANSFER
Wastewater discharge permits are issued to a specific user for a
specific operation and are not assignable to another user or transferable
to any other location without the prior written approval of the City. Sale
of a User shall obligate the purchaser to seek prior written approval of the
City for continued discharge to the sewerage system.
11. FALSIFYING INFORMATION OR TAMPERING WITH MONITORING EQUIPMENT
Knowingly making any false statement on any report or other
document required by this permit or knowingly rendering any monitoring
device or method inaccurate, may result in punishment under the criminal
laws of the City, as well as being subjected to civil penalties and relief.
12. MODIFICATION OR REVISION OF THE PERMIT
a) The terms and conditions of this permit may be subject to
modification by the City at any time as limitations or requirements as
identified the City's Ordinance, are modified or other just cause exists.
b) This permit may also be modified to incorporate special
conditions resulting from the issuance of a special order.
-------
Page 7 of 7
Permit No.: M-0002
c) The terms and conditions may be modified as a result of EPA
promulgating a new federal pretreatment standard.
d) Any permit modifications which result in new conditions in the
permit shall include a reasonable time schedule for compliance of necessary.
13. DUTY TO REAPPLY
The City shall notify a User one hundred and eighty (180) days
prior to the expiration of the User's Permit. Within ninety (90) days of
the notification, the User shall reapply for reissuance of the permit on a
form provided by the City.
14. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision
of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any
circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other
circumstances, and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected
thereby.
<15. PROPERTY RIGHTS
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in
either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it
authorize any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal,
State or Local regulations.
-------
ATTACHMENT 7.4
PERMIT FOR CATEGORICAL USER
FEDERAL STANDARDS NOT YET PROMULGATED
-------
FACT SHEET
1. The facility is a medium size electroplating shop. It performs Cd,
Cr, Ni, plating.
2. There are two other waste streams both not related to plating lines
(non-contact cooling water and sanitary).
3. Discharge of all wastewater is to one common pipe leaving the plant
site.
4. Federal categorical standards for electroplating will not be
published for 2 years. The City's local limits for heavy metals and
cyanide will apply. Refer to Chapter 4 for the list of local limits
used for this example. [The reader should remember that this is only
a hypothetical example to show how a city can apply its own local
limits when a categorical standard has not been promulgated]
5. The City will perform all the monitoring and charge the facility for
cost of monitoring.
6. The facility cannot meet local limits. Installation of treatment and
in-plant process changes needed.
7. Sampling manhole needed.
8. Potential for spills is exists.
Note; This permit may need to be modified when the EPA promulgates
the federal standard in question, i_f they happen to be more stringent
than the local standards.
-------
Page 1 of 7
Permit No.: M-0003
City of Milton
Department of Public Works
Wastewater Discharge Permit
Company Name: ABC Fasteners
Division Name (If Applicable) Wilson Products Inc.
Mailing Address 36 Birch St
Street or P.O. Box
Maple Valley N.Y. 00126
City, State and Zip Code
Facility Address 1526 Ann St
Street Address
Milton WA 12560
City, State and Zip Code
The above Industrial User is authorized to discharge industrial
wastewater to the City of Milton's sewer system in compliance with the
City's Ordinance Number 1089, any applicable provisions of Federal or
State law or regulation, and in accordance with discharge point(s),
effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set
forth herein.
This permit is granted in accordance with the application filed
on April 6. 1982 in the office of the Public Works Director, and in
conformity with plans, specifications, and other data submitted to the
City in support of the above application.
Effective Date: June 15, 1982
Expiration Date: June 15, 1987
Director, Pubnc Works
-------
Page 2 of 7
Permit No.: M-0003
PART I - Wastewater Discharge Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
The industrial user shall comply with the effluent limitations
specified below by December 15. 1983.
PARAMETER
Flow(mgd)
Cd (1)
Pb
Zn
Cn
Cu
Ni
Cr
30 DAY
AVERAGE
DAILY MAX
mgTTTTFs/ day) mg/1 (1 bs/day)
.,5
.1
0.
0'.
4.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
5.0
SAMPLE
FREQUENCY
continuous
(2)
SAMPLE
TYPE
recording
note
(1) All pollutant parameters to be reported as total.
(2) The city will perform all monitoring and charge the Industrial user
for costs relating to sampling and analysis.
-------
Page 3 of 7
Permit No.: M-0003
PART II - SPECIAL CONDITIONS/COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
1. The Industrial User shall develop, within 6 months of the effective date
of this permit, an accidental spill prevention plan to eliminate or minimize
the accidental or slug discharge of pollutants into the sewer system, which
could have an effect on the City's treatment plant, sludge, or cause the
City to violate Its NPDES permit.
2. The Industrial User shall construct a sampling manhole within 9 months
of the effective date of this permit.
3. In order to meet the wastewater discharge limitations specified in Part
I, the Industrial User will be required to make in-plant process
modifications and install a treatment facility. The following construction
schedule shall be adhered to and reports on progress shall be submitted to
the City, as outlined in Part III:
1. Investigate 1n-plant process modifications 3 months
and end of pipe treatment options
2. Complete preliminary A & E 6 months
3. Go out to bid 9 months
4. Secure equipment and begin construction 12 months
5. Complete installation 16 months
6. Pretreatment system start-up 17 months
7. Achieve final compliance 18 months
-------
Page 4 of 7
Permit No.: M-0003
PART III - REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. The Industrial User shall notify the City immediately upon any
accidental or slug discharge to the sanitary sewer as outlined in the
Accidental Spill section of the City's Ordinance Number 1089 . Formal
written notification discussing circumstances and remedies shall be
submitted to the city within 5 days of the occurence.
2. The Industrial User shall notify the City prior to the introduction
of new wastewater or pollutants or any substantial change in the volume
or characteristics of the wastewater being introduced into the POTW
from the User's industrial processes. Formal written notification
shall follow within 30 days of such introduction.
3. Any upset experienced by the Industrial User of its treatment that
places it in a temporary state of non-compliance with wastewater
discharge limitations contained in this permit or other limitations
specified in the City's Ordinance shall be reported to the City within
24 hours of first awareness of the commencement of the upset. A
detailed report shall be filed within 5 days.
4. Not later than fourteen (14) days following each date in the
compliance schedule, the Industrial User shall submit a progress report
to the City. This report must indicate whether or not the increment of
progress was met on the date, the reason(s) for any delay, and what
steps are being taken by the User to return to the schedule
established. In no event shall more than (9) months elapse between
such progress reports to the City.
5. Within 90 days following the final compliance date specified in
Section I of this permit, the Industrial User shall submit a final
compliance report. The Industrial User will be required to sample its
wastewater for the pollutants specified in Section I, and report
compliance. Any reasons for not complying and any steps being taken by
the User to comply shall be part of the report.
7. The Industrial User shall report completion of its
sampl i ng/moni tori ng manhole.
8. All reports shall be submitted to the following address:
Mr. John Ashton, Director
Public Works Dept.
City of Milton
P.O. Box 001
Milton WA 12560
-------
Page 5 of 7
Permit No.: M-0003
PART IV - STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. The Industrial User shall comply with all the general prohibitive
discharge standards in Section 4 of the City Ordinance.
2. RIGHT OF ENTRY
*
The Industrial User shall, after reasonable notification by the
City, allow the City or its representatives, exhibiting proper credentials
and identification, to enter upon the premises of the User, at all
reasonable hours, for the purposes of inspection, sampling, or records
inspection. Reasonable hours in the context of inspection and sampling
includes any time the Industrial User is operating any process which results
in a process wastewater discharge to the City's sewerage system.
3. RECORDS RETENTION
The Industrial user shall retain and preserve for no less than
three (3) years, any records, books, documents, memoranda, reports,
correspondence and any and all summaries thereof, relating to monitoring,
sampling and chemical analyses made by or in behalf of the user in
connection with its disharge.
b. All records that pertain to matters that are the subject of
special orders or any other enforcement or litigation activities brought by
the City shall be retained and preserved by the Industrial User until all
enforcement activities have concluded and all periods of limitation with
respect to any and all appeals have expired.
4. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Except for data determined to be c'onfidential under Section 10 of
the City's Ordinance, all reports required by this permit shall be available
for public inspection at the office of the Public Works Director .
5. RECORDING OF RESULTS
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements
of this permit, the user shall record the following information:
a) The exact place, date, and time of sampling;
b) The dates the analyses were performed;
. c) The person(s) who performed the analyses;
d) The analytical techniques or methods used; and
e) The results of all required analyses.
-------
Page 6 of 7
Permit No.: M-0003
6. DILUTION
No Industrial User shall Increase the use of potable or process
water or, in any way, attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or complete
substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with the limitations
contained in this permit.
7. PROPER DISPOSAL OF PRETREATMENT SLUDGES AND SPENT CHEMICALS
The disposal of sludges and spent chemicals generated shall be
done in accordance with Section 405 of the Clean Water Act and Subtitles C
and D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
8. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS
All reports required by this permit shall be signed by a principal
executive officer of the User, or his designee.
9. REVOCATION OF PERMIT
The permit issued to the Industrial User by the City may be
revoked when, after inspection, monitoring or analysis it is determined that
the discharge of wastewater to the sanitary sewer is in violation of
Federal, State, or local laws, ordinances, or regulations. Additionally,
falsification or intentional misrepresentation of data or statements
pertaining to the permit application or any other required reporting form,
shall be cause for permit revocation.
10. LIMITATION ON PERMIT TRANSFER
Wastewater discharge permits are issued to a specific user for a
specific operation and are not assignable to another user or transferable
to any other location without the prior written approval of the City. Sale
of a User shall obligate the purchaser to seek prior written approval of the
City for continued discharge to the sewerage system.
11. FALSIFYING INFORMATION OR TAMPERING WITH MONITORING EQUIPMENT
Knowingly making any false statement on any report or other
document required by this permit or knowingly rendering any monitoring
device or method inaccurate, may result in punishment under the criminal
laws of the City, as well as being subjected to civil penalties and relief.
12. MODIFICATION OR REVISION OF THE PERMIT
a) The terms and conditions of this permit may be subject to
modification by the City at any time as limitations or requirements as
identified the City's Ordinance, are modified or other just cause exists.
b) This permit may also be modified to incorporate special
conditions resulting from the issuance of a special order.
-------
Page 7 of 7
Permit No.: M-0003
c) The terms and conditions may be modified as a result of EPA
promulgating a new federal pretreatment standard.
d) Any permit modifications which result in new conditions in the
permit shall include a reasonable time schedule for compliance of necessary.
13. DUTY TO REAPPLY
The City shall notify a User one hundred and eighty (180) days
prior to the expiration of the User's Permit. Within ninety (90) days of
the notification, the User shall reapply for reissuance of the permit on a
form provided by the City.
14. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision
of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any
circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other
circumstances, and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected
thereby.
15. PROPERTY RIGHTS
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in
either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it
authorize any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal,
State or Local regulations.
-------
ATTACHMENT 7.5
PERMIT FOR CATEGORICAL INTEGRATED USER
WITH PROMULGATED FEDERAL STANDARDS
-------
FACT SHEET
1. This facility 1s described 1n Chapter 4, pp. 4-4.
2. The EPA has only promulgated the electroplating standards.
3. The City needs to compare its local limits against the promulgated
electroplating federal standard. The data and comparison is shown
be!ow.
3. The facility's flow is quite large and variable.
4. The facility has provided flow information so that adjusted federal
limits can be calculated using the combined waste stream formula. As
part of its on-going monitoring of its waste discharges, it will have
to continue to measure those flows utilized in the calculations.
5. The facility has a pretreatment facility and is meeting the applicable
standards(that is, local and/or federal, whichever are more stringent)
and has a sampling manhole.
6. Potential for accidental spills of plating baths and chemicals exists.
7. The facility has measured the TTO in its effluent and it is below
.01 mg/1 (lOppb). It will develop a solvent management plan.
(F-j) Regulated flows: .05 mgd
Non-Regulated flows: .01 mgd
(F(j) Dilution flows: .04 mgd
(Ft) Total flow: .1 mgd
[Dilution flow is the sun
of non-contact cooling
water, sanitary, and ca-
feteria wastes]
Combined waste stream formula
1=1-
^cFL
C -
t
Ci = federal categorical pretreatment standard
Ct = adjusted federal pretreatment standard
-------
Calculating for one federal standard (Cadmium) the formula would be as
follows:
c^
Ft - Fd
1.2 mg/1 x .05 mgd x .1 mgd - .04 mgd
.05 mgd.1 mgd
.72 mg/1
Note; Same calculation performed for all pollutants listed in the
electroplaing standards (40 CFR 413).
Adjusted federal standards
Pollutant
Cd
Pb
N1
Cr
Zn
Cu
Cn
TTO
Total metals
Promul gated
Federal
Standard
(q)
4 day avg.
.7
.4
2.6
4.0
2.6
2.7
1.0
Adjusted
Federal
Standard
(Ct)
4 day avg.
.42
.24
1.62
2.4
1.56
1.62 -
.6
Promul gated
Federal
Standard
(Ci)
daily max.
1.2
.6
4.1
7.0
4.2
4.5
1.9
2.13
Adjusted
Federal
Standard
(Ct)
dally max.
.72
.36
2.46
4.20
2.52
2.70
1.14
2.13
6.8
4.08
10.5
6.30
Note; The average limitations contained 1n the promulgated electroplating
standards are expressed as maximum 4 day averages. The promulgated 4-day
average values were adjusted using the Combined Wastestream Formula,
because the industrial facility is treating all wastewaters including the
dilution flows.
-------
t Selection of Applicable Standard
(local maximums vs. federal adjusted max. limits)
(A) (B)
Adjusted Federal Max. Local Max.
(0
Applicable standard
(most stringent of
column A or B)
0,
0.
2.46
4.2
2.52
2.0
1.14
(Local)
(Local)
(Federal)
(Federal )
(Federal)
(Local)
(Federal)
Pollutant
Cd .72 0.5
Pb .36 0.1
Ni 2.45 3.0
Cr 4.20 •' 5.0
Zn 2.52 4.0
Cu 2.70 2.0
Cn 1.14 3.0
TTO 2.13
Total metals "5.3
Note;
SI nee the POTW only has maximum limits for metals and cyanide, the
maximum 4-day average limits in .the permit will be the adjusted federal
average limits from the previous tabl.e.
Local maximum limits for this POTW can be found in Chapter 4, pp. 4-8,
Column C.
-------
Page 1 of 7
Permit No.: M-0004
City of Milton
Department of~PubT7c~Works
Wastewater Discharge Permit
Company Name: Acme Plating Co.
Division Name (If Applicable)
Mailing Address 2216 Fig Tree Blvd
Street or P.O. Box
'Milton WA 12560
City, State and Zip Code
Facility Address (same as above)
Street Address
City, State and Zip Code
The above Industrial User is authorized to discharge industrial
wastewater to the City of Milton's sewer system in compliance with the
City's Ordinance Number 1083 , any applicable provisions of Federal or
State law or regulation, and in accordance with discharge point(s),
effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set
forth herein.
This permit is granted in accordance with the application filed
on August 1. 1982 in the office of the Public Works Director, and in
conformity with plans, specifications, and other data submitted to the
City in support of the above application.
Effective Date: October 1, 1982
Expiration Date: October 1. 1987
Director, Public Works
-------
Page 2 of 7
Permit No.: M-0004
PART I - Wastewater Discharge Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
The industrial user shall comply with the effluent limitations
specified below by June 30, 1984.
PARAMETER
Flow(mgd)
Cdfl)
Pb
Ni
Cr
Zn
Cu
Cn
TTO
Tot.il Metals
MAXIMUM
4 DAY(2)
AVERAGE
DAILY MAX
mg/l(lbs/day) mg/Hlbs/day)
0.42
0.24
1,
2.
1,
1.
0.
55
4
56
52
6
4.08
0.5
0.1
2.46
4.2
2.52
2.7
1.14
(3)
10.5
SAMPLE(4)
FREQUENCY
continuous
2/month
SAMPLE
TYPE
recording
24 hr
composite
(3)
2/month
Notes
(1) All metals and cyanide to be reported as total.
(2) Promulgated 4-day averages in 40 CFR 413 adjusted using the
Combined Wastestream Formula.
(3) The permittee shall develop a solvent management plan in lieu of
having to comply with the effluent limitation. Refer to Part II.1 for
further requirements on the solvent management plan.
(4) The city may reduce the frequency of sampling based on the
analytical results submitted by the permittee.
-------
Page 3 of 7
Permit No.: M-0004
PART II - SPECIAL CONDITIONS/COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
1. If the results of sampling reported in the permit application for Total
Toxic Organic (TTO) are below .01 mg/1 (10 ppb), the Industrial User can
develop a solvent management pla/i. If the User elects to develop a plan, it
will be developed within 90 days from the effective date of this permit.
The plan will be submitted to the City for review and approval. Once
approved, the Industrial User must comply with the plan and any reporting
requirements specified by the city.
2. The Industrial User shall develop, within 6 months of the effective date
of this permit, an accidental spill prevention plan to eliminate or minimize
the accidental or slug discharge of pollutants into the sewer system, which
could have an effect on the City's treatment plant, sludge, or cause the
City to violate its NPDES permit.
3. The Industrial User shall construct a sampling manhole within 9 months
of the effective date of this permit.
4. Discharge limitations in Part I are adjusted categorical standards
derived from the Combined Wastestream Formula (Section 403.6(e) of the
General Pretreatment Regulations). The Industrial User shall monitor on a
monthly basis the individual flows that were utilized in the Combined
Wastestream Formula.
-------
Page 4 of 7
Permit No.: M-0004
PART III - REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. The Industrial User shall notify the City immedia.tely upon any
accidental or slug discharge to the sanitary sewer as outlined in the
Accidental Spill section of the City's Ordinance Number 1089 . Formal
written notification discussing circumstances and remedies shall be.
submitted to the city within 5 days of the occurence.
2. The Industrial User shall notify the City prior to the introduction
of new wastewater or pollutants or any substantial change in the volume
or characteristics of the wastewater, being introduced into the POTW
from the User's industrial processes. Formal written notification
shall follow within 30 days of such introduction.
3. Any upset experienced by the Industrial User of its treatment that
places it in a temporary state of non-compliance with wastewater
discharge limitations contained in this permit or other limitations
specified in the City's Ordinance shall be reported to the City within
24 hours of first awareness of the commencement of the upset. A
detailed report shall be filed within 5 days.
4. The Industrial User is required to submit to the City quarterly
reports on the results of its sampling of the pollutants specified in
Part I of this permit. This report shall also contain monthly flows as
required in Part II.5.
5. Within 90 days following the final compliance date specified in
Section I of this permit, the Industrial User shall submit a final
compliance report. The Industrial User will be required to sample its
wastewater for the pollutants specified in Section I, and report
compliance. Any reasons for not complying and iny steps being taken by
the User to comply shall be part of the report.
6. All reports shall be submitted to the following address:
Mr. John Ashton, Director
Public Works Dept.
City of Milton
P.O. Box 001
Milton WA 12560
-------
Page 5 of 7
Permit No.: M-0004
PART IV - STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. The Industrial User shall comply with all the general prohibitive
discharge standards In Section 4 of the City Ordinance.
2. RIGHT OF ENTRY
The Industrial User shall, after reasonable notification by the
City, allow the City or Its representatives, exhibiting proper credentials
and Identification, to enter upon the premises of the User, at all
reasonable hours, for the purposes of Inspection, sampling, or records
Inspection. Reasonable hours 1n the context of Inspection and sampling
Includes any time the Industrial User 1s operating any process which results
1n a process wastewater discharge to the City's sewerage system.
3. RECORDS RETENTION
The Industrial user shall retain and preserve for no less than
three (3) years, any records, books, documents, memoranda, reports,
correspondence and any and all summaries thereof, relating to monitoring,
sampling and chemical analyses made by or in behalf of the user in
connection with Its dlsharge.
b. All records that pertain to matters that are the subject of
special orders or any other enforcement or litigation activities brought by
the City shall be retained and preserved by the Industrial User until all
enforcement activities have concluded and all periods of limitation with
respect to any and all appeals have expired.
4. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Except for data determined to be confidential under Section 10 of
the City's Ordinance, all reports required.by this permit shall be available
for public inspection at the office of the Public Works Director.
5. RECORDING OF RESULTS
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements
of this permit, the user shall record the following Information:
a) The exact place, date, and time of sampling;
b) The dates the analyses were performed;
c) The person(s) who performed the analyses;
d) The analytical techniques or methods used; and
e) The results of all required analyses.
-------
Page 6 of 7
Permit No.: M-0004
6. DILUTION
No Industrial User shall increase the use of potable or process
water or, in any way, attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or complete
substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with the limitations
contained in this permit.
7. PROPER DISPOSAL OF PRETREATMENT SLUDGES AND SPENT CHEMICALS
The disposal of sludges and spent chemicals generated shall be
done in accordance with Section 405 of the Clean Water Act and Subtitles C
and D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
8. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS
All reports required by this permit shall be signed by a principal
executive officer of the User, or his designee.
9. REVOCATION OF PERMIT
The permit issued to the Industrial User by the City may be
revoked when, after inspection, monitoring or analysis it 1s determined that
the discharge of wastewater to the sanitary sewer is in violation of
Federal, State, or local laws, ordinances, or regulations. Additionally,
falsification or intentional misrepresentation of data or statements
pertaining to the permit application or any other required reporting form,
shall be cause for permit revocation.
10. LIMITATION ON PERMIT TRANSFER
Wastewater discharge permits are issued to a specific user for a
specific operation and are not assignable to another user or transferable
to any other location without the prior written approval of the City. Sale
of a User shall obligate the purchaser to seek prior written approval of the
City for continued discharge to the sewerage system.
11. FALSIFYING INFORMATION OR TAMPERING WITH MONITORING EQUIPMENT
Knowingly making any false statement on any report or other
document required by this permit or knowingly rendering any monitoring
device or method inaccurate, may result in punishment under the criminal
laws of the City, as well as being subjected to civil penalties and relief.
12. MODIFICATION OR REVISION OF THE PERMIT
a) The terms and conditions of this permit may be subject to
modification by the City at any time as limitations or requirements as
identified the City's Ordinance, are modified or other just cause exists.
b) This permit may also be modified to incorporate special
conditions resulting from the issuance of a special order.
-------
Page 7 of 7
Permit No.: M-0004
c) The terms and conditions may be modified as a result of EPA
promulgating a new federal pretreatment standard.
d) Any permit modifications which result in new conditions in the
permit shall include a reasonable time schedule for compliance of necessary.
13. DUTY TO REAPPLY
The City shall notify a User one hundred and eighty (180) days
prior to the expiration of the User's Permit. Within ninety (90) days of
the notification, the User shall reapply ,for relssuance of the permit on a
form provided by the City. '
14. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision
of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any
circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other
circumstances, and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected
thereby.
15. PROPERTY RIGHTS
The Issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in
either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor. does it
authorize any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal ,
State or Local regulations.
-------
ATTACHMENT 7.6
PERMIT FOR CATEGORICAL INTEGRATED USER
TWO SETS OF STANDARDS
-------
FACT SHEET
1. This facility Is the same facility described 1n Chapter 4 pp 4-4.
2. This example 1s similar to that 1n Attachment 7.5. That 1s, the POTW
must compare local limits versus promulgated pretreatment standards.
The only additional requirement Is that this facility 1s also covered
by the promulgated metal finishing standards, which has a compliance
deadline date almost two years (Feb. 15, I9b6) beyond the Integrated
electroplating deadline date of June 30, 1984. The City must not
only compare Its local limits vs. the electroplating standard, but
must also compare Its limits against the metal finishing standards.
3. The City has elected to have two sets of limitations 1n the permit.
The first set are the results of the City comparing Its maximum local
limits vs. the electroplating dally maximum limits. The second set
of limits which are to be met by January 15, 1986, are a result of
the City comparing Its local limits against the metal finishing
standards. Tables listing the appropriate data and limits are
provided below.
4. The facility's flow 1s quite large and variable.
5. The facility has provided flow Information so that the adjusted
federal limits can be calculated using the combined waste stream
formula. As part of Its on-going monitoring of Its wastewater, it
will have to continue to measure those flows utilized 1n the
caculatlon.
6. The facility has a pretreatment facility and will be able to meet
both the Interim and final applicable standards listed 1n Part I of
the permit.
7. The facility will develop a solvent management plan, since the
results of sampling for TTO are below .01 mg/1.
8. Potential exists for spills.
-------
First set of limits-Comparing local max limits vs. electroplating max dally
standards
Same applicable limits as those 1n Attachment 7.5. The reader should
review the example provided.
Second set of limits - Comparing local max limits vs. metal finishing max
dally standards.
Regulated Flows (Fj) » .06 mgd
Dilution Flows (Ftf) » .04 mgd
Total Flow (Ft) = .1 mgd
(Dilution flow consist only of the
sanitary,cafeteria wastes and non-
. contact cooling water flow)
Note; The spray painting operation and electroplating processes are both
regulated under the metal finishing regulation. Hence, the total flow of
regulated wastewater Is .06mgd (electroplat1ng:.05mgd, painting:.Olmgd).
COMBINED WASTESTREAM FORMULA
c
•L
I
C-j » Federal categorical pretreatment standards
Ct a Adjusted federal pretreatment standards.
Calculating for one of the metal finishing maximum standards (cadmium)
the formula would be:
X. -Ob wgi -I ivijd - -04
^
Note; Same calculation performed for all listed pollutants 1n the metal
TTnTshlng standards(40 CFR 433)
-------
ADJUSTED METAL FINISHING STANDARDS
POLLUTANT
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
Ni
SI
Zn
Cn
TTO( interim)
TTO( final)
PROMULGATED
FEDERAL
STANDARD
(Ci)
MONTHLY AVE.
0.26
1.71
2.07
0.43
2.38
0.24
1.48
0.65
ADJUSTED
FEDERAL
STANDARD
(Ct)
MONTHLY AVE.
1.38
1.03
1.24
0.26
1.43
0.6
0.89
0.39
PROMULGATED
FEDERAL
STANDARD
(Cf)
DAILY MAX.
0.69
2.77
3.38
0.69
3.98
0.43
2.61
1.20
4.57
2.13
ADJUSTED
FEDERAL
STANDARD
ct)
DAILY MAX
0.41
1.7
2.03
0.41
2.4
0.26
1.57
0.72
SELECTION OF APPLICABLE STANDARD
(LOCAL MAX. vs METAL FINISHING MAX. STANDARDS)
(A)
ADJUSTED METAL
FINISHING MAX
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
Ni
Si
Zn
Cn
TTO( interim)
TTO( final)
0.41
1.66
2.03
0.41
2.39
0.26
1.57
0.72
2.74
1.28
(B)
LOCAL MAX
0.5
5.0
2.0
0.1
3.0
4.0
3.0
(C)
APPLICABLE STANDARD
(most stringent
between columns A and
Bl
0.41(Federal)
1.65 (Federal)
2.0 (Local)
0.1 (Local)
2.39(Federal)
0.26 (Federal)
1.57 (Federal)
0.72 (Federal)
2.74 (Federal)
1.23 (Federal)
Note
Local maximum limits can be found in Chapter 4 pp. 4-8 column c.
Since the POTW only has maximum limits for metals and cyanide, the
maximum monthly average limits in the permit will be the adjusted
federal average limits font the previous table.
-------
Page 1 of 8
Permit No.: M-0005
City of Mil ton
Department of Public Works
Wastewater Discharge Permit
Company Name: Milton Master Lock Co.
Division Name (If Applicable)
Mailing Address 15 Vine St
Street or P.O. Box
• ' MUton WA 12560
City, State and Zip Code
Facility Address (same as above)
Street Address
CTty, state and Zip Code
The above Industrial User 1s authorized to discharge Industrial
wastewater to the City of Milton's sewer system In compliance with the
City's Ordinance Number 1089 , any applicable provisions of Federal or State
law or regulation, and in accordance with discharge po1nt(s), effluent
limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth herein.
This permit Is granted 1n accordance with the application filed on
August 1 ,1982 1n the office of the Public Works Director, and 1n conformity
with plans, specifications, and other data submitted to the City in support
of the above application.
Effective Date: October 1, 1982
Expiration Date: October 1, 1987
Director, Public Works
-------
Page 2 of 8
Permit No.: M-0005
PART I - Wastewater Discharge Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
A. Interim requirements:
The Industrial user shall comply with the effluent limitations
specified below by June 30, 1984.
MAXIMUM
4 DAY(3) SAMPLE(4) SAMPLE
PARAMETER AVERAGE DAILY MAX FREQUENCY TYPE
mg/uIDs/day) mg/n IDs/day)
Flow(mgd) continuous recording
Cd (1) 0.42 0.5 2/month 24-hr
composite
Cr 2.4 4.2
Cu 1.62 2.0
Pb 0.24 0.1
N1 1.56 2.46
Zn 1.56 2.52
Cn 0.6 1.14
TTO(2)
Total Metals 4.08 6.26
Notes
(1) All metals and cyanide parameters to be reported as total.
(2) The permittee shall develop a solvent management plan.
Requirements are specified In Part II.
(3) The promulgated 4-day average limitations specified In 40 CFR 413
(electroplating categorical standards) were adjusted using the Combined
Wastestream Formula.
(4) The sampling frequency may be modified depending on the analytical
results submitted by the permittee.
-------
Page 3 of 8
Permit No: M-0005
B. Final requirements;
The Industrial user shall comply with the effluent limitations
specified below by February 15, 1986.
PARAMETERS
Flow(mgd)
Cd(l)
Cr
Cu
Pb
N1
S1
Zn
CN
TTO(2)
MAXIMUM
MONTHLYO)
AVERAGE
mg/Hlbs/day)
0.14
1.
1.
0,
1.
0,
0,
,03
,24
,26
,43
,06
,89
0.39
DAILY MAX
mg/1libs/day)
0.41
2.
0.
1.
66
0
0.1
39
26
57
0.72
SAMPLE(4)
FREQUENCY
continuous
2/month
SAMPLE
TYPE
recordlng
24 hr com-
posites
n
n
u
n
u
Notes
(1) thru (4): see above under Interim requirements.
-------
Page 4 of 8
Permit No.: M-0005
PART II - SPECIAL CONDITIONS/COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
1. If the results of sampling reported 1n the permit application for Total
Toxic Organic (TTO) are below .01 mg/1 (10 ppb), the Industrial User can
develop a solvent management plan. If the User elects to develop a plan, it
will be developed within 90 days from the effective date of this permit.
The plan will be submitted to the City for review and approval. Once
approved, the Industrial User must comply with the plan and any reporting
requirements specified by the city.
2. The Industrial User shall develop, within 6 months of the effective date
of this permit, an accidental spill prevention plan to eliminate or minimize
the accidental or slug discharge of pollutants Into the sewer system, which
could have an effect on the City's treatment plant, sludge, or cause the
3. Discharge limitations in Part I are adjusted categorical standards
derived from the Combined Wastestream Formula (Section 403.6(e) of the
General Pretreatment Regulations). The Industrial User shall monitor on a
monthly basis the Individual flows that were utilized in the Combined
Wastestream Formula.
-------
Page 5 of 8
Permit No.: M-0005
PART III - REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. The Industrial User shall notify the City 1 [mediately upon any
accidental or slug discharge to the sanitary sewer as outlined 1n the
Accidental Spill section of the City's Ordinance Number 1089. Formal
written notification discussing circumstances and remedies shall be
submitted to the city within 5 days of the occurence.
2. The Industrial User shall notify the City prior to the Introduction
of new wastewater or pollutants or any substantial change 1n the volume
or characteristics of the wastewater being Introduced Into the POTW
from the User's Industrial processes. Formal written notification
shall follow within 30 days of such Introduction.
3. Any upset experienced by the Industrial User of Its treatment that
places 1t In a temporary state of non-compliance with wastewater
discharge limitations contained In this permit or other limitations
specified 1n the City's Ordinance shall be reported to the City within
24 hours of first awareness of the commencement of the upset. A
detailed report shall be filed within 5 days.
4. The Industrial User Is required to submit to the City quarterly
reports on the results of Its sampling of the pollutants specified in
Part I of this permit. This report shall also contain monthly flows as
required In Part 11.5.
5. Within 90 days following the final compliance date specified 1n
Section I of this permit, the Industrial User shall submit a final
compliance report. The Industrial User will be required to sample Us
wastewater for the pollutants specified 1n Section I, and report
compliance. Any reasons for not complying, and any steps being taken by
the User to comply shall be part of the report.
8. All reports shall be submitted to the following address:
Mr. John Ashton, Director
Public Works Dept.
City of Milton
P.O. Box 001
Milton WA 12560
-------
Page 6 of 8
Permit No.: H-0005
PART IV - STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. The Industrial User shall comply with all the general prohibitive
discharge standards 1n Sect1on_4_of the City Ordinance.
2. RIGHT OF ENTRY
The Industrial User shall, after reasonable notification by the
City, allow the City or Its representatives, exhibiting proper credentials
and Identification, to enter upon the premises of the User, at all
reasonable hours, for the purposes of Inspection, sampling, or records
Inspection. Reasonable hours In the context of Inspection and sampling
Includes any time the Industrial User 1s operating any process which results
in a process wastewater discharge to the City's sewerage system.
3. RECORDS RETENTION
The industrial user shall retain and preserve for no less than
three (3) years, any records, books, documents, memoranda, reports,
correspondence and any and all summaries thereof, relating to monitoring,
sampling and chemical analyses made by or in behalf of the user in
connection with Its disharge.
b. All records that pertain to matters that are the subject of
special orders or any other enforcement or litigation activities brought by
the City shall be retained and preserved by the Industrial User until all
enforcement activities have concluded and all periods of limitation with
respect to any and all appeals have expired.
4. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Except for data determined to be confidential under Section 10 of
the City's Ordinance, all reports required by this permit shall be available
for public Inspection at the office of the Public Works Director .
5. RECORDING OF RESULTS
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements
of this permit, the user shall record the following information:
a) The exact place, date, and time of sampling;
b) The dates the analyses were performed;
c) The person(s) who performed the analyses;
d) The analytical techniques or methods used; and
e) The results of all required analyses.
-------
Page 7 of 8
Permit No.: M-0005
6. DILUTION
No Industrial User shall Increase the use of potable or process
water or, In any way, attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or complete
substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with the limitations
contained 1n this permit.
7. PROPER DISPOSAL OF PRETREATMENT SLUDGES AND SPENT CHEMICALS
The disposal of sludges and spent chemicals generated shall be
done In accordance with Section 405 of the Clean Water Act and Subtitles C
and D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
8. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS
All reports required by this permit shall be signed by a principal
executive officer of the User, or his deslgnee.
9. REVOCATION OF PERMIT
The permit Issued to the Industrial User by the City may be
revoked when, after Inspection, monitoring or analysis 1t 1s determined that
the discharge of wastewater to the sanitary sewer is 1n violation of
Federal, State, or local laws, ordinances, or regulations. Additionally,
falsification or Intentional misrepresentation of data or statements
pertaining to the permit application or any other required reporting form,
shall be cause for permit revocation.
10. LIMITATION ON PERMIT TRANSFER
Wastewater discharge permits are Issued to a specific user for a
specific operation and are not assignable to another user or transferrable
to any other location without the prior written approval of the City. Sale
of a User shall obligate the purchaser to seek prior written approval of the
City for continued discharge to the sewerage system.
11. FALSIFYING INFORMATION OR TAMPERING WITH MONITORING EQUIPMENT
Knowingly making any false statement on any report or other
document required by this permit or knowingly rendering any monitoring
device or method Inaccurate, may result in punishment under the criminal
laws of the City, as well as being subjected to civil penalties and relief.
12. MODIFICATION OR REVISION OF THE PERMIT
a) The terms and conditions of this permit may be subject to
modification by the City at any time as limitations or requirements as
Identified the City's Ordinance, are modified or other just cause exists.
b) This permit may also be modified to Incorporate special
conditions resulting from the issuance of a special order.
-------
Page 8 of 8
Permit No.: M-0005
c) The terms and conditions may be modified as a result of EPA
promulgating a new federal pretreatment standard.
d) Any permit modifications which result 1n new conditions In the
permit shall Include a reasonable time schedule for compliance of necessary.
13. DUTY TO REAPPLY
The City shall notify a User one hundred and eighty (180) days
prior to the expiration of the User's Permit. Within ninety (90) days of
the notification, the User shall reapply for relssuance of the permit on a
form provided by the City.
14. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this permit are severable, and 1f any provision
of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any
circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other
circumstances, and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected
thereby.
15. PROPERTY RIGHTS
The Issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in
either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it
authorize any Invasion of personal rights, nor any Infringement of Federal,
State or Local regulations.
-------
ATTACHMENT 7.7
UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
PERMITS FOR NONMONITORING AND MONITORING INDUSTRIAL USERS
-------
unified
agency
150 North First Av«nu«
Hillsboro, Oregon 97123
SO3 048-8621
Non-Monitoring
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
1. Applicant Business Name
2. Address of premises discharging wastewater
Street _
City
Zip
3. Assessor's Map and Tax Lot Number
4. Mailing Address (1f different from above)
'Zip
5. Person to be contacted about this permit
Name • ', ', Title
6. Person to be contacted about billing Information
Name Title
Permit No.
SIC Nos.
Billing Responsibility:
City
or U.S.A. I—I
Treatment Plant
Phone
Phone
7. Method used to compute Industrial sewer bill
A. | | Building fixture units C. | | Wastewater strength
B. [ [ Wastewater consumption or discharge D. | | Plus commercial fixture count for
— — domestic sewerage use
8. Other requirements that must be met for Industrial Permit Compliance
OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE
Print Name
Title
Signature
Date
AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: .
EXPIRATION DATE:
FEE PAID .
RENEWABLE
YES
NO
Industrial Waste Program Coordinator
Dated
83-442
-------
unified
15O North Flr»t Avenue-
Hllleboro, Oregon 97123
803 648-8621
Part G-Permit
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
Gl. Applicant Buslntss
G2. Address of premises discharging vastewatar
Street _____^_^_^__^^_
City
Zip
G3. Assessor's Nap and Tax Lot Number
G4. Nailing Address (If different than above)
G5. Person to be contacted about this pernrlt
Nam
Z1P
Permit No.
SIC Nos.
Billing Responsibility:
City
or U.S.A.
Treatment Plant
Title
66. Person to be contacted about billing Information
Wane ________^_________ Title
Phone
Phone
G7. Method used to compute Industrial sewer bill
A.
Building fixture units
C.
Wastewater strength
B. n Uastewater consumption or discharge 0. |""l Plus connerclal fixture count for
domestic seweragt use
G8. Other requirements that must be nt for Industrial Permit Compliance
OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE
Print Na
Signature
Title
Date
-------
unified
sewerage
agency
150 North First Avenue
HHUboro, Oregon 97123
503 648-8621
Part G- Permit Conditions
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
Business Address ,
Permit No.
SECTION 1. MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE CONDITIONS
61. DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS (explanation on reverse side)
ELEMENT OR
CONSTITUENT
UNIT
DAILY
MAXIMUM
MONTHLY
AVERAGE
ELEMENT OR
CONSTITUENT
1
UNIT
DAILY
MAXIMUM
MONTHLY
AVERAGE
G2. TIME SCHEDULE — Time schedules for compliance with the Ordinance limitations and prohibitions,
construction of pretreatnent facilities, sampling and monitoring facilities, and other orders
by the Agency.
ITEM NO.
T
MONTH
ME. 5
CHEDUL
5AY
:
YEAR
EVENT
G3. MONITORING PROGRAM
Estimated number of samples per year
A. I I
Estimated number of tests per year
B. I ~1
SECTION 2. PERMITS
AUTHORIZATION: The above-named applicant Is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater to the public
sewer subject to said Applicant's compliance with Agency's Ordinance No. 9, appropriate RaO
Nos. and Part G-SectIon 1 of this permit and the following terms and conditions:
1.
Payment of the following fees and charges:
a. Permit fee
b. Connection charge
c. Side sewer tap fee
d. Facilities development fee
e. Plan review fee
f. Additional capacity fee
TOTAL
2.
3.
Compliance with the permit conditions as specified In Part G-Section 1. Specifically, you are
required to furnish monthly monitoring, test data, to the Agency by the 10th of each month for
the purpose of determining the monthly sewage user service charge, (sample on reverse side)
The applicant shall report any changes (permanent or temporary) to the premises or operations
that significantly change the quality or volume of the vastewater discharge or deviate from the
terms and conditions under which this permit Is granted.
4. EFFECTIVE DATE:
5. EXPIRATION DATE:
Industrial Waste Program Coordinator
Dated
-------
MIM. 10*
OF •"CtP
AT 9* 0.01
(NO ICNOS)
MAKE SURFACE OF GROUT
FILLET SMOOTH A FORM
GROOVED INVERT TO
DIRECTION OF FLOW.
MANHOLE
FRAME •
COVER
MIN. •
OF 6" CSP
AT S » O.OS
(NO BENDS)
STANDARD MANHOLE
FRAME * COVER
SET FRAME
IN MOTAR
FINISH GRADE
NOTES:
I. MONITORING MANHOLE AND FLOW
MEASUREMENT DEVICES MUST BE
APPROVED BY AGENCY STAFF.
2. MONITORING MANHOLE FRAME
NOT TO EXCEED SIX INCHES {•")
ABOVE FINISH GRAOC.
3. AGENCY PREFERS THAT A VAULT
BE USED IF THE DISTANCE FROM
FINISHED GRADE TO PIPE INVERT
IS LCSB THAN FOUR F|ET (4').
4. IF SAMPLING DEVICE IS SET
OUTSIDE OF A MANHOLE, MAN-
HOLE COVER MAY HAVE TO BE
ADAPTED TO ACCOMMODATE A '/t"
DtA. HOSE WITH COVER SECURED.
5. FLOW MEASUREMENT DEVICES
(RECORDER-TOTALIZER) MUST
BE ACCESSABLE TO AGENCY
MONITOftlN* PERSONEL.
RISER RINGS-
VARIABLE
(MAX. 10")
FLATTOP MANHOLE (AS
SHOWN) SHOULD BE
USED ONLY IF MANHOLE
DEPTH IS LESS THAN B FT.
STANDARD 48""01 A.
MANHOLE RISERS
CONCRETE BASE-
>'
t*
t:
•f
:>
ft
*)
|
*
*;
S*HK! \*-':-'\
^ ^^j^
-m «-"
__
MANHOLE
/STEP
m*a^^
!"/Ft.^ *-I"/FA
;fc
'.•i
v;
•>'
••**
.v
mm
T.o-
^\
PREFORMED
PLASTIC
GASKET
VARIAG
MINIMU
^1
Lf
M
IF MONITORING MANHOLE IS NOT
LOCATED IN A SECURED AREA THE
MANHOLE MUST ACCOMMODATE
A SAMPLER INSIDE. (22" DIA. x
27 " HKJH)
VARIABLE: MAXIMUM OF IS FT. DEEP,
COMPACTED
GRAVEL
-0")
&MMM&^'
• •' MIN. -|
TO MAINTAIN A FULLY IMMERSED
-SAMPLE STRAINER, ALTERATIONS
TO THE MANHOLE INVERT MAY
HAVE TO BE MADE.
STANDARD INDUSTRIAL
MONITORING MANHOLE
-------
CITY OF BURLEY
INDUSTRIAL WASTE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER ACCEPTANCE FORM (IWA)
GENERAL INFORMATION
INDUSTRIAL USER
1. COMPANY NAME:
2. DIVISION NAME (If aopliable):
3. MAI LING AOOR ESS:
STREET OR P.O. BOX
CITY. STATE. & ZIP CODE
FACILITY AOORESS:
STREET AOORESS
CITY. STATE. & ZIP CODE
SIGNING OFFICIAL:
NAME
TITLE
TELEPHONE NUMBER
The abovt Industrial User a authorized to discharge industrial wastewattr to the City of Burley sewer system in
compliance with the Gty of Buriey's Ordinance Numhar In accordance with discharge point(s). effluent
limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth herein. This acceptance form may be modified at
the discretion of the Gty so as to bring it into compliance with Federal and local regulations. The Industrial User shall
comply with the effluent concentrations specified below by
EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS & LOADINGS
CONCEMTRATtO* MOA. EFFLUENT LOAOINCS LB/DAY
PARAMETER DAILY AVER AC! DAILY MAXIMUM DAILY AVERAGE DAILY MAXIMUM
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
PARAMETER UNIT OP MEASUREMENT SAMPLING FREQUENCY TYPE OF SAMPLING
-------
POINT(S) OF DISCHARGE
LOCATION SI26 MONITORING PROVISIONS
AUTHORIZED PRODUCTS MANUFACTURED
OR SERVICES PROVIDED
—^—— AMOUNT ANO/OR
PRODUCT PRODUCED/ AVERAGE RATE
SERVICE PROVIDED PROCESS 4-OtOIT SIC CODE OP PRODUCTION
In accordance with Section _____^__^_ of Ordinance - the City of Bur ley must be notified
at least 30 days prior to changing any of the discharge characteristics as allowed in this IWA Form.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS & COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
FEES SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT !_
PERMIT PROCESSING —
INSPECTION *-
OTHER
TOTAL
APPROVED
UTILITIES DIRECTOR
-------
INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER ACCEPTANCE FORM AND STANDARD
CONDITIONS
These Standard Conditions shall become a part of the Indus-
trial Wastewater Acceptance (IWA) Form issued to the indus-
trial user by the City. In all instances, the City's Sewer
Use Ordinance, No. , shall take precedence.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF THE
INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER ACCEPTANCE (IWA) FORM
a. Where required, the industrial user shall provide moni-
toring facilities, installed and maintained at all times
at the user's expense, to allow inspection, sampling,
and flow measurement at locations specified in the IWA.
There shall be ample room in and near such monitoring
facilities to allow accurate sampling and monitoring
equipment to be installed and to prepare samples for •
analysis. Such facilities shall be accessible to autho-
rized representatives of the City at all times upon
presentation of suitable identification from 8:00 a.m.
to 5:00 p.m., 5 days per week, provided that authorized
representatives of the City personnel shall under excep-
tional circumstances have access upon presentation of
suitable identification from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,
7 days per week. Where required by Federal or state
regulations, such monitoring facilities shall be pro-
vided at the end of a process or unit production from
which regulated toxic pollutants are discharged.
b. The user shall retain wastewater monitoring records for
a period of 3 years. During this period said records
shall be available for inspection and duplication by
authorized representatives of the City.
-------
c. The industrial user shall notify the City prior to the
introduction of new wastewater or pollutants or any
substantial change in the volume or characteristics of
the wastewater being introduced into the Publicly Owned
Treatment Works from the user's processes. Formal writ-
ten notification shall follow within 30 days of such
• .
introduction.
d. The user shall notify the City immediately upon any
accidental or slug discharge to the sanitary sewer as
outlined in the industrial_spill reporting requirements
of the District.
e. No IWA shall be issued to any user whose discharge of
pollutants to the sanitary sewer, whether shown upon
the application or determined after inspection, monitor-
ing, or analysis by the City, is not in conformance
with Federal, state, or City laws,.ordinances, or regu-
lations. The City may grant variances of City standards
and requirements in accordance with this ordinance.
f. The IWA issued to the industrial user by the City may
be revoked when, after inspection, monitoring, or anal-
ysis, it is determined that the discharge of wastewater
to the sanitary sewer is in violation of Federal, state,
or- City laws, ordinances, or regulations.
g. The IWA shall be revoked due to falsification or inten-
tional misrepresentation of data or statements pertain-
ing to the data disclosure form or any other required
reporting form.
h. The City shall notify a user one hundred and eighty
(180) days prior to the expiration of the user's IWA.
-------
Within ninety (90) days of the notification, the user
shall apply (for reissuance of the IWA) on a form pro-
vided by the City.
The terms and conditions of the IWA are subject to modi-
fication by the City during the term of the permit as
limitations or requirements are modified or for other
just cause. The user shall be informed of any proposed
changes in this permit at least 30 days prior to the
effective date of change. Changes or additions to the
permit shall include a time schedule for compliance.
i. The IWA is issued to the named user for the specific
operation or operations permitted and is not transfer-
able without the approval of the City.
j. Not later than fourteen (14) days following each date
in the compliance schedule and the final date for com-
pliance given by the user in the data disclosure form
and included as part of the IWA, the user shall submit
a progress report to the City. This report must indi-
cate whether or not the increment of progress was met
on the date on which the user expects to comply with
the increment of progress, the reason for delay, and
what steps are being taken by the user to return to the
schedule established. In no event shall more than six
(6) months elapse between such progress reports to the
City.
k. The compliance dates for the increments of progress
given the compliance schedule will be revised only at
the discretion of the City. Failure to meet the compli-
ance date without just reason for delay is a violation
of the conditions of the IWA.
BOT.309/U
-------
ATTACHMENT 7.8
INDUSTRIAL WASTE ACCEPTANCE FORM (IWA)
o City of Burley
o City of Caldwell
-------
CITY OF CALDWELL
INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER ACCEPTANCE FORM
SECTION I'- GENERAL INFORMATION
A. INDUSTRIAL USER
1. Company Name:
2. Division Name (if applicable):
3. Mailing Address
Street or P.O. Box
4. Facility Address:
Street Address
5. Name, Title, & Telephone Number
of Signing Official:
Name"
Title
Telephone Number
•
The above industrial user is authorized to discharge industrial wastewater to the
City of Ca Id we 11 sewer system in compliance with the City of Cal dwell
Ordinance Number 1645, in accordance with discharge point(s), effluent
limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth herein. This
acceptance form may be modified at the discretion of the City so as to bring it
into compliance with federal and local regulations. The industrial users shall
comply with the effluent concentrations specified below by .
EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS & LOADINGS
Concentration mg/1 Effluent T-"i"<"'g« Ib/day
Daily Daily Daily Daily
Parameter Average Maximum __ _Average
Flow Peak Daily gallons per minute
Monthly Average gallons per minute
-------
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Unit of Sampling Type of
Parameter Measurement
POINT(S) OF DISCHARGE
Monitoring
Location Size Provisions
AUTHORIZED PRODUCTS MANUFACTURED
OR SERVICES PROVIDED
Amount and/or
Product Produced/ 4-Digit Average Rate
Service Provided Process SIC Code of Production
-------
SPECIAL CONDITIONS i
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
FEES Capitalization $
Acceptance Form Processing $_
Hook-up $_
Other $
Total $_
APPROVED
-------
Page of
IWA No.:
PART ii -"SPECIAL CONDITIONS/COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES (Examples)
1. If the results of sampling reported 1n the data disclosure form for
Total Toxic Organic (TTO) are below .01 rag/1 (10 ppb), the Industrial User
can develop a solvent management plan. If the User elects to develop a plan,
It trill be developed within 90 days from the effective date of this IWA.
The plan will be submitted to the City for review and approval. Once
approved, the Industrial User must comply with the plan and any reporting
requirements specified by the city.
2. The Industrial User shall develop, within 6 months of the effective date
of this IUA, an accidental spill prevention plan to eliminate or minimize
the accidental or slug discharge of pollutants Into the sewer system, which
could have an effect on the City's treatment plant, sludge, or cause the
City to violate Us NPDES permit.
3. The Industrial User shall construct a sampling manhole within 9 months
of the effective date of this IWA.
4. In order to meet the wastewater discharge limitations specified 1n Part
I, the Industrial User will be required to make In-plant process
modifications and Install a treatment facility. The following construction
schedule shall be adhered to and reports on progress shall be submitted to
the City, as outlined 1n Part III:
1. Investigate In-plant process modifications 3 months
and end of pipe treatment options
2. Complete preliminary A & E 6 months
3. Go out to bid 9 months
4. Secure equipment and begin construction 12 months
5. Complete Installation 16 months
6. Pretreatment system start-up 17 months
7. Achieve final compliance 18 months
t
5. Discharge limitations 1n Part I are adjusted categorical standards
derived from the Combined Wastestream Formula (Section 403.6(e) of the
General Pretreatment Regulations). The Industrial User shall monitor on a
monthly basis the Individual flows that were utilized 1n the Combined
Wastestream Formula.
-------
Page of
IWA No.:
PART III - REPORTING REQUIRPCNTS
1. The Industrial User shall notify the City Immediately upon any
accidental or slug discharge to the sanitary sewer as outlined In the
Accidental Spill section of the City's Ordinance Number isu 5
Formal written notification discussing circumstances and remedies shall
be submitted to the city within 5 days of the occurence.
2. The Industrial User shall notify the City prior to the Introduction
of new wastewater or pollutants or any substantial change In the volume
or characteristics of the wastewater being Introduced Into the POTW
from the User's Industrial processes. Formal written notification
shall follow within 30 days of such Introduction.
3. Any upset experienced by the Industrial User of Its treatment that
places 1t In a temporary state of non-compliance with wastewater
discharge limitations contained 1n this IWA or other limitations
specified 1n the City's Ordinance shall be reported to the City within
24 hours of first awareness of the commencement of the upset. A
detailed report shall be filed within 5 days.
4. The Industrial User is required to submit to the City
reports on the results of Its sampling of the pollutants specified in
Part I of this IWA. This report shall also contain monthly flows as
required 1n Part 11.5.
5. Not later than fourteen (14) days following each date in the
compliance schedule, the Industrial User shall submit a progress report
to the C1 ty. This report must indicate whether or not the increment of
progress was met on the date, the reason(s) for any delay, and what
steps are being taken by the User to return to the schedule
established. In no event shall more than (9) months elapse between
such progress reports to the City.
6. Within 90 days following the final compliance date specified in
Section I of this IWA, the Industrial User shall submit a final
compliance report. The Industrial User will be required to sample its
wastewater for the pollutants specified In Section I, and report
compliance. Any reasons for not complying and any steps being taken by
the User to comply shall be part of the report.
7. The Industrial User shall report completion of its
sampling/monitoring manhole.
8. All reports shall be submitted to the following address:
-------
Page of
IWA No.:
PART iv -"STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. The Industrial User shall comply with all the general prohibitive
discharge standards 1n Section 3.01 of the City Ordinance.
2. RIGHT OF ENTRY
The Industrial User shall, after reasonable notification by the
City, allow the City or Its representatives, exhibiting proper credentials
and Identification, to enter upon the premises of the User, at all
reasonable hours, for the purposes of inspection, sampling, or records
Inspection. Reasonable hours In the context of Inspection and sampling
Includes any time the Industrial User 1s operating any process which results
1n a process wastewater discharge to the City's sewerage system.
3. RECORDS RETENTION
The Industrial user shall retain and preserve for no less than
three (3) years, any records, books, documents, memoranda, reports,
correspondence and any and all summaries thereof, relating to monitoring,
sampling and chemical analyses made by or In behalf of the user in
connection with Its dlsharge.
b. All records that pertain to matters that are the subject of
special orders or any other enforcement or litigation activities brought by
the City shall be retained and preserved by the Industrial User until all
enforcement activities have concluded and all periods of limitation with
respect to any and all appeals have expired.
4. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Except for data determined to be confidential under Section 5.05
of the City's Ordinance, all reports required by this IWA shall be aval 1 abl e
for public Inspection at the office of the citv
5. RECORDING OF RESULTS
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements
of this IWA. the user shall record the following Information:
a) The exact place, date, and time of sampling;
b) The dates the analyses were performed;
-c) The person(s) who performed the analyses;
d) The analytical techniques or methods used; and
e) The results of all required analyses.
-------
Page of
IWA No.:
6. DILUTION
No Industrial User shall Increase the use of potable or process
water or. In any way, attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or complete
substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with the limitations
contained In this IWA.
7. PROPER DISPOSAL OF PRETREATHENT SLUDGES AND SPENT CHEMICALS
The disposal of sludges and spent chemicals generated shall be
done In accordance with Section 405 of the Clean Water Act and Subtitles C
and 0 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
8. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS
All reports required by this IWA shall be signed by a principal
executive officer of the User, or his deslgnee.
9. REVOCATION OF IWA
The IWA Issued to the Industrial User by the City may be revoked
when, after Inspection, monitoring or analysis 1t 1s determined that the
discharge of wastewater to the sanitary sewer Is In violation of Federal,
State, or local laws, ordinances, or regulations. Additionally,
falsification or Intentional misrepresentation of data or statements
pertaining to the data disclosure form or any other required reporting form,
shall be cause for IWA revocation.
10. LIMITATION ON IWA TRANSFER
IWAs are Issued to a specific user for a specific operation and
are not assignable to another user or transferable to any other location
without the prior wn'tten approval of the City. Sale of a User shall
obligate the purchaser to seek prior written approval of the City for
continued discharge to the sewerage system.
11. FALSIFYING INFORMATION OR TAMPERING WITH MONITORING EQUIPMENT
Knowingly making any false statement on any report or other
document required by this IWA or knowingly rendering any monitoring device
or method Inaccurate, may result In punishment under the criminal laws of
the City, as well as being subjected to civil penalties and relief.
12. MODIFICATION OR REVISION OF THE IWA
a) The terms and conditions of this IWA may be subject to
modification by the City at any time as limitations or requirements as
Identified the City's Ordinance, are modified or other Just cause exists.
b) This IWA may also be modified to Incorporate special
conditions resulting from the Issuance of a special order.
-------
Page of
IWA No.:
..c) The terms and conditions may be modified as a result of EPA
promulgating a new federal pretreatment standard.
d) Any IWA modifications which result In new conditions In the
IWA shall Include a reasonable time schedule for compliance of necessary.
13. DUTY TO REAPPLY
If the IWA Is Issued for a specified fixed period of time, the
City shall notify a User one hundred and eighty (180) days prior to the
expiration of the User's IWA. Within ninety (90) days of the notification,
the User shall reap ply for relssuance of the permit on a form provided by
the C1ty.
14. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this IWA are severable. and 1f any provision of
this IWA, or the application of any provision of this IWA to any
circumstance, 1s held Invalid, the application of such provision to other
circumstances, and the remainder of this IWA shall not be affected thereby.
15. PROPERTY RIGHTS
The Issuance of this IWA does not convey any property rights in
either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it
authorize any Invasion of personal rights, nor any Infringement of Federal,
State or Local regulations.
-------
D/REG. X-1///6
CHAPTER 8
ACCIDENTAL SPILL PREVENTION PROGRAM
Major concerns for POTWs are accident spills, slug discharges, or unusual
discharges of wastewater by any industrial user. These events can have
serious consequences on municipal treatment plant operation, causing upsets or
interferences. There have been documented cases of sewer lines corroding from
acid dischargers; clogged sewer lines from large volumes of greasy wastes; and
sewer manhole covers blowing off from explosive material concentrating in the
sewer lines. In many cases, municipalities have had to bypass their treatment
plant because of the nature of the waste discharged (e.g., slug discharge of
cyanide wastes). If the event is severe, not only may the treatment plants
experience interference problems causing NPDES permit violation, but the
material may pass through the treatment plant affecting water quality.
The prime objective of the pretreatment program is the prevention of
these problems. Although a POTW utilizes a control mechanism to control
routine discharges, it is important that it also develop a system to prevent
the types of events discussed above from occurring. One method is the
development and implementation of an Accidental Spill Prevention Program.
This program should be directed, at a minimum, to the POTW's Significant
Industrial Discharges, and to other users with the potential for accidental
spills, slug discharges, or unusual discharges. POTWs in Alaska, Idaho and
Washington have been required to develop such programs within their first year
of pretreatment program implementation. The structure of the program will
depend on the size of the municipality and its industrial base.
A guidance document will be developed which will assist these communities
to develop reasonable accidental spill prevention programs. One reference
that is available that could be useful to POTWs is "Hazardous Material Spills
and Responses for Municipalities", EPA 600/2-80-108.
8-1
-------
E/REG. X-l/#12
CHAPTER 9
INDUSTRIAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
t
There are several reporting requirements for industrial users. This
chapter provides a brief discussion of each of the reporting requirements and
the accompanying attachments present examples of report forms.
1. Baseline Monitoring Report (BMR)
Once the EPA promulgates a categorical pretreatment standard, affected
industrial dischargers are required to submit specific information about its
facility within 180 days after the effective date of the promulgated standard.
See Chapter 6 for further discussion on BMRs.
2. Compliance Schedule Progress Reports
An industrial user who is not in compliance with applicable discharge
limitations will frequently have to make in-plant process changes and/or
install end-of-pipe treatment. To address this situation, Section 403.8(f)
(l)(iv) requires "...development of a compliance schedule..."
As part of the BMR submission [40 CFR 403.12(b)] or as part of the
permit application or data disclosure form, a noncomplying facility must
present to the POTW the shortest schedule of industrial user actions enabling
it to meet the applicable discharge limitations. For categorical SIDs, the
final or completion date in the schedule must not be later than the final
compliance date specified in the Federally promulgated standards. Where
reasonable, the POTW may require a final compliance date earlier than the
Federal standards. If a facility must develop a compliance schedule to meet
local limits, the industrial user should develop a schedule with the POTW
deciding on the final compliance date. The compliance schedule normally will
become part of the industrial user's permit.
The schedule must contain increments of progress in the form of dates
(not to exceed nine months per event) for commencement and completion of major
actions leading to construction and operation of a pretreatment system and/or
in-plant process modifications (examples of major actions are hiring an
9-1
-------
E/REG. X-1///12
engineer, completing preliminary A&E, finalizing plans, executing a contract
for major components, commencing construction, completion of construction, and
testing operation). Attachment 9.1 presents an example compliance schedule
for an industrial facility.
In addition, Section 403.12(c)(3) requires that the noncomplying facility
submit to the Control Authority (POTW, State, or EPA) a compliance schedule
progress report at least every nine months (or more frequently if requested by
the Control Authority) which includes:
• A statement on the facility's status with respect to the compliance
schedule
• A statement on when the industrial user expects to be back on schedule
if it is falling behind. The reason for the delay and steps being
taken by the industrial user to return to the established schedule
must also be reported.
Attachment 9.2 presents an example of a compliance progress report.
The POTW needs to review these reports as quickly as possible. Where an
industrial user is falling behind schedule, the POTW should maintain close
contact with the user. If the industrial user is not showing good faith in
meeting the schedule, the POTW may consider initiating appropriate enforcement
action to correct the problem(s).
3. Final Compliance Report
Section 403.12(d) of the General Pretreatment Regulations requires
industrial facilities subject to pretreatment standards to submit a final
compliance report to the POTW. Existing industrial users must file a final
compliance report within 90 days following the final compliance date specified
in a categorical regulation or within 90 days of the compliance date specified
by the POTW, whichever is earlier. New source industrial users must file a
compliance report upon commencement of a discharge.
The contents of the final report must include: results of sampling the
industrial wastestreams for regulated pollutants; average and maximum daily
flow for industrial process wastewaters being regulated; a statement of
9-2
-------
E/REG. X-1///12
compliance, and; where necessary, a statement as to whether additional O&M
changes and/or pretreatment equipment are needed to bring the industrial user
into compliance.
The POTW should notify each of its SIDs of the requirement for submittal
of the final compliance report. The POTW should carefully examine the report
as soon as possible. Any enforcement action contemplated by the POTW for
facilities still out of compliance should take into consideration the reasons
for continued noncompliance.
4. Periodic Compliance Reports
a. Self-monitoring Report
After the final compliance date, categorical industrial users are
required to report, at least semi-annually (June and December), self-moni-
toring results of their wastewater discharge(s). Attachment 9.3 contains
examples of industrial user self-monitoring reports. The results of this
self-monitoring must be reported to the Control Authority. The POTW is
responsible for developing industrial user self-monitoring sampling frequen-
cies for the individual facilities and the type of sample (grab, 24-hour
composite) to be taken. These sampling protocols are typically specified in
the industrial user's permit. The industrial user's self-monitoring sampling
frequency should depend on the following:
• Type of facility (toxic vs. conventional wastes discharger)
• Type and concentrations of pollutants in the discharge
• Type of discharge (continuous vs. batch)
• Type production (24-hour operation vs. 8-hour operation; seasonal vs.
daily production)
• Past performance of and compliance by an industrial user.
As a general rule, the POTW should require more frequent self-monitoring
sampling during the first year or more to obtain a data base. It is strongly
encouraged that POTWs require sampling and receive monitoring reports on at
least a quarterly basis and that submission of the reports be staggered so
9-3
-------
C/Disk Region 10/012
that they are not all received on one day or during one month. Depending on
the results of both the industrial user self-monitoring and POTW compliance
monitoring of the industrial user, it may be possible to reduce or vary the
sampling frequency at a later time. The POTW should remember that Federal
standards are expressed as monthly averages and daily maximums.
A POTW should consider developing a standard form for its industrial
users to record their self-monitoring data. This will aid the POTW in
reviewing, responding to, and filing the information.
i
All records must be maintained by the industry and the POTW for at least
three years.
A POTW may choose to monitor industrial facilities in lieu
of the industrial user doing the self-monitoring. In this
case self-monitoring reports may not be required.
b. Accidental Spill and Upset Reports
Most POTW ordinances require an industrial user to report to the POTW
within 24 hours of a spill or upset in the facility's pretreatment system.
This is done by telephone and is followed by a written report within five
working days. The written report should describe the details and actions to
be taken by the industrial user to correct the situation and prevent its
reoccurrence.
c. Miscellaneous Reports
• An industrial user developing a solvent management plan (an option
available to certain categorical industries in lieu of sampling for
total toxic organics) may be required to submit periodic information
on its solvent management operation. See Chapter 16 for further
discussion on a solvent management plan.
• Depending on informational needs of the POTW, an industrial facility
may need to provide specific data not required by Federal regulations.
This might include information on pollutants other than those regu-
lated by a categorical standard, information concerning disposal of
pretreatment system residuals or other waste not discharged into the
sewer system, or other data.
9-4
-------
C/Disk Region 10///12
5. Signatory Requirements
All reports submitted by an industrial user must be signed by an author-
ized representative. As stated in the 40 CFR A03.12(k) regulations, an
authorized representative of an industrial user is:
• "A principal executive officer of at least the level of vice presi-
dent, if the industrial user submitting the reports required by
paragraphs (b), (d) and (e) of this section is a corporation."
• "A general partner or proprietor if the industrial user submitting the
report required by paragraphs (b), (4) and (e) of this section is a
partnership or sole proprietorship, 'respectively."
• "A duly authorized representative of the individual designated in
paragraph (k)(l) or (2) of this section if such representative is
responsible for the overall operation of the facility from which the
indirect discharge originates."
9-5
-------
A/Region 10///37
ATTACHMENT 9.1
PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
-------
TYPICAL PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE
SCHEDULE WORK PLAN (GENERAL)
SCHEDULED SCHEDULED
INCREMENT OF PROGRESS (1) COMMENCEMENT DATE COMPLETION DATE (2)
1. Select Engineer
2. Engineering Investigation of Plant
Conditions (Industrial process Review
6 Wastewater Characterization)
3, Select Treatment Process 6 Design
Criteria (Treatability Studies)
4. Detailed Design of Treatment System
(Plans 6 Specifications)
5. Preparation of Operations Manual
6. Select Contractor For Construction
7. Commence Construction
a. Site Preparation (survey, excava-
tion, etc.)
b. Foundation Work 6 Underground
Utilities (slabs, sewer, etc.)
c. Structural Work (bldgs ., etc.)
d. Mechanical Work (equipment
installation, etc.)
e. Electrical Work (control panels,
etc.)
f. Site Finish Work (fences, clean-
up, etc.)
8. Pretreatment System Start Up
(1) -No Increment of Progress Shall Exceed Nine (9) Months
(2) Final Completion Date Shall Not Be Later Than Final Compliance Date
-------
A/Region 10///37
ATTACHMENT 9.2
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE PROGRESS REPORT
-------
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE PROGRESS REPORT"
COMPANY NAME: ADDRESS:
DATE SUBMITTED: AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE:
1. Increment of Progress description:
2. Scheduled completion date for above Increment of Progress:
3. Is Increment of Progress completed on schedule? yes D no Q
4. If not on schedule, indicate anticipated completion date:
5. State reason for delay, if applicable:
6. What action has been initiated to return project to original schedule?
* Report is to be submitted within 14 days after scheduled completion of each
Increment of Progress listed in the Compliance Schedule.
-------
A/Region 10///37
ATTACHMENT 9.3
INDUSTRIAL USER SELF-MONITORING REPORTS
• Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, Oregon
• Chattanooga, Tennessee
• Self-monitoring Report for an Electroplater «10,000 gpd)
-------
USA - Oregon
INDUSTRIAL USER SELF-MONITORING REPORT
industry
Location Code
Month/Year
Date
1
2
3
4
5
- 6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
TOTAL
AVERAGE
MAXIMUM
Meter
Reading
(x )
Flow
(gals)
50050
PH
Hours in Range
<6.5 6.5 - 9.0 >9.0
i
NOTE
Write down the minimum and
maximum pH for each day you
were outside the allowed pH
range.
* REQUIRED TO BE SAMPLED
BIANNUALLY (Dec. & June)
SAMPLE
DATE
PARAMETER
TOTAL
AVERAGE
MAXIMUM
-------
CITY OF CHATTANOOGA
INTERCEPTOR SEWER SYSTEM
INDUSTRIAL SELF MONITORING SURVEILLANCE REPORT
COMPANY NAME
DISCHARGE POINT
PERMIT #
SIOSKS)
SECTION I
SAMPLE DATE
SAMPLING PERIOD:
PARAMETERS SUBJECT TO COMPOSITE SAMPLING
COMPOSITE TYPE: FJDW PROPORTIONAL
TIME PROPORTIONAL
FROM
TO
SAMPLING PERIOD FLOW
(MGD)
COLLECTED BY:
Parameter
Aluminum Dissolved
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Boron
Cadmium
Chromium-total
Cobalt
CoDDer
Cyanide
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Phenols
Selenium
Silver
Titanium-dissolved
-line
Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen
'5il S Grease
:-SAS
Mg/1
Date Analyzed i
Analyzed 3y
i
>fethod
SV - 11579
-------
CITY OF CHATTANOOGA
INTERCEPTOR SEWER SYSTEM %
INDUSTRIAL SELF MONITORING SURVEILLANCE REPORT FORM
SECTION II - PAGE II
PARAMETERS SUBJECT TO INSTANTANEOUS OR GRAB EVALUATION
COLLECTED BY:
Oil and Grease
„.
i
2
3
4
-5
fi
7
8
9
Hg/1
Date/Tiine Collected
Date Analyzed
,
Analyzed By
Method
ANALYZED BY:
DATE
DM
1)
2)
3)
4)
!>)
5)
V)
§)
8)
10)
11)
12)
TIME
50:06
00:15
00:30
00:45
13)
14)
15)
15)
17)
18)
19)
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
TIME
00:00
00:15
00:30
00:45
ANALYZED BY:
DATE
T
1)
2)
3)
4)
S)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
ll)
12)
iThL I uu:uu
00:15 i
00:30
emperatupe
00:45
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
TIME i ?0:00
00:15
(
00:30
00:45
1
i 1
1
-------
CITY CF CHAT7AXQOGA
CER7I7ICATIC.V: I have supervisee the collection and preparation
r\ ~ ^ i "* —'-~ .o -! -^ —/-* v^p\^j* ^01 "'^ ""'""i.^: >^-tioo'^t a P. cl a £ ^oo ~*~ h a7" •
1) All sarr.ples ar.d r.easurer.^r.ts taker, are to the best of my
knowledge representative o:' the subject wastewater effluent.
2) All ~~.~*:lir.g, measurements, and analyses were conducted in
accordance with guidelines set forth by the Environmental
Protection Agency and/or c.ooroved by the Suoerintend.ent of
the 133.
S — /•<»• i -"• •-»— .
_IO.\.-A. ^."._. t
-------
cr:Y cr C.-TA:TAMCOGA
r-:T.E?.C;;pYOR CJWL'^ SYSTEM
INDUSTRIAL GELT y^.'lTOEI.'iO ENFORCEMENT REPORT FORM
COMPANY NAME
DISCHARGE POINT
PERMIT*
SIC'/(S)
SAMPLE DATE
SECTION I
PARAMETERS SUBJECT TO .COMPOSITE SAMPLING
COMPOSITE TYPE: FLOW PROPORTIONAL
TIME PROPORTIONAL
SAMPLING PERIOD: FROM
TO
COLLECTED BY:
SAMPLING PERIOD FLOW
(MCL-)
Parameter
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium-Total
Chromium-Hex .
Copper
Cyanide 1
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Mg/1 ! Date Analyzed ' Analyzed By
i i
.
Method
!
-------
CITY OF CHATTANOOGA
INTERCEPTOR SEWER SYSTEM
INDUSTRIAL SELF MONITORING ENFORCEMENT REPORT FORM
SECTION II ° PAGE II
PARAMETERS SUBJECT TO INSTANTANEOUS OR GRAB EVALUATION
COLLECTED BY:
Oil and Grease
1
2
3
4
S
6
~7
8
9
Mg/1
Bate/Tims Collected
Late Analyzed
Analyzed By
1
,
Method
ANALYZED BY:
DATE
I)
2)
1 ^
4)
TIfE~
"wiufT
5)1 1
6)1 1
~7T
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
00:15
00:30 i 00:45
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
TIME
00:00
00:15
00:30
00:15
ANALYZED BY:
DATE
1)
2)
3)
4)
b)
fa)
V)
3)
9)
lu)
11)
12)
TIME I 00:00
00:15
00:30
00:45
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
TIME
00:00
00:15
00:30
00:45
-------
. 6
CITY OF CHATTANOOGA
INTERCEPTOR SEWER SYSTEM
INDUSTRIAL SELF MONITORING ENFORCEMENT REPORT FORM
SECTION III - PAGE III
CERTIFICATION: I have supervised the collection and preparation
of all the information in this report and agre"e that:
1) All samples and measurements taken are to the best of my
knowledge representative of the subject wastewater effluent.
2) All sampling, measurements, and analyses were conducted in
accordance with guidelines set forth by the Environmental
Protection Agency and/or approved by the Superintendent of
the ISS.
SIGNATURE: TITLE
-------
PRETREATMENT SEMI-ANNUAL SELF-MONITORING REPORT
COMPANY NAME:
DATE SUBMITTED:
ADDRESS:
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE:
PROCESS "A" DESCRIPTION:
SAMPLE COLLECTION
DATA
Sample No:
Date: Time:
Location:
Person:
Method:
Sample No:
Date: |Time:
Location:
Person:
Method:
Sample No:
Date: [Time:
r »- '
Person:
Me t hod :
Sample No i
Hate: JTime:
Location :
Person :
Method:
Sample No:
Date: (Time:
,ocat ion :
Person:
Method:
Sample No:
Date: Time:
.ocat ion :
Person :
Method:
LABORATORY
DATA
Sample No:
Date:
Person:
Methods:
Sample No:
Date:
Person:
Methods :
Sample No:
late:
'erson :
lethods:
Sample No:
Da te .-
Person .-
'letliods:
Sample No:
)ate:
>erson :
letliods:
Sample No:
)ate:
•erson :
Methods :
ANALYTICAL DATA
PI .nw fppnl
Daily Max.
Month Avg.
Daily Max.
Month Avg .
Daily Max.
Month Avq.
Daily Max.
Month Avg.
Daily Max.
Month Avg.
Daily Max.
Month Avg.
Pollutant (mg/1)
CNa
Pb
Cd
PROCESS "B" DESCRIPTION:
SAMPLE COLLECTION
DATA
Sample No:
Date : (Time :
Location :
Person :
Method:
Sample No:
Date: JTime:
Location :
Person:
Method:
Sample No:
Date: (Time:
Location :
Person:
Method:
Sample No:
Date: [Time:
Location :
Person:
Method:
Sample No :
Date: [Time:
Location:
Person:
Method:
Sample No:
Date: ITime:
Location
Person
Method :
LABORATORY
DATA
Sample No:
Date:
Person:
Methods :
Sample No:
Date :
Person :
Methods:
Sample No:
Date:
Person :
Methods :
Sample No:
Date:
Person :
Methods:
Sample No:
Date:
Person :
Methods:
Sample No:
Date :
Person :
Methods :
ANALY-1CAL DATA
FLOW(GPD)
Daily Max.
Month Avg.
Daily Max.
Month Avg.
Daily Max.
Month Avg.
Daily Max.
Month Avg.
Daily Max.
Month Avg.
Daily Max.
Mont.li Avcj.
Pollutant (mqA)
CNa
*
t
Pb
,. ,.". , =3
Cd
EXAMPLE OF SELF-MONITORING REPORT FOR F1 rCTROPLATER «10,OOOGPD) WITH TWO REGULATE" PROCESSES
-------
H/REG. X-1///14
s
CHAPTER 10
ANNUAL POTW PRETREATMENT EVALUATION AND REPORT
INTRODUCTION
When a POTW's pretreatment program is approved, the General Pretreatment
Regulations [40 CFR 403.8(c)] require that the Approval Authority (EPA or
State) modify or reissue the POTW's NPDES permit with conditions of the
approved program. Attachment 10.1 provides an example of what the permit
conditions can address. The POTW should go through an annual evaluation of
its existing procedures, resources and program priorities to determine
compliance with its permit conditions, assess the effectiveness of its program
and to plan for the following year's activities and needs. If the POTW
conducts this self-evaluation, it will be better prepared to meet one of its
permit conditions — the annual report.
This chapter provides guidance for completing the POTW pretreatment
annual report. The annual report is an essential component of EPA's oversight
of the National Pretreatment Program and is consistent with the overall POTW
reporting requirements under the NPDES program. It will provide for the
Approval Authority the necessary information to determine how effectively the
POTW is operating its program.
Generally, the POTW's permit will contain a list of the items that should
be part of its annual report. To assist POTWs in fully understanding the
reporting requirements, a brief discussion of each is presented below. In
addition, example forms are provided to help the POTW organize the needed
information.
The following section of this chapter lists the requirements contained in
the example NPDES permit contained in Attachment 10.1 and each requirement
should be addressed when appropriate. If an item is not applicable, the POTW
only needs to indicate "N/A" under the item. Generally, the POTW should use
the forms provided to supply the required information. If additional pages
are needed, the POTW merely needs to supplement the annual report. In some
cases, a POTW may need to provide additional information not specifically
indicated in the NPDES permit or may need to perform additional requirements
10-1
-------
H/REG. X-1///14 »
that might warrant a separate report (such as results of biomonitoring or
toxic organic scan).
If the POTW maintains the same data in other formats it is unnecessary to
copy these data onto the forms, provided all the required information is
presented and is clear and understandable.
Where a POTW operates more than one treatment plant, some of the infor-
mation requested in an annual report should be provided separately for each of
the plants, such as sampling and plant operational data. Each report should
include the most current information available and should be submitted
annually.
Intervals between reports may be lengthened if, as a result of the review
of a few reports by the State/EPA, the data submitted by the POTW does not
change dramatically.
In summary, the annual report package, submitted by a POTW to satisfy its
NPDES pretreatment annual reporting requirements should contain, at a minimum,
the information identified in the items 1-10 below.
FORMAT FOR AN ANNUAL REPORT
All annual reports should begin with the completed cover sheet that
identifies the sewer authority, the period covered by the report, and the
name, address, and telephone number of the contact person. The cover sheet
should also be signed by an official of the sewer authority. Form 1 presents
an example of an annual report cover sheet.
The cover sheet should be followed by a short narrative summary of the
major subjects addressed in the report. Significant achievements resulting
from the program or major problems in operating the program should also be
highlighted. This narrative summary should be followed by the presentation of
information addressing each of the required items presented below.
10-2
-------
H/REG. X-1///14
1. Updating to the Industrial Waste Survey
Additions and deletions to the industrial waste survey should be pro-
vided. Information should be .presented to reflect the name and address of
industrial users, the industrial activity performed by the users, all of the
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes that apply to the users, and
the wastewater flow rate. If an industrial user is deleted, the reason for
the deletion should be provided under the column, "Comments."
Where an existing facility changes its manufacturing processes and/or its
wastewater constituents, the POTW also should list the facility and comment on
the change and what appropriate action was taken, such as: permit modifica-
tions resulting in changes to discharge standards, reporting requirements, or
changes in special conditions. Form 2 provides a format that can be utilized
to update the POTW's industrial user survey. If the POTW maintains a current
list of all industrial users, and providing this list would require less
effort than completing the table, submission of the existing list is accept-
able.
2. Results of POTW Sampling and Analysis
The Pretreatment Implementation section of the POTW's permit should
contain the specific requirements for sampling of the treatment plant's
influent, effluent, and sludge. Generally, toxic heavy metals, cyanides, and
conventional wastes (BOD,- and oil and grease) are required as a minimum
because of their potential impacts. In some cases, toxic organics and/or
biomonitoring may be required based on the local situation such as water
quality impacts, sludge disposal considerations, interference problems, and
type of industrial facilities connected to the POTW.
The POTW should follow the sampling frequency identified in the permit
and report results on each sampling event. Where a POTW's permit does not
contain a specific sampling protocol, the POTW should be guided by the
following:
• Influent, effluent and sludge values should be reported for toxic and
incompatible pollutants discharged in significant quantities or
concentrations from industrial sources.
10-3
-------
H/REG. X-l/014
• The data.should reflect the results of at least semi-annual sampling
over three consecutive days. Twenty-four hour composite samples are
preferred; where composite sampling is not feasible for a particular
pollutant, three grab samples over a twenty-four hour period are
acceptable. As much current information as is available should be
provided.
• Sampling and analytical information must be provided which should
include the following:
- Type of sample(s) taken (24-hour composite, grab)
- Date of sample(s)
- Analytical methodology (wet chemistry, GCMS, AA, etc.)
- Name of laboratory (if analysis is contracted to an outside
laboratory).
Finally, two other very important pieces of information must be supplied:
• Calculated removal rates for each pollutant sampled
• A discussion of whether local limits continue to be appropriate to
protect the POTW's treatment system, prevent pass-through or sludge
contamination.
All of this information will be useful in evaluating the overall effectiveness
of the pretreatment program.
Forms 3 and 3.a contain a table and appropriate space for a narrative
discussion to report results of influent, effluent, and sludge samplings or
the POTW can submit the data using its own format if previously compiled.
3. Pretreatment Program Modification
Significant changes (if any) in operating the pretreatment program that
have occurred in the past year should be described. Modifications to the
original program submission, or the previous annual report, should be
described in a narrative format. The description should also include the
reasons for any changes. In addition to providing a description of changes, a
description of the current staffing and budget for pretreatment activities
should be provided. Modifications to the program requiring inclusion in the
10-4
-------
H/REG. X-l/014
annual report may include changes in industrial discharge limits, the moni-
toring program, enforcement policy, or in the industrial community (such as
development of an industrial park or the closing of a major industrial plant).
The description of a program modification in the annual report does not
necessarily mean approval by the Approval Authority. A separate, written
request for approval of a modification should be prepared. Form 4 can be
utilized by the POTW to supply the appropriate information.
4. Summary of POTW Operations
Information regarding POTW upsets, interferences, and NPDES violations
caused by industrial wastes should be presented for the reporting year. Form
5 can be used to supply this information in this discussion. An explanation
or reason for each incident should be included and, if known, the identifica-
tion of the responsible industrial user, as well as the corrective action
taken by the POTW.
5. Summary of Industrial User Monitoring
The POTW should provide a listing of industrial users inspected and/or
sampled during the previous year and a summary of the results. Form 6 can be
used to report this data. The data should reflect the type of activity
performed by the POTW (i.e., sampling and/or inspection) and the actual
frequencies per year of each activity.
6. Planned Industrial User Monitoring Schedule
Form 7 could be used to report the number of planned inspections and
sampling visits of industrial users for the next year. The planned frequency
of each activity should also be presented. Where there are significant dis-
crepancies between the number of planned monitoring visits and the information
provided in the original pretreatment program submission, an explanation
should be provided. If there are large discrepancies, the Approval Authority
may request a modification to the program including a submission describing
the modification.
10-5
-------
H/REG. X-l/#14
7. Compliance with Local and Federal Standards
Form 8 can be used to supply information related to compliance with local
and Federal pretreatment standards. For each affected industrial user, the
following information should be presented: whether notification of applicable
industrial user limits has been provided to the industrial user by the POTW or
alternatively a permit application or data disclosure form; whether a baseline
monitoring report (BMR) has been received from the industrial user, whether
the industrial user is in compliance; whether the industrial user is subject
to a compliance schedule and the final date of compliance, and; whether the
compliance status of the industrial user has been investigated.
8. Control Mechanisms
A list of industrial users that were issued permits, contracts, or waste
acceptance forms during the period covered by the report should be provided.
If there are users that have been identified through the industrial waste
survey that have not been issued permits, contracts, or IWAs, a narrative
explanation should be provided. The effective date and date of expiration of
the control mechanism(s) should also be presented, as well as compliance
deadline date. Form 9 provides the list of informational requirements.
If the POTW modified or reissued a permit, contract or IWA during the
reporting period, it should provide the following information:
• Name of facility and address
• Reason for modification/reissuance (e.g., process modification,
modification of compliance schedule, reporting requirements, etc.)
• Date of modification/reissuance.
Form 9.a can be utilized to provide the above information. The reason
for modification or reissuance can be entered in the "Comments" column.
9. Planned Changes in Program Implementation
A narrative summary of planned changes in implementing the pretreatment
program should be provided. The Approval Authority will need to review and
approve any substantial changes. These changes could include:
10-6
-------
H/REG. X-1///14
• Major POTW facility changes (e.g., primary to secondary treatment)
• Monitoring program changes
• Administrative procedure changes
• Legal authority changes
• Data management capabilities
• Sludge disposal changes
• Assistance to industrial users
• Interjurisdictional issues.
Form 10 provides space for discussing such changes.
10. Summary of POTW Enforcement Actions
A summary of enforcement actions taken by the POTW must be included in
the Annual Report. Form 11 can be used to supply this information. The form
should list each industrial user that has been found to be in violation of
applicable standards and/or reporting requirements, describe the nature of the
violations and the actions taken by the POTW in response to these violations.
Relatively insignificant violations, (e.g., a report submitted two weeks late)
do not need to be reported. For each industrial user that has necessitated an
enforcement action, the number of each type of action should be noted on the
form. In addition, it should be noted whether or not the violation has been
resolved.
The General Pretreatment Regulations [40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(vii)] , require a
POTW to publish a notice of significant violators in its local newspaper.
Form 11. a can be utilized to list any industrial users which fit the criteria
of a significant violator and were published in the local newspaper.
10-7
-------
FORM 1
POTW PRETREATMENT ANNUAL REPORT
COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit Holder or Sewer Authority Name:
Report Date: __
Period Covered by This Report: from to
Period Covered by Previous Report: from to
Name of Wastewater Treatment Plant(s) NPDES Permit Number
Person to contact concerning information contained in this report:
Name:
Title:
Mailing Address:
Zip Code;
Telephone No.:
1 have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in
this document and attachments. Based upon my inquiry of those individuals
immediately responsible for obtaining the information reported herein, I
believe that the submitted information is true, accurate and complete.
Date Signature of Official
Title
10-8
-------
FORM 2
INDUSTRIAL WASTE SURVEY UPDATE
Addition/
Deletion/ Wastewater Pollutant
Significant Name and Address of Industrial SIC Flow of
Changes Industrial User Activity Code (I.OOOgpd) Concern Comments
o
i
vC
For each facility, an entry of addition, deletion, or significant change needs to be made. The comment column should
be filled out, especially where significant change entries are «ade.
-------
FORM 3
RESULTS OF POTW PLANT SAMPLING
Name of Treatnent Plant
O
I
Sample Date
Parameter
(•g/1)
Oil and Grease
Influent
Effluent
Removal Rate (Z)
Sludge (nig/kg)
Permit Sampling
Protocol Pot lowed?
(Y/N)A
If »ore than one treatment plant in POTW system, show this information separately for each plant.
If POTW Is required to sample more than three times, use additional sheets.
In addltioq to BOD and Oil and Crease, the parameters should be those Identified In the pretreatment section of the POTW's
permit (I.e., As, Cd, Cr, Cu, CN, Pb, Hg, Ag, Nl, Zn and organic toxics, etc.).
If the sampling protocol Identified In the POTW's permit was not followed, describe on a separate sheet what frequency and type
of sampling was conducted.
All val> reported In mg/1 unless otherwise noted.
-------
FORM 3.a
1. List laboratory conducting analysis
2. Describe type analysis [i.e., indicate method (GC, GCMS, AA, HPLC, wet
chemistry analysis)]
3. Discuss whether existing local limits contained in sewer use ordinance
continues to protect against interference, sludge contamination, or pass-
through.
10-11
-------
FORM 4
Describe significant changes (if any) that occurred in operating the pretreat-
ment program over the past year.
10-12
-------
FORM 5
UPSET, INTERFERENCE, AND PERMIT VIOLATIONS
o
i
Explanation/Reason Corrective Actlon(s)
l
Type of Incident Frequency for Incident(s) Taken
If known, identify the responsible industrial user.
-------
FORM 6
INDUSTRIAL USER MONITORING
Industrial User
Sampling
Date(s)
Inspection
Date(s)
Violation
(Y/N)
Nature of
Violation
Enforcement
Action
O
I
Supplemental sheets may be needed and attached to this form to describe an event, and enforcement action.
Identifying the noncomplylng facility should result In some action by the FOTW (such as verification sampling). Refer to Chapter
13 of the Implementation manual for discussion of type enforcement actions available, and a discussion of circumstances that
should be considered In deciding what enforcement action Is warranted.
-------
FORM 7
PLANNED INDUSTRIAL USER MONITORING SCHEDULE
Sampling Inspection
Frequency/ Frequency/
Industrial User Year Year
10-15
-------
o
I
FORM 8
COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL AND FEDERAL STANDARDS1
Subject to Compliance
BMRs Compliance Final Date Not
. Notified Received In Compliance Schedule of Investigated
Industrial User (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Compliance (Y/N)
Note:
Additional sheets may be needed depending on number of affected users.
2
If the Industrial facility Is covered by local limits, use the symbol "L" after the facility's name. If covered by
Federal standards, use the symbol "F". If covered by both, use symbol "LF".
The POTW may elect to utilize a permit application or data disclosure form In lieu of a BHR. If this Is the case, use
the following Identifiers after "Y": BUR - B, Permit Application - P.A., Data Disclosure » D.D.
-------
o
I
FORM 9
INDUSTRIAL USERS ISSUED PERMITS, CONTRACTS OR IWAs
Compliance
Industrial User/ SIC Issuance Expiration Pollutants Average Monitoring Schedule Compliance
Address Code Date Date Limited Flow Frequency (Y/N) Date Comments
List* the pollutant and the numerical limit. Identify If limit Is locally developed by the symbol "L" after the value or with the
symbol "F" if It Is a Federal standard.
To differentiate between monitoring frequencies, use an S for Industrial user self-monltortng and P for POTW compliance
mon^orlng.
-------
FORM 9.a
INDUSTRIAL USERS REISSUED/MODIFIED PERMITS, CONTRACTS ON IWAs
j j Modification/
Industrial User/ Modified Reissued Issuance Expiration
Address (Y/N) (Y/N) Date Date Comments
O
i
oo
lain under the comments column the reason(s) for modifying ulng the permit•
-------
FORM 10
Provide a summary of planned changes in implementing your pretreatment
program.
10-19
-------
FORM 11
SUMMARY OF POTW ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
Number of POTW
Actions to Obtain Compliance
Industrial
User
Type of
Violation
Notice of
Violation
(letter)
Informal
Meeting
Show-
Cause
Hearing
Legal/
Judicial
(order)
Violation
Resolved
Other (Y/N)
o
I
tsJ
o
1
Additional sheets may be needed to describe a particular situation with a noncoraplylng facilty.
Type of violations should be listed. The POTW could make up their own code for describing the type violation. The following
codes can be used: failure to report (FR), failure to comply with Pretreatment Standards (FPS), falsification (F), tampering
with equipment (T), Interference (I), endangerment (E).
Desctlbe on a separate sheet what actions were taken, If an entry Is made In the "Other" column.
-------
FORM 11.a
List all significant noncomplying industrial facilities that were public
noticed in the local newspaper.
10-21
-------
ATTACHMENT 10.1
NPDES PERMIT PRETREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
-------
(example pretreatment language
for Region X POTW permits)
M. Pretreatment Program Requirements
1. The.permittee shall Implement the Industrial Pretreatment
program 1n accordance with the legal authorities, policies, procedures,
and financial provisions described in the permittee's pretreatment program
submission entitled, and dated, , and the General
Pretreatment Regulations (40CFR 403). At a minimum, the following
pretreatment implementation activities shall be undertaken by the
permittee:
a. Enforce categorical pretreatment standards promulgated
pursuant to Section 307 (b) and (c) of the Act, prohibitive
discharge standards as set forth in 40 CFR 403.5, or local
limitation specified in Section of the
(City/District) code, whichever are more stringent or apply
at the time of Issuance 'or modification of an (industrial
waste acceptance form/industrial discharge
permit/contract). Locally derived limitations shall be
defined as pretreatment standards under Section 307(d) of
the act and shall not be limited to categorical industrial
facilities.
b. Issue (industrial discharge permits, contracts,
industrial waste acceptance form) to all affected
industrial users. (Permits, contracts, industrial waste
acceptance forms) shall contain limitations, sampling
protocols, compliance schedule if appropriate, reporting
requirements, and appropriate standard conditions.
c. Maintain and update, as necessary, records, identifying
the nature, character, and volume of pollutants contributed
by industrial users. Records shall be maintained in
accordance with Part II.G.4.
d. Carry out inspections, surveillance, and monitoring
activities on industrial users to determine compliance with
applicable pretreatment standards. Frequency of monitoring
of industrial user's wastewaters shall be commensurate with
the character and volume of the wastes, but shall not be
less than two(2) times per year.
e. Enforce and obtain remedies for non-compliance by any
industrial users with applicable pretreatment standards and
requirements.
2. The permittee shall develop and submit to EPA for approval
within 6 months of the effective date of this permit, an accidental spill
prevention program to reduce and prevent spills and slug discharges of
pollutants from industrial users. The program, as approved by the Agency,
will become an enforceable part of this permit.
-------
3. Whenever, on the basis of Information provided to the Water
Division Director, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1t has been
determined that any source contributes pollutants 1n the permittee's
treatment works in violation of subsection (b), (c) or (d) of Section 307
of the Clean Water Act, notification shall be provided to the permittee.
Failure by the permittee to commence an appropriate enforcement action
within 30 days of this notification may result in appropriate enforcement
action against the source and permittee.
4. Pretreatment Program Sampling Requirements
The permittee shall sample, on a semi-annual basis, its
influent, effluent, and sludge over three consecutive days (Monday thru
Friday) for the following pollutants: arsenic, cadmium, hexavalent
chromium, total chromium, copper, cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, silver,
and zinc. Results shall be reported as total except where noted otherwise.
Daily samples of each shall be 24 hour composited and shall be
analyzed and reported seperately. Where composite sampling is not
feasible for a particular pollutant, 3 grab samples over a 24 hour period
are acceptable. Whenever possible, periods of sampling should be
representative of a wet weather and dry weather period.
The sampling protocol may be modified without formal notice, if
the results of the sampling data, as presented in the annual report,
indicate levels pollutants are either insignificant or conversely
significant as they relate to interference at the treatment plant, sludge
contaminating or effects on water quality.
(Optional) The permittee shall perform chemical analyses of its
influent, effluent, and sludge every (variable) from the effective date of
this permit for all specific toxic pollutants listed in Tables II and III
of Appendix D of 40 CFR 122..
(Optional) The permittee will be required to conduct a
flow-through/static/embryo-larval bioassy to test (chronic/acute) exposure
on ecologically important species in the area.
5. Pretreatment Report
1. The permittee shall provide to the U.S. EPA Region 10
Office an annual report that briefly describes the permittee's program
activities over the previous twelve months. The Agency may modify,
without formal notice, this reporting requirement to require less frequent
reporting if it is determined that the data in the report does not
substantially change from year to year. (The permittee must also report
on the pretreatment program activities of all participating agencies (Name
of agencies).) This report shall be submitted to the above address no
later tnan of each year and shall include:
(i) An updated industrial survey, as appropriate.
-------
(11) Results of wastewater sampling at the treatment
plant as specified 1n Section I.B.2. In addition, the permittee shall
calculate removal rates for each pollutant, and provide an analysis and
discussion as to whether the existing local limitations specific In
Chapter Section - of the (City/District) code continue to be
appropriate to prevent treatment plant Interference, pass through of
pollutants that could affect water quality, and sludge contamination.
(111) Status of Program implementation to include:
a. Any substantial modifications to the
pretreatment program as originally approved by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, to
include staffing and funding updates.
b. Any interference, upset or permit violations
experienced at the POTW directly attributable to
industrial users.
c. Listing of industrial users inspected and/or
monitored during the previous year and summary of
results.
d. Listing of industrial users planned for
inspection and/or monitoring for the next year
along with inspection frequencies.
e. Listing of industrial users notified of
promulgated pretreatment standards and/or local
standards as required in 40 CFR Part
403.8(f)(2)(1ii).
f. Listing of industrial users issued
(industrial discharge permits, contracts,
industrial waste acceptance forms).
g. Listing of-Industrial users notified of
promulgated pretreatment standards or applicable
local standards who are on compliance schedules.
The listing should include for each facility the
final date of compliance.
h. Planned changes in the implementation
program.
(iv) Status of enforcement activities to include:
a. Listing of industrial users, who failed to
submit baseline reports or any other reports as
specified in 40 CFR 403.12(d) and in Chapter
Section of the (City/District) code.
-------
b. Listing of Industrial users not complying
with federal or local pretreatment standards as
of the final compliance date.
c. Summary of enforcement activities taken or
planned against non-complying industrial users.
The permittee shall provide public notice of
significant violators as outline in 40 CFR Part
403.8(f)(2)(1i).
2. The permittee shall notify the EPA 60 days prior to any
major proposed changes in its existing sludge disposal practices.
(Optional) The permittee shall provide information as required
of 40 CFR Part 403.12 (1) and (j) regarding removal allowance.
-------
CHAPTER 11
COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND INSPECTIONS
OF INDUSTRIAL USERS
-------
C/REG. X-2///24
1. INTRODUCTION
The overall success of a POTW's pretreatment program is primarily
dependent on a comprehensive and properly designed local monitoring program
for industrial users of the POTW system. It is through monitoring activities
that compliance with permits, contracts, IWAs and ordinance requirements is
determined, user charges confirmed, and data generated for annual pretreatment
reports and other reports required by EPA or the State. POTW monitoring of
industrial users also helps to verify self-monitoring data submitted by the
industrial user, support enforcement action, and help identify the industrial
user responsible for interference or pass-through problems experienced at the
POTW. Labor and resources have a direct bearing on how many monitoring and
inspection visits will be conducted. A POTW should develop a list of facili-
ties it plans to sample and inspect, including the frequency. A list should
be developed annually by the POTW and be presented in its annual report to the
EPA or State.
This chapter presents guidelines and procedures to be used by POTW
personnel when conducting on-site inspections and monitoring activities at
industrial facilities that discharge or could potentially discharge process
wastewater to the POTW's collection system. The intent is to assist POTW
personnel in planning, collecting, and documenting adequate information to
determine compliance or noncompliance by all industrial users with Federal,
state and local pretreatment standards and requirements. Safety consider-
ations for POTW personnel performing inspections and monitoring activities are
also discussed. Various forms and guidance for conducting sampling and
inspections are also provided in the attachments to this chapter. An outline
of a monitoring program is provided in Attachment 11.1. For the purposes of
this guidance, monitoring shall refer to the process of collecting wastewater
samples by POTW personnel for chemical analysis.
11-1
-------
A/Region 10/#24
2. NEED FOR INSPECTIONS AND MONITORING
2.1 REGULATORY INTENT
The General Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR Part 403) require industrial
inspections and monitoring to ensure compliance with all applicable p'retreat-
ment regulations. Section 403.8(f)(2)(v) states that POTWs must develop
procedures to:
"Randomly sample and analyze the effluent from industrial users
and conduct surveillance and inspection activities in order to
identify, independent of information supplied by industrial users,
occasional and continuing noncompliance with Pretreatment Stan-
dards.
Inspections and monitoring are one of the most important ongoing tasks
throughout implementation of the local pretreatment program. Information
collected during inspections and monitoring activities will be the basis for
all compliance and enforcement activities taken by POTWs against industrial
users in violation of pretreatment standards and requirements.
2.2 IMPORTANCE OF INDUSTRIAL INSPECTIONS
Industrial inspections are valuable in the overall implementation of
pretreatment programs because they provide:
• A means to check the completeness and accuracy of the industrial user
performance/compliance records
• A basis for deciding on and conducting monitoring activities at the
industry
• A means for communicating and developing a good working relationship
with industrial users
• A mechanism for maintaining current data on industrial users and
determining the users' compliance status
• A means to evaluate construction of treatment facilities
• A means to assess the adequacy of the user's self-monitoring and
reporting program and the industrial discharge permit
• A means to assess the potential for spills
11-2
-------
A/Region 10 ///24
• A means to evaluate the industrial user's operation and maintenance
activities of its pretreatment system.
Current data on industrial dischargers is necessary in a pretreatment
program to identify sources of problems and to provide a foundation for devel-
oping or amending local discharge limits for industrial users. Industrial
inspections will help the POTW maintain current data on all its industrial
users (i.e., updating the initial survey), and if performed on a frequent
basis, the POTW should not need to repeat the industrial waste survey.
Properly implemented on-site industrial,'inspections set the groundwork
for monitoring tasks associated with the pretreatment program. Industrial
inspections can furnish the POTW with information needed to plan future moni-
toring activities (e.g., operating data, sampling considerations and loca-
tions, safety considerations, laboratory considerations, etc). In addition to
this type of logistical information, the inspection can provide information
about needed changes in existing procedures at the industrial facility. For
example, if a firm changes its processes to use fewer pollutants, the inspec-
tor might recommend that the POTW's analyses also be cut back to match the new
discharge. Similarly a series of inspections can show a trend or a change
that necessitates a modification of monitoring schedules or frequency, or even
the industry's discharge permit. In this way, inspections can be a useful
tool for adjusting and refining the POTW's pretreatment program to allocate
resources and undertake activities efficiently.
An inspection should also check the industrial users self-monitoring
procedures and equipment (where applicable) to insure that data obtained by
these procedures and equipment are proper and accurate. Items to be checked
in this regard during the inspection include the following:
• The user's sampling location(s) includes all the effluent from process
and nonprocess wastewater system(s);
• The sampling location specified in the permit is adequate for the
collection of a representative sample of the wastewater;
• The user's sampling technique is adequate to assure the collection of
a representative sample;
11-3
-------
A/Region 10///24
• The user's permit sampling and monitoring requirements will yield
representative samples; and
• The parameters specified in the user's permit are adequate to cover
all pollutants of concern that may be discharged by the permittee.
Industrial inspections also serve to establish and maintain a good rap-
port between the POTW and industrial users. The inspection is a good time for
exchanging ideas and concerns. During industrial inspections, POTW personnel
can inform the industrial user of any new or updated pretreatment regulations
or offer technical assistance on pretreatraent techniques, particularly to
smaller industries. ,'
2.3 IMPORTANCE OF MONITORING ACTIVITIES
Probably the most important tool for ensuring the enforcement of local
standards and other legal authority provisions is obtaining accurate flow
measurements and representative samples of industrial users' discharges to
determine compliance with applicable regulations and wastewater discharge
requirements. POTW personnel may often visit an industrial user only to
collect samples and not conduct a complete industrial inspection. Because of
the potential for contamination of samples and significant errors in the
results, it is essential that extreme care be exercised in selecting repre-
sentative sampling locations, proper equipment and appropriate sampling and
analysis protocol. Sampling considerations and references for sampling and
analytical procedures are provided later in this Chapter.
3. TYPES AND FREQUENCY OF INSPECTIONS AND MONITORING
3.1 TYPES
Industrial inspections and monitoring activities are prompted or initi-
ated much in the same way. They may be: scheduled in advance with the indus-
try; unscheduled with little or no prior notice to the industry; or demand,
usually in response to a problem or emergency such as a spill at an industry
or an upset at the POTW treatment plant.
11-4
-------
A/Region 10///24
3.1.1 Scheduled
Scheduled inspections and monitoring are planned in advance by the POTW
with prior notice to the industry. Depending on the size and type of indus-
try, the date and time of the planned visit should be mutually agreed upon one
week to one month in advance. The purposes of scheduled inspections and moni-
toring are to:
• Collect information and obtain samples to evaluate industry compliance
with local, State and Federal pretreatment standards and requirements
• Identify changes in industrial processes that may affect the quality
of the industrial discharges and subsequent permit limitations
• Maintain a cooperative as well as a regulatory presence with the
industrial community
• Update the POTW's industrial user data base
• Verify self-monitoring reports submitted to the POTW by the industrial
user.
3.1.2 Unscheduled
Unscheduled monitoring and inspections represent a random spot check to
evaluate industry compliance. These unscheduled visits have the same purposes
as the scheduled inspections, however, no advance notice is provided to the
industry. The unscheduled inspection is effectively conducted simultaneous
with sampling activities of the industry's effluent. Most cases of non-
compliance are identified during unscheduled inspections and monitoring
activities. Unscheduled monitoring activities can occur as often as once per
week when an industrial user is suspected of having difficulties maintaining
consistent compliance.
3.1.3 Demand
Demand monitoring and industrial inspections are usually performed in
response to a complaint or an emergency situation. A POTW may receive com-
plaints from the public or reports from other agencies concerning discharges
to the POTW system by an industrial user. Demand monitoring and inspections
should also be initiated if POTW personnel notice changes to the influent
11-5
-------
A/Region 10/#24
characteristics of the treatment plant or an upset or interference of treat-
ment plant processes. Monitoring and inspections of this type should:
• Determine the nature, duration and hazard of the discharge
• Obtain samples to verify the source and constituents of the discharge
• Ascertain the necessary corrective actions needed to be taken to con-
tain or halt the discharge
• Initiate corrective actions, if needed
• Document information needed for follow-up compliance or enforcement
activities.
When emergency situations arise in the treatment plant or collection
system (upsets, blockages, fires, explosions, etc.) industrial inspections
should be initiated immediately. Similarly, sampling and laboratory staff
should be notified to aid in determining the source and constituents of the
discharge. Inspections and monitoring of suspected industrial users will
generally determine the source(s) of the problem. Remedial actions to be
taken by the responsible industrial user can also be determined during the
industrial inspection. In addition to the information stated above, POTW
personnel performing demand inspections in response to an emergency should:
• Notify other agencies (local, State or Federal) as appropriate
• Make all information on the industry available to the person or agency
in charge of the response effort
• Stay in direct contact with the POTW managers in case:
- special equipment or remedial actions is needed
- injunctions or legal opinions are needed
- high level decisions are needed
• Collect and adequately document all information should enforcement or
litigation procedures be pursued at a later date.
3.1.4 Self Monitoring
It may not be possible or advisable for a POTW to perform all of the
monitoring desired to ensure that each industrial user is complying with pre-
treatment requirements. POTWs have the option of requiring users to perform
11-6
-------
B/Region 10///24
their own sampling and analysis and to have the results sent to the POTW.
Categorical Pretreatment Standards require certain industries to perform self-
monitoring. However, POTWs must perform scheduled and unscheduled monitoring
to verify the results submitted by industrial users in self-monitoring
reports. Industrial user self-monitoring and reporting requirements are
discussed in further detail in Chapter 9.
3.2 FREQUENCY
POTW personnel must determine the frequency with which industrial inspec-
tions and monitoring will occur. Significant or major industrial users should
be inspected and sampled, at a minimum, twice per year; one scheduled and the
other unscheduled. However, there are overall factors to be considered in
determining the frequency of monitoring inspections, including:
• Past performance of and compliance by an industrial user
r
• Flow and constituents of the industrial user's discharge
• Extent and number of problems in the collection system and at the
treatment plant which are the result of industrial waste discharges
• Number and significance of industrial users in the POTW's service area
• Available manpower and finances
• Quality of the industrial user data base
• Proposed methods to update the date base
• New or additional pretreatment standards and requirements
• Seasonal production schedules at an industry.
Attachment 11.2 provides an example of a POTW's monitoring frequency.
Regardless of the inspection and monitoring frequency described in a
POTW's approved pretreatment program submission, the implementation phase of
the program will provide POTW staff with an opportunity to evaluate industrial
users and the inspection and monitoring frequencies. Once a history has been
established for each industrial user, then POTW personnel can reallocate
11-7
-------
A/Region 10///24
resources for inspections and monitoring to focus on industrial users which
have difficulty with compliance.
4. CONDUCTING ON-SITE INDUSTRIAL INSPECTIONS
4.1 CONTENT OF AN INDUSTRIAL INSPECTION
The industrial inspection provides an excellent opportunity for POTW
staff to collect information about an industry and evaluate its compliance
with pretreatment standards and requirements.. Presented below is a descrip-
tion of the information which should be collected and documented during an
on-site inspection.
• Industry name
• Site address
• Correspondence address
• Contact name, title and telephone number
• Year the industry was established on site
• Number of employees per shift
• Applicable Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes
• A schematic of the water flow through the industry and the location of
all wastewater discharge lines that flow to the POTW system; the
schematic should also include the layout of major plant features
• A description of each discharge (including any batch discharges),
including the amount, chemical nature, frequency and destination of
each discharge
• A description and process flow diagram of each major product line and
process utilized within the plant, particularly processes which may be
subject to Federal Categorical Pretreatment Standards
• A detailed description and appropriate sketches of existing pretreat-
ment facilities, including operating data, if available
• A list of pollutants of interest at the plant. The list should be
divided into two categories: (1) pollutants that come in direct con-
tact with the water that is discharged to the POTW and (2) pollutants
that do not come in direct contact, but have a potential to enter the
wastewater due to spills, machinery malfunctions, etc.
11-8
-------
B/Region 10///24
• Identification of appropriate sampling locations
• Availability of sampling results performed by the industry
• Proximity of chemical storage to floor drains and whether floor drains
discharge to storm or sanitary sewers
• A description of spill control practices the industry uses. Informa-
tion about past spills, unusual discharges or temporary problems with
any of the process units that may affect the wastewater discharge
should be included
• A description of air pollution control equipment that may generate a
wastestream, pollutants which are likely to be found in the waste-
stream and the discharge or disposal' method and location
• A description of how waste residuals (solids) are handled, stored
and/or disposed
• A description of proposed or recent changes to the industry's proc-
esses that would affect the discharge characteristics or sampling
locations
• A description of any operational problems or shut downs of pretreat-
ment facilities
• Identification of specific hazards and establishment of procedures to
ensure safety of POTW personnel while at the industrial facility
• Other information as may be necessary.
Attachment 11.3 of this chapter contains a form called an Industrial
Investigation Report which is used by one POTW to document the information
collected during an on-site inspection. Several variations of the inspection
form are used by POTWs, however, the type of information collected is gener-
ally the same. In the case of the sample inspection form in Attachment 11.3,
the POTW prepared the inspection report form so the first two pages would
serve as a data encoding form. All the information on pages one and two are
directly entered onto a computerized data base. POTWs with many industrial
users often use a computer to manage the information in an industrial user
data base. A second example In Attachment 11.3 provides an Industrial
Investigation Report that is manually filed.
11-9
-------
A/Region 10///24
4.2 PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING ON-SITE INDUSTRIAL INSPECTIONS
Adequate preparation and training of POTW personnel is essential for
utilizing the industrial inspection to its fullest capabilities. In order to
ensure that adequate steps are taken to prepare for the inspection and that
all the necessary information is collected during the on-site visit, a check-
list has been prepared as a guide for POTW personnel (Table 11.1). The
checklist covers three areas: preparation for the inspection; conducting the
on-site inspection and follow-up compliance activities. Once POTW personnel
have conducted several on-site industrial inspections and are familiar with
the necessary steps, the checklist would only be necessary for occasional
reference and training of new personnel.
5. CONDUCTING MONITORING ACTIVITIES
5.1 INTRODUCTION
An effective POTW pretreatment program must include the ability to take
wastewater samples and arrive at meaningful and supportable analytical
results. Such a monitoring program has two goals. The first is to determine
the impact of industrial wastes on the POTW's collection and treatment system
including impacts on treatment plant operations, sludge management alterna-
tives and receiving stream quality. The second goal is to evaluate compliance
by all industrial users with applicable pretreatment standards and require-
ments. The POTW's monitoring program may consist of any combination of
in-house sampling and analytical capabilities or contracted services.
However, the POTW must ensure that the monitoring program consists of properly
trained personnel, accepted sampling procedures and analytical protocol and
accurate record keeping to ensure the validity of the results. Data collected
from a POTW's monitoring program will likely be the basis for establishing
local discharge limitations and determining compliance by industrial users,
therefore extreme care must be taken during all phases of the monitoring
program. Section 403.8(f)(2)(vi) of the Regulations states: "...Sample taking
and analysis and the collection of other information shall be performed with
sufficient care to produce evidence admissable in enforcement proceedings or
in judicial actions."
11-10
-------
B/Region 10/#24
TABLE 11.1
INDUSTRIAL INSPECTION PROCEDURES CHECKLIST
COMPLETED
( )
A. PREPARATION FOR THE INSPECTION
1. Determine the need for inspection of the given industry. This
exercise will involve review of the industrial users' permit and/or
applicable regulations and discharge limits.
2. Review existing files for available information about the industry.
Existing information such as plant layouts, process flow diagrams,
compliance schedule (if applicable), and wastewater analytical data
should be taken along during the inspection and verified for accur-
acy.
3. Review water and sewer records to determine water usage and verify
connection to the sanitary sewer.
4. Review literature about unfamiliar industrial processes which may be
encountered. Prepare specific questions to be asked about industrial
processes to be encountered, (see Attachment 11.4 for sample
questions)
5. As appropriate, contact the industrial user to establish a convenient
date and time to perform the inspection. In some cases, no advance
notice should be given.
6. Prepare sample containers and sampling equipment if monitoring
activities may be performed.
7. Confirm availability of your co-inspector. Two POTW personnel should
be present during an industrial inspection.
B. THE ON-SITE INSPECTION
1. Conduct a peripheral examination of the industrial user. Note the
size of the industry, additional buildings, outside chemical storage,
and location of the sanitary sewer.
2. Observe the physical characteristics of the wastestream in the
sanitary sewer which is emanating from the industrial user, if access
is available. Obtain samples if appropriate.
3. Establish contact with the chief executive officer, plant manager or
engineer or another person in similar authority.
11-11
-------
D/REG. X-2///39
TABLE 11.1 (Continued)
4. Request a pre-inspection meeting/discussion with the industry repre-
sentative(s) to:
• Provide an overview of the local pretreatment program and how it
affects the industry
• Explain the purpose of your visit
• Emphasize that any process information necessary for the inspec-
tion report which the industry feels is proprietary can be handled
as confidential information. However, advise the industry that
effluent data is public information subject to public access
through appropriate means.
• State the POTW's intent to work cooperatively with industry to
meet the goals and requirements of the pretreatment program and
the National Pretreatment Policy including Categorical Pretreat-
ment Standards
• Describe the information you wish to collect during the inspec-
tion. Offer the industry official an opportunity to review the
inspection report form that you intend to complete.
• Provide the industry with any written information about the pre-
treatment program, if available
• Answer any questions for the industry representative about the
purpose of the visit or about the pretreatment program
5. Obtain the basic biographical information about the industry such as
industry name and address, contact name, title and phone number,
number of employees, general overview of the business etc.
6. Request a complete tour of the facility and obtain all necessary
information to complete the industrial inspection. If the industry
manufactures a product, it may be advantageous to follow the process
in sequence so that flow diagrams can be prepared.
7. Document the exact locations of all sampling points used by the
industry. This is especially important if the combined wastestream
formula is used by the industry to determine discharge standards.
8. Check for implementation of an Accident Spill Prevention Control Plan
at the industry. Comment as appropriate on the operation and effec-
tiveness of the plan.
9. During the inspection it should be determined if sampling inside the
industry will be necessary. Sampling should be conducted at this
time or scheduled for a later time with the industry. Unannounced
(unscheduled) sampling may be done at any time in the sanitary sewer
or at the industry with no advance notice.
11-12
-------
C/REG. X-2///24
TABLE 11.1 (Continued)
10. Results of any sampling activities should be incorporated into the
inspection report.
11. Complete the inspection report as soon as possible after the site
visit to aid in its accurary. Both inspectors must sign and date the
final report upon completion. If the industry has requested that
specific process information remain confidential, that information
should be handled as such. Data on the effluent characteristics
cannot be considered proprietary.
12. If no follow-up activities are required, the report may be appropri-
ately filed.
C. FOLLOW-UP COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES
1. When all the information has been evaluated, the final conclusion in
the inspection report should indicate whether or not the industrial
user is in compliance with applicable pretreatment standards and
whether any further action is needed by the POTW at this time.
Recommendations with regard to future monitoring may be included,
where appropriate, such as:
• If the industrial user has .been consistently in compliance and has
had no major problems, then the monitoring frequency might be
reduced or abbreviated.
• Conversely, if the monitoring visit results show problems with
pretreatment facilities, chemical handling, or other violations,
then the POTW may want to increase the monitoring frequency,
modify the industrial discharge permit, request additional
information from the industrial user, etc.
2. If the industrial inspection or sampling results identify problems or
violations, the appropriate POTW staff must be notified and copies of
the report made available to them. A POTW staff person should be
assigned to follow through with the problem/violation until it is
satisfactorily resolved. The POTW should:
• Notify the industrial user of the problem/violation (i.e. ,
issuance of a written violation)
• Possibly conduct additional sampling to verify violations
• Establish or require the development of a compliance schedule
• If appropriate, request that enforcement proceedings be taken
against the industrial user
• Ensure that remedial actions have been taken by the industrial
user
11-13
-------
C/REG. X-2///24
TABLE 11.1 (Continued)
• Keep POTW management informed of the status of compliance/enforce-
ment actions
• Submit a final report to the file once corrective actions have
been completed.
3. If the industrial user has processes which are subject to Federal
Categorical Pretreatment Standards, then the POTW must:
• Notify the industrial user of its responsibilities
• Submit a category determination 'request to the Approval Authority
[403. 6(a)], if appropriate
• Require the development of a compliance schedule for the installa-
tion of technology required to meet applicable pretreatment
standards [403. 8(f )(1 )(iv)(A) ]
• Require the submission of all notices and reports (baseline moni-
toring report, self monitoring reports, etc.) from the industrial
user [403.8(f)(l)(iv)(B)].
4. Finally, all reports, communications, data, etc. on each industrial
user should be filed in a manner so the information is readily avail-
able to the appropriate POTW staff.
11-14
-------
C/REG. X-2/#24
Sampling and analysis of an industrial user is conducted to accomplish
one or more of the following objectives:
• Verify compliance with wastewater discharge limitations
• Verify self-monitoring data
• Verify that parameters specified in the industrial user's permit are
consistent with wastewater characteristics
• Support reissuance and revision
• Support enforcement action.
5.2 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS OF A MONITORING PROGRAM
The four basic factors which affect the quality of the data resulting
from the POTW's monitoring program are sample collection, sample preservation,
sample analysis and data recording. Several documents are available which
address these four areas in detail and can usually be obtained from a univer-
sity library or the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Springfield VA 22161. It is strongly recommended that these
references form the basis for any monitoring program. They include, among
others:
• Handbook for Sampling and Sample Preservation of Water and Wastewater,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory, September 1982. Report No. EPA-600/4-82-029.
NTIS PB83-124503.
• Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
1978. Report No. EPA-500/4-79-020. NTIS PB 297686.
• Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollu-
tants; Proposed Regulations. 40 CFR 136. December 18, 1979.
• Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, American
Public Health Association, 15th Edition.
• Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater Labo-
ratories , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Transfer,
June 1972.
• NPDES Compliance Sampling Inspection Manual-MCD-51, USEPA Enforcement
Division, Office of Water Enforcement, Compliance Branch.
11-15
-------
C/REG. X-2/#24
• Compliance Evaluation Inspection Manual, EPA, Office of Water Enforce-
ment, July 1976.
Although some of the information in the references above are related
to the NPDES program^ this information may be helpful to the POTW.
Some general points to be considered in preparation for a sampling visit
are:
• The inspectors should know:
- the exact locations to be sampled
- the parameters to be sampled
- the type of samples to be taken (grab, time composite, or flow
composite)
- the type of sample containers
- the preservatives needed
• The inspectors should be aware of process and flow variations, recent
shut downs etc. (i.e., weekends, holidays, seasonal production).
• Sampling equipment should be calibrated and tested to be sure it
functions properly and the inspectors are familiar with its operation.
• All sampling "paperwork" should be filled out to the extent possible
and all containers properly marked. This would include sample
requests, sample tags, chain-of-custody forms, marked containers,
etc. Examples of some of these record sheets and sample tags are
provided in Attachment 11.5.
• The laboratory doing the analysis should be notified in advance of the
number and type of samples expected, in order to prevent extended
holding times before samples are analyzed and to assist in overall
laboratory planning.
By the time the POTW field sampling team reaches the industry they will
already know what parameters they will collect samples for, where and how they
will sample, and have all the appropriate equipment (including safety equip-
ment, sample bottles, preservative, field log sheets, lab forms, chain-of-
custody forms, etc.) readily available. To determine the pollutant loading
rate into the POTW system, it may be important to make an accurate flow
measurement for each regulated discharge. Therefore, POTW inspectors should
also be prepared to measure the flow in case the industrial user does not
regularly monitor the amount of wastewater discharged. Some general points to
be considered in collecting industrial samples are:
11-16
-------
C/REG. X-2/024
Samples should be collected in a location that is easily accessible
and provides a well-mixed representative sample of the regulated
wastestream.
Sampling points should be located where no discharge other than the
discharge from the industrial user being monitored is present. Repet-
itive samples should always be taken in the same locations.
Any discrepancies between industrial self-monitoring sample points and
POTW sampling points should be noted and corrected as appropriate.
The POTW inspectors/samplers should look for any evidence of
accidental spills at the industry. During the visit.they should check
for apparent compliance to the requirements of their Accident Spill
Prevention Control Plan.
Sampling equipment selection and installation must be tailored to the
hydraulic characteristics and physical and chemical constituents of
the wastewater.
Composite samples should be collected during the industry's regular
working hours, if possible. Ideally, flow proportioned samples should
be taken. At a minimum, the composites should consist of equal-volume
samples collected in two-hour intervals. Attachment 11.6 provides a
discussion on sampling techniques.
Samples must be collected and stored in the proper containers (i.e. ,
glass for oil and grease, glass or polyethylene for metals, etc.) and
properly preserved. Attachment 11.6 provides information about sample
containers and preservation.
Samples need to be packaged properly for shipment to the lab in a
manner that ensures that the characteristics to be analyzed are not
altered. Samples should be shipped to the lab as soon as possible.
Accurate reports must be maintained, indicating the time, date, loca-
tion, type of sample, method of collection and preservation, name of
person who collected the sample, and any pertinent comments. The
development of a field data form would ensure that the required infor-
mation would be obtained.
Sampling QA/QC should be conducted. There are several ways this can
be accomplished:
- split samples with the industrial user for analysis by a certified
lab of the user's choice. Be sure that different labs are using
the same analytical technique when analyzing the split samples
- take duplicate samples at a single discharge point to help deter-
mine sampling and analytical consistency
- "blanks" or standardized samples with a known amount of pollutant
should be periodically analyzed by the lab for each parameter being
checked.
11-17
-------
A/Region 10///24
6. SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS
Industrial inspections and sampling activities are often carried out in
hazardous situations. POTW personnel must be adequately trained, in teams of
not less than two people, to identify potential hazards and take necessary
precautions to avoid dangerous situations. The supervisor is responsible for
ensuring the safety of his/her subordinates and should therefore document that
they have received proper safety equipment and training. Table 11.2 lists
safety equipment which is typically provided to industrial inspection and
sampling teams. Discussed below are some of the more common hazards that POTW
personnel will encounter while performing industrial inspections and sampling
activities.
6.1 HAZARDOUS ATMOSPHERES
Confined spaces such as manholes, metering vaults and other unventilated
areas may contain inadequate amounts of oxygen or collect toxic gases such as
hydrogen sulfide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen cyanide as well as explosive gases
such as methane. Before entry into any confined space, POTW personnel must
always determine the adequacy of the atmosphere with a oxygen/combustion/H_s
meter or continuously ventilate the confined space with a blower.
6.2 PHYSICAL HAZARDS
Care should be exercised when removing manhole covers and entering man-
holes for sampling and observation activities. Personnel should wear protec-
tive clothing including a hardhat, safety glasses, gloves, coveralls, etc. 'An
acceptable harness and safety rope, preferably attached to a portable winch,
should be worn by any person entering a vertical manhole. Sampling equipment
and tools should be moved in and out of the manhole with a canvas bucket or
sling attached to a rope. If there is any doubt about the soundness of the
manhole steps, a portable ladder should be used.
6.3 TRAFFIC
Traffic cones, markers, warning signs and barricades should be used to
properly divert traffic around sampling locations and manholes. State
11-18
-------
A/Region 10/#24
TABLE 11.2
TYPICAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT
FOR
INDUSTRIAL INSPECTION AND SAMPLING TEAMS
oxygen/combustion/H2s meter with alarm
air blower with 15' hose
safety harness and tripod
safety rope
hard hat
rubber boots
safety glasses
rubber gloves
coveralls
flashlight (explosion proof)
manhole hook or pick
first aid kit
fire extinguisher
safety ladder (aluminum, chain or rope)
safety cones
warning flags
particulate masks
self contained breathing apparatus
traffic diversion devices
11-19
-------
A/Region 10/#24
Departments of Transportation usually dictate particular requirements for
traffic control.
6.4 MEDICAL EMERGENCIES
Every member of the industrial inspection and sampling team should be
instructed on the procedures to be followed in an emergency. The National Red
Cross courses in First Aid and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) provide a
good basis of training for medical emergencies. POTW personnel should also be
trained in rescue operations. Rescue is often complicated by the fact that
the victim of an accident at a sampling site'is underground in a confined
space. If the victim cannot be retrieved by his harness and rope, entry into
the manhole by another person must not be attempted without the use of a self
contained breathing apparatus.
7. CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY PROCEDURES
Once the appropriate sample is obtained and stabilized, it is essential
that POTW sampling personnel properly document the methods used to collect the
sample, as well as the chain of possession of the sample from collection to
analysis. Chain-of-custody procedures are a critical aspect in monitoring
industrial users. Since it is impossible to predict which violations will
require legal action, it should be assumed that all data generated from
sampling will be used in court. If a case utlimately goes to trial, the
integrity of the data must be established. The sampling results will only be
admissible in court if POTW personnel can prove that a sample has been
properly collected, preserved, and analyzed, and has not been tampered with or
mishandled.
Some of the items that you will need to consider, at a minimum, to
address adequately chain-of-custody concerns are:
• Name of person collecting the sample
• Date and time of sample collection
• Location of sample collection
11-20
-------
A/Region 10/024
• Type of sample collected (i.e., grab, composite)
• Preservatives used for each sample type
• Names and signature of any persons handling the samples in the field
and laboratory.
It is often convenient and efficient for a POTW to develop a chain-of-
custody form that can be used by its sampling team. See Attachment 11.5.
This form should accompany the sample at all times. It may be in the best
interest of the POTW to document properly the protocols followed during the
sampling and analysis of industrial wastewaters. Adequate documentation is
particularly important in the case of priority pollutant sampling where the
sampling and analysis techniques are not as well recognized as those for
conventional pollutants.
11-21
-------
ATTACHMENT 11.1
MUNICIPAL MONITORING OF INDUSTRIES DISCHARGING TO POTWs
(WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES)
-------
Municipal Monitoring of Industries Discharging to POTW's
The Municipal Pretreatnent Monitoring Program will include review of
self-monitor ing, reports, facility inspection, compliance monitoring, and
demand monitoring of industrial users to ensure compliance with spedfic
objectives of the national, state, and local pretreatnent program.
Whereever possible the Pretreatnent Monitoring Program will be integrated with
outer ongoing industrial wastewater monitoring programs, such as user charge
monitoring now being conducted by nany municipalities.
Initial visits to an industrial facility will be announced visits. The
industrial user will be advised that subsequent visits nay be announced or
unannounced, as necessary.
The Municipal Pretreatnent Monitoring Program will be reviewed and approved
annually by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
1. Review of Self-Monitoring Reports
Function; Determine basic compliance or non-conpliance with specific and
general effluent limits applicable to a given industrial user.
Self-monitoring reports will be reviewed and considered prior to
initiating facility inspections, compliance monitoring, or demand
monitoring procedures.
Participation: Industrial users subject to federal, state, or local
self-monitoring requirements. Included here are federal or state
categorical self-monitoring reports, state NR 101 reports, and any
self-monitoring reports that are required pursuant to local limits
established in a sewer use or other local ordinance. Also included here
are municipal review of local water consumption records, user charge
effluent data, and any other available information pertaining to
wastewater discharges by the industrial user.
Commencement: Ongoing, but expanding with the adoption of new federal,
state, or local standards calling for self-monitoring of industrial
wastewaters.
2. Facility Inspection
Function; Categorize industrial processes that are or will be subject to
pretreatnent regulation; observe the operational status of pretreatnent
equipment, pretreatment recordkeeping, and sewer spill prevention control;
determine compliance or non-compliance with certain prohibited discharge
standards (prohibitions on materials which obstruct the sewers, flammable
wastes, etc.).
-------
- 2 -
Participation; Significant industrial users should be inspected initially
for appncaoi lity of effluent standards and for general wastewater
management observation. Continuing inspections Mill depend on initial
observations, ongoing evaluation of Industry self-monitoring reports,
wastewater composition and volume, and whether or not Inspection activity
Is superceded by compliance or demand monitoring activities noted below.
Commencement: Ongoing, but more systematic upon approval of the municipal
pretreatment program.
3. Compliance Monitoring
Function; Determine, through wastewater sampling and analysis, compliance
or non-compliance with specific numerical effluent limits applicable to a
given Industrial user. Effluent limits include specific pretreatnent
standards published in federal or state regulations, specific local
wastewater standards published in sewer use or other ordinances, and
specific numerical limits Issued in a permit, contract, or order to the
industrial user.
Participation; Industrial users subject to one or more specific numerical
effluent limits. Wastewater sample type and duration will depend on zhe
specifications or the standard to be met. Sampling frequency will depend
on the relative volume and Impact of a given waste stream on the POTW, its
sludge, and on the receiving water quality.
Commencement; Ongoing, but more systematic upon approval of the municipal
pretreatment program.
4. Demand Monitoring
Function: Determine, through wastewater sampling and analysis, causes of
PQTTd upset or losses of treatment efficiency resulting in violation of the
WPDES permit, causes of .POTW sludge contamination in excess of standards
for sludge use or disposal, and causes of violations of POTW receiving
water quality^standards. Also, to determine the cause of industry related
problems in the POTW collection system. Demand monitoring is the primary
investigation tool used to reveal or confirm violations of general
prohibited effluent limits applicable to industrial users.
Participation; Limited to those industrial users suspected of causing
violations of limits or standards noted above. Wastewater sample type and
duration will depend on the parameter or concern and on the nature of the
problem to be addressed. Sampling frequency 1s limited to detection and
confirmation of the suspected industrial users.
Commencement: Ongoing, but more systematic upon approval of the municipal
pretreatnent program.
2505R
-------
ATTACHMENT
Suggested Monitoring Frequencies for Industrial Users Discharging
Toxic Pollutants
Flow and Potential Impact
of Industrial Users
Sample Monitoring Frequency
Compliance Moni-
toring of Industry
Self-Monitoring by for Local and Cat-
Industry* egorlcal Standards
1. Less than H of POTW average dally
flow or low potential to Impact
POTW treatment processes, sludge
quality, or the receiving
waters.
2. U to 5% of PUTW average dally
flow or moderate to high
potential to Impact PUTW
treatment processes, sludge
quality or receiving waters.
3. 5% or more of POTW average dally
flow or high potential to Impact
POTW treatment processes, sludge
quality, or the receiving waters.
Twice yearly or
more frequently
Monthly or more
frequent Intervals
Weekly to dally
Intervals
Yearly or more
frequently
Twice yearly or
more frequently
Quarterly or
more frequently
This table was developed to provide an example of the sampling frequency
schedule that could be developed by a POTW for use in its compliance
monitoring program and provides guidance for self monitoring by industrial
users. The Table uses discharge flow and the presence of toxic or hazardous
pollutants to determine monitoring frequency.
A general monitoring schedule, such as that presented in the table, should
only be used by the PUTW as a guideline for its monitoring efforts. Other
factors may warrant the development of specific monitoring schedules for users
different from that presented in the general monitoring schedule. These other
factors include:
1)
'2)
Users compliance history. An industrial user that has a history of
jry_,
juTai
not complying with regulatory requirements may warrant a more
frequent monitoring schedule.
Self-monitoring capabilities. The amount of information that can be
provided to a PUTW by an industry may vary from user to user. As a
result, the HUTW may have to vary monitoring effort to reflect these
differences.
-------
3) Periods of noncompliance. Monitoring activities should be
intensified wnen industrial users are not meeting pretreatment
regulations or when pretreatment facilities are not functioning
properly.
Monitoring guidelines presented in the table stress the tailoring of a
monitoring program to fit the potential for adverse impact that an industrial
discharge presents. Monitoring activity increases as the potential for a
discharge to upset or Interfere with POTW operations increases. However, as
stated previously, such a monitoring schedule should only be used as a
guiding. It is in the POTU's best interest to ensure that its monitoring
program has the flexibility to address the specific informational needs
regarding discharges from its industrial users. The POTW will meet with the
Department annually to finalize the monitoring program for the coming year.
In addition to the self monitoring and compliance monitoring described above,
the POTW will perform inspections and demand monitoring as provided in
Attachment . Wherever possible the user charge monitoring will be combined
with the compliance monitoring program to save time, labor and expense.
Additionally samples may be necessary to verify results, for purposes of
developing standards and for other reasons.
The goal of the sampling program is to obtain samples which are as
representative as possible of the concentration and quantity of wastes being
discharged. Therefore, samples should be obtained by flow-proportional
sampling techniques. Where flow-proportional sampling is not feasible or
appropriate, alternate sampling techniques may be used. When alternate
sampling techniques are used, justification must be provided citing the
reasons for using the alternate sampling techniques and supporting the
adequacy of the technique In obtaining representative samples. Sampling
should take place over 24 hours if the discharge occurs over a 24 hour
period. The sample should be taken over the period of discharge if less than
24 hours.
Industries subject to categorical standards are required to provide regular
monitoring reports by 403.12(e) in addition to the monitoring required within
180 days of the effective date of applicable standards as specifically
provided in 4U3.12(b). Reference 40 CFR Part 403, Vol. 46. No. 18 dated
January 28. 1981. Additionally, the PUTW Is encouraged to require other
industrial users to provide self monitoring reports, where there is a need for
such reports.
0752C
-------
ATTACHMENT 11.2
POTW MONITORING FREQUENCY
(CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE)
-------
Industrial
Discharge
Volume
Greater
Than
100,000 gpd
100,000 gpd
to
50,000 gpd
50,000 gpd
to
10,000 gpd
10,000 gpd
to
800 gpd
Less
Than
800 gpd
Sample
Type
E
SV
SC
E
SV
SC
.E
SV
SC
E
SV
SC
E
SV
SC
SAMPLING INTERVAL
Weekly Semi-Monthly Monthly Quarterly Semi-Annually
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Annually
X
X
X
X
X
X
Monitoring Schedule for Enforcement (E) (Demand Monitoring), Surveillance (SV) (Scheduled or Unscheduled
Monitoring) and Surcharge (SC) Reports.
-------
ATTACHMENT 11.3
SAMPLE INDUSTRIAL INSPECTION REPORT FORM
• Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, Laurel, MD
• Metropolitan District Commission, Boston, MA
• EPA Form 3560-3-NPDES Compliance Inspection Report
f Field Interview Sheet, Austin Texas
• Industrial Investigation Reporting Form, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
• Follow-up Investigation Reporting Form, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
-------
WASHINGTON SUBURBAN 3ANITARY COMMISSION
Industrial Oijcnaiga Control Sacaon
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION RETORT
PA
-------
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
»»a«z or
moumrmt NUMMJ*
•KMWWAk SAT* (MM/TV)
ftCVIKW OAT* (MM/TV)
INVOTiaATION j INV«*TiaATO* 1
IMM/W]
MUMMM or KM»iar«n
SHIFT 1:
SHIFT2:
SHIFT 3:
TOTAL:
HoUSM*O ON SIT*
»
COOKS
1
2
3
4
5
S
7
3
9
10
WACTKWATCM
CONCT1TUKMT COOCS
1 !11
2 |12
3
4
5
S
7
13
14
15
16
17
3 |13
9
10
19
20
ACTION
COOK
1
2
3
4
S
OAT*
/ /
/ /
'
ACTION OaCKIPTION
Gamnl Onenotion of PmmiiM and Products:
REASON
POR
INVESTIGATION:
INVESTIGATION
C SILLING INQUIRY
G COMPLAINT, MADE BY:
G OTHER:
-------
IMBUSTBJAL IWVIIT16AT1QW RIPflST
WATfFl SOUSCI
USAGI
ISPS
Lo wsrae
pQavaFmeto savies-
PCJOOUC?..
e-f wan .___.
esoa
CHgMICAU STORAGE
I yrair?
OP Piooo QPAIMO;
SPILL CSNTBOL PLANS/PSOCSDURES
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL (WtKSf 3olo«o«J)
SAMPLING POINTS AVAILA8LS
oascnioa a swow on PI_AK>T
RESULTS AVAILABLE
is/ox) paeo 3
-------
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
« or
PROCESS CHEMICALS AMD WASTESTHEAMS IHO*J«THY «UMM»
oczovimoM
caoc
rvw«»
auANTrrrmMC MCTMOO or OMPOVAUCOMMKNTS
i
;»
' CODE TVPS:
CO • Cdnrmuoui O'aetiurqi to Siniary S««Mr
3D • Batcn Oi«cn«r^ to S«niarv
OO • OOMT Otooal • Not» Sjnrtwy S«ww
NO - Not OUamv*» or Ouooad .
tat-n 11/111
-------
5MOUSTHIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT '**« « atr
'OCESS FlflW OlAfiRAM/FACiUTY UYOUT/HELATSD INFORMATION .How*r*«r MUM..M
IS/MI p*ac s
A-5
-------
CITiSTIGATICN RIP CRT
* * * *
USE TOR TOU.OW-C2 REPORT ONLY
" * * * *
C — V
laves tigation Date / />»-
P— svious
Investigation Date / / <$
laduscry
Address:
/f
Zip Code
3IHia3 Address :
3iV X-
Contact:
Title:
Telephone:
SIC No's:
MDC Discharge Codes:
Weekly Hrs. of Operation: /&/? " -"D 'j'^s^
So. of tapicyees: ._j£?-
Mane of Scavenger:
Type of Scavenger:
Wastewatar Constituent Codes:
Raw Materials:
Products: _^__
Industrial Category:
(.
/
~t,w7i for *4i'33'i'n$ If.fciwtii ~on.,
?retraac=ent Present:
Type of Pretrearsent:
(Check all that apply)
Discharge to: Nut Island Systaa __
Water Source: MDC Surface
___ Deer Island Systaa
Wells Town
(X
Other
Wastawater Disposal: Local Sewer Is (Separata ,/ ;Cocbined -.Unknown
MDC (Direct Connection) Subsurface or ground Surface water course_
Left: Pemir application -^ Rules & Regulations *~S
Instruction sheet L/ Scavenger List 1^
Reason for ?ollow-UD Visit: SLt?0>472? //f//*?<^&/S'~7fG'd /*/",.<
Reviewer'3 Co=ents:
-------
M5C:
^T' Sasa:
&%)' /'-fa
•J)
-------
EPA FORM 3560-3 :NPDES COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
Even though this EPA form was designed for regulatory agencies' use while
conducting compliance inspections of NPDES facilities, alot of the same
information in a similar format could be used by the POTW during its compli-
ance inspections of industrial users.
-------
Fomt Approved
OMB No. 158 - R0073
NPDES COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT (Coding Instructions on back of last page)
NPDES
YR
MO DA
INSPEC- FAC
TYPE TOR TYPE
U isJ I M I 1 i i I I l
_i 2 3 11
17
U
IB
U U
20
12
|p.n
REMARKS
JSi
ADDITIONAL
SECTION A - Parmit Summary
NAME AND ADDRESS OF F ACl LITY (Include County. State and ZIP code)'
EXPIRATION DATE
ISSUANCE DATE
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL
TITLE
PHONE
IFACILITY REPRESENTATIVE
TITLE
PHONE
SECTION B - Effluant Characteristics (Additional sheets attached .
PARAMETER/
OUTFALL
MINIMUM
AVERAGE
MAXIMUM
ADDITIONAL
SAMPLE
MEASUREMENT
PERMIT
REQUIREMENT
SAMPLE
MEASUREMENT
PERMIT
REQUIREMENT
SAMPLE
MEASUREMENT
PERMIT
REQUIREMENT
SAMPLE
MEASUREMENT
PERMIT
REQUIREMENT
SAMPLE
MEASUREMENT
PERMIT
REQUIREMENT
[SECTION C - Facility Evaluation (S = Satisfactory. U = Unsatisfactory. N/A = Not applicable)
EFFLUENT WITHIN PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
SAMPLING PROCEDURES
RECORDS AND REPORTS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
LABORATORY PRACTICES
PERMIT VERIFICATION
FLOW MEASUREMENTS
OTHER:
(SECTION O • Commmts
(SECTION E • Inspaction/Raview
SIGNATURES
AGENCY
DATE
ENFORCEMENT
{MViSION
USE ONLY
-"ECTED BY
OOMPUANCE STATUS
.xECTED BY
QCOSWUAKCE
REVIEWED BY
EPA FORM 3560-3 (9-77)
REPLACES EPA FORM T-51 (9-76) WHICH IS OBSOLETE.
PAGE 1 OF 4
-------
Form Approved
OMB /Vo. 158-R0073
Sections F thru L: Complete on all inspections, as appropriate. N/A = Not Applicable
PERMIT NO.
SECTION F - Facility and Permit Bcckground
ADDRESS OF PERMITTEE IF DIFFERENT FROM FACILITY DATE OF LAST PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION BY EPA/STATE
(Including City, County and ZIP code/
FINDINGS
SECTION G • Records and Reports
RECORDS AND REPORTS MAINTAINED AS REQUIRED BY PERMIT. DYES D NO D N/A (Further explanation attached )
DETAILS:
(a) ADEQUATE RECORDS MAINTAINED OF:
(i) SAMPLING DATE. TIME. EXACT LOCATION
(ii) ANALYSES DATES, TIMES
(iij) INDIVIDUAL PERFORMING ANALYSIS
,(iv) ANALYTICAL METHODS/TECHNIQUES USED
(v) ANALYTICAL RESULTS /e.g., consistent with self-monitoring report data}
Ib) MONITORING RECORDS (e.g..flow, pff, D.O., etc.) MAINTAINED FOR A MINIMUM OF THREE YEARS
INCLUDING ALL ORIGINAL STRIP CHART RECORDINGS (e.g. continuous monitoring instrumentation.
calibration and maintenance records).
(c) LAB EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS KEPT.
(d) FACILITY OPERATING RECORDS KEPT INCLUDING OPERATING LOGS FOR EACH TREATMENT UNIT.
(e) QUALITY ASSURANCE RECORDS KEPT.
(f) RECORDS MAINTAINED OF MAJOR CONTRIBUTING INDUSTRIES (and their compliance status) USING
PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS.
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
n YES n NO
n YES n NO
D YES D NO
n YES n NO
D YES D NO
n YES n NO
n YES n NO
n N/A
DN/A
n N/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
a N/A
DN/A
SECTION H - Permit Verification
INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS VERIFY THE PERMIT. DYES D NO D N/ A (Further explanation
DETAILS:
(a) CORRECT NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS OF PERMITTEE.
(b) FACILITY IS AS DESCRIBED IN PERMIT.
(c) PRINCIPAL PRODUCT(S) AND PRODUCTION RATES CONFORM WITH THOSE SET FORTH IN PERMIT
APPLICATION.
(d) TREATMENT PROCESSES ARE AS DESCRIBED IN PERMIT APPLICATION.
(e) NOTIFICATION GIVEN TO EPA/STATE OF NEW, DIFFERENT OR INCREASED DISCHARGES.
(f) ACCURATE RECORDS OF RAW WATER VOLUME MAINTAINED.
(g) NUMBER AND LOCATION OF DISCHARGE POINTS ARE AS DESCRIBED IN PERMIT.
(h) CORRECT NAME AND LOCATION OF RECEIVING WATERS.
(i) ALL DISCHARGES ARE PERMITTED.
attarheei j
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
SECTION 1 • Operation ond tWaintonanco
TREATMENT FACILITY PROPERLY OPERATED AND MAINTAINED. DYES DNO D N/A (Further explanation attached j
DETAILS:
(a) STANDBY POWER OR OTHER EQUIVALENT PROVISIONS PROVIDED.
(b) ADEQUATE ALARM SYSTEM FOR POWER OR EQUIPMENT FAILURES AVAILABLE.
(c) REPORTS ON ALTERNATE SOURCE OF POWERSENTTO E'PA^ATE AS REQUIRED BY PERMIT.
(d) SLUDGES AND SOLIDS ADEQUATELY DISPOSED.
(e) ALL TREATMENT UNITS IN SERVICE.
(f) CONSULTING ENGINEER RETAINED OR AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION ON OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE PROBLEMS.
(g) QUALIFIED OPERATING STAFF PROVIDED.
(h) ESTABLISHED PROCEDURES AVAILABLE FOR TRAINING NEW OPERATORS.
(i) FILES MAINTAINED ON SPARE PARTS INVENTORY, MAJOR EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS. AND
PARTS AND EQUIPMENT SUPPLIERS.
(j) INSTRUCTIONS FILES KEPT FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF EACH ITEM OF MAJOR
EQUIPMENT.
(k) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL MAINTAINED.
(1) SPCC PLAN AVAILABLE.
(m) REGULATORY AGENCY NOTIFIED OF BY PASSING. (Dates 1
(n) ANY BY-PASSING SINCE LAST INSPECTION.
(0) ANY HYDRAULIC AND/OR ORGANIC OVERLOADS EXPERIENCED.
D YES D NO
n YES n NO
n YES n NO
D YES D NO
n YES n NO
n YES n NO
D YES D NO
D YES D NO
n YES n NO
D YES D NO
n YES D NO
n YES n NO
D YES D NO
a YES D NO
D YES D NO
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A -
D N/A
DN/A
D N/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
EPA FORM 3560-3 (9-77)
PAGE 2 OF 4
-------
Form Approved
OMB No. 158-R0073
PERMIT
i
NO.
"TJON J • Compliance Scliadults
.RMITTEE is MEETING COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE. D YES DNO DN/A (Further explanation attached J
CHECK APPROPRIATE PHASE(S):
D (a) THE PERMITTEE HAS OBTAINED THE NECESSARY APPROVALS FROM THE APPROPRIATE
AUTHORITIES TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION.
D (b) PROPER ARRANGEMENT HAS BEEN MADE FOR FINANCING (mortgage commitments, grants, etc.).
D (c) CONTRACTS FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES HAVE BEEN EXECUTED.
D (d) DESIGN PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.
D (e) CONSTRUCTION HAS COMMENCED.
D (f) CONSTRUCTION AND/OR EQUIPMENT ACQUISITION IS ON SCHEDULE.
O (g) CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED.
D (h) START-UP HAS COMMENCED.
D (i) THE PERMITTEE HAS REQUESTED AN EXTENSION OF TIME.
SECTION K - Self-Monitoring Program
Part 1 — Flow measurement (Further explanation attached )
PERMITTEE FLOW MEASUREMENT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS AND INTENT OF THE PERMIT.
DETAILS:
(a) PRIMARY MEASURING DEVICE PROPERLY INSTALLED.
D YES
D YES
D NO
D NO
DN/A
DN/A
TYPE OF DEVICE: DwEIR D PARSHALL FLUME DMAGMETER D VENTURI METER D OTHER (Specify ;
) CALIBRATION FREQUENCY ADEQUATE. {Date oflast calibration }
(c) PRIMARY FLOW MEASURING DEVICE PROPERLY OPERATED AND MAINTAINED.
(d)SECONDARY INSTRUMENTS (totalizers, recorders, etc.) PROPERLY OPERATED AND MAINTAINED.
(e) FLOW MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT ADEQUATE TO HANDLE EXPECTED RANGES OF FLOW RATES.
Part 2 — Sampling (Further explanation attached )
PERMITTEE SAMPLING MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS AND INTENT OF THE PERMIT.
DETAILS:
a) LOCATIONS ADEQUATE FOR REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES.
(b) PARAMETERS AND SAMPLING FREQUENCY AGREE WITH PERMIT.
(c) PERMITTEE IS USING METHOD OF SAMPLE COLLECTION REQUIRED BY PERMIT.
IF NO QGRAB D MANUAL COMPOSITE D AUTOMATIC COMPOSITE FREQUENCY
(d) SAMPLE COLLECTION PROCEDURES ARE ADEQUATE.
(j) SAMPLES REFRIGERATED DURING COMPOSITING
(ii) PROPER PRESERVATION TECHNIQUES USED
(iii) FLOW PROPORTIONED SAMPLES OBTAINED WHERE REQUIRED BY PERMIT
(iv) SAMPLE HOLDING TIMES PRIOR TO ANALYSES IN CONFORMANCE WITH 40 CFfl 136.3
(e) MONITORING AND ANALYSES BEING PERFORMED MORE FREQUENTLY THAN REQUIRED BY
PERMIT.
(f) IF (e) IS YES. RESULTS ARE REPORTED IN PERMITTEE'S SELF-MONITORING REPORT.
Jart 3 — laboratory (Further explanation attached , j
PERMITTEE LABORATORY PROCEDURES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS AND INTENT OF THE PERMIT.
DETAILS:
(a) EPA APPROVED ANALYTICAL TESTING PROCEDURES USED. (40 CFR 136.3)
(b) IF ALTERNATE ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES ARE USED, PROPER APPROVAL HAS BEEN OBTAINED.
(c) PARAMETERS OTHER THAN THOSE REQUIRED BY THE PERMIT ARE ANALYZED.
(d) SATISFACTORY CALIBRATION AND MAINTENANCE OF INSTRUMENTS AND EQUIPMENT.
(e) QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES USED.
(f) OUPI ICATF SA«pRF«!R
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D' YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
n NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
a NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
a NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
EPA FORM 3560-3 (9-77)
PAGE 3 OF 4
-------
Form Approved
OMB No. 158-RO073
.:- PERMIT NO.
SECTION L - Efflu«nt/R«ceiving Water ObMrvatioftt (Further explanation attached.
OUTFALL NO.
OILSH6EN
GREASE
TURBIDITY
VISIBLE
FOAM
VISIBLE
FLOAT SOL
COLOR
OTHER
(Sections M and N: Complete as appropriate for sampling inspections)
SECTION M • Sampling Inspection Procedure* and Ofceennrtieni (Further explanation attached }
D GRAB SAMPLES OBTAINED
D COMPOSITE OBTAINED
D FLOW PROPORTIONED SAMPLE
D AUTOMATIC SAMPLER USED
D SAMPLE SPLIT WITH PERMITTEE
D CHAIN OF CUSTODY EMPLOYED
D SAMPLE OBTAINED FROM FACILITY SAMPLING DEVICE
COMPOSITING FREQUENCY
PRESERVATION
SAMPLE REFRIGERATED DURING COMPOSITING: DYES O NO
SAMPLE REPRESENTATIVE OF VOLUME AND NATURE OF DISCHARGE.
SECTION N • Analytical Results (Attach report if necessary)
EPA Form 3560-3 (9-77)
PAGE A OF 4
-------
FIELD INTERVIEW SHEET
Date:
Account No. W.W. Avg.
Water Billing
Mailing Address
Company Name
Address
Authority Interviewed
Contact Official Phone No.
Type of Industry Sic Code
Description of Process (include hours of operation)
Location of Water Meter(s), sampling port(s), and sewer tap(s)
Type of Pretreatment (include location(s) and size(s)
Plumbing Fixtures
Comments:
By:
(Over)
-------
CHEMICALS USED
In Process:
In Maintenance:
Priority Pollutants:
DIAGRAM
-------
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY Pa^e of
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
"«*••
Sasin: ________________ Mini-Basin:
1.1)- (No.2)-.
Industry Number:
Industry Name:
Site Address:
Correspondence
Address:
Staplt Businea Service Address:
Card Hen
Yean at Present
Location:
No. 1 Co -tact:
Phorw:
No. 2 Contact:
Working Hours: _______ Hours/Day:.
SIC: Permit
Saw Materials: ____________________________
Process Description:
Products
Report Completed By: _________________________________ Date:
Seoort Reviewed By: ' Date:
Section Review/Date: -' IDS Checked/Date:
Investigator's Time Involved (hours): INQ n— (No. 2)-i__
-------
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
Page.
.of.
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
Industry Name:
Date:
Warn Source:
City:
Landlord
Other:
Warn Unoe:
Consunwd in Produce . . .
Volume (GPDI
Volume (GPO>
Comments
'
Of1"*'
Cod* PratrMtment Description/Comments
>
•
.
I Chemical Storage
(Indude Type. Maximum Amount Stored, and Proximity to Floor Drains)
•
Samoling Points Available* | Number of Connections to Sewer
1
Analysis Available
-------
f
CITY OF OKLAHOMA C I-TY
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
PROCESS CHEMICALS AND WASTESTREAMS
Page.
.of.
Industry Name:
Date:
Description
Cod*
Amount
Destination/Comment]
-see
-.,
-"'•f Continuous Discharge.
=0: 3atcn Discharge.
00: Otner Disposal — not by sanitary sewer.
NO: Not Discharged or Disoosad.
-------
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL JSSSVISTJQATIQN REPORT
Industry
-------
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY Pa** of-
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
3ate: . .— Industry Name;
-------
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY * PsSs of
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
FOLLOW-UP INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
lfW3a?3«ers: (Me. 1) . —= (No. 2).
Invusxjgaxien We. (1,24 ote=): =====^= Bass e? Previous Inv^tigatioa:
N«fn&or: . Industry Catofery:. •
Nastso: ' —_ ==—; =—==—-
Sozsan fe? FeJIe^Mjp Visit:
Ba«e:.
3v: ============================_=__=_ Qase:.
Hoviow/Oato: «====__======_^=== IDS Checkea/OaKe:.
't Time Involves (hours): (No. 1) _=_=_____=__________ (No. 2)
-------
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
Page
of
Date:.
•
tmmff. tumm
1.
Sap/t Businsa
Card Hen
sir-
Raw Mararialc- _.
Correspondence
Years at Present
• . ^- #
^Tittfl* •^•••••••^
No, 2 CO«T«CT:
Permit * •
Prariues-
Report CompletBd By: •
Report Reviewed By: ___^___^—_
Section Review/Date: ^__^___^_^____
Investigator's Time Involved (hours): (No. 1)-=_
Date:
Date:
IDS Checked/Date:
(No. 2)-
-------
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
Page of.
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
Industry Name:
Date:
Water Source:
City:
landlord
Otften ..
Water Usage:
Consumed in Product: . . .
Volume (GPD1
Volume (GPOI
•
Comments
M«, 1 Amjnurrr N«,.
'
Code
- . .
•
.
Chemical Storage (Include Type, Maximum Amount Stored, and Proximity to Floor Drains)
*
Samolinq Point! Available* Number of Connections to Sewer | | Analysis Available
t
'Describe.
-------
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
PROCESS CHEMICALS AND WASTESTHEAMS
Page.
.of.
Industry Name:
Date:
Description
Cod*
Typ«»
Amount
DertJnatJon/Commenn
-see Type:
-->Continuous Discharge.
-0: 3atcn Oijcnarga.
OD: Other Oisoojal — not bv sanitary sewer.
NO: Not Oiscnangea or Oisoosao.
-------
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION RIFORT
Industry Name:
-------
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY Page of'
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
Sate:. Industry
-------
UTY OF OKLAHOMA CITY
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMEMT PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL INVESTIGATION RIPORT
°f
Oste:
(Ma. 1}
Imsssigstien We. (1 2 J Q«e,):
industry
Nasno:
Namo/Titlo/Ffieno:,
(We. 2).
Oass ef Previous Investigation:
Bossn far
Visit: .
By:
' "vcstigator's Time Involved (hours): (No. 1)
Date: .
Date:
IDS Checked/Date:.
(No. 2)
-------
ATTACHMENT 11.4a
PERflNENT QUESTIONS
FOR INSPECTIONS OF
SELECTED INDUSTRIAL GROUPS
aAdapted from the Pretreatment Program Submission of the Washington Suburban
Sanitary Commission, Laurel, Maryland.
-------
INDEX
S.I.C. INDUSTRY PAGE
0741 Veterinary services 27
0742 " " 27
2011 Meat produces/poultry products 12
2013 " " 12
2016 " " u
2017 " " 12
202X Dairy industry , 5
2032 Canned & preserved fruits and vegetables 4
2033 " " 4
2034 " " 4
2035 " " 4
2037 " " 4
2061 Sugar processing 24
2062 " 24
2077 Meat products/poultry products 12
2091 Seafood processing industry 22
2092 " " 22
2099 Canned & preserved fruits and vegetables 4
22XX Textile mills 25
232QE " 25
243X Woodworking shops • 27
2611 Paper sills 15
2621 " 15
2631 " 15
2641 " 15
2642 " 15
2645 " 15
2654 " 15
27XX Printing 18
2821 Plastic and synthetic materials manufacturing 18
2822 Rubber processing 20
2823 Plastic and synthetic materials manufacturing 18
2824 " " 18
2831 Pharmaceuticals 16
2833 " 16
2834 " 16
. 2S41 Soap and detergent manufacturing 24
2851 Paint and Ink formulation 14
2865 Organic chemicals 13
2869 " 13
2891 Rubber processing 20
2893 Paint and Ink formulation 14
2899 " " 14
2951 Paving and roofing 16
2952 " 16
-------
3011 Rubber processing 20
3021 " 20
3031 n 20
3041 " 20
3069 " 20
3079 Plastic and synthetic materials manufacturing 18
3111 Leather tanning and finishing 10
3293 Rubber processing 20
3296 Fiberglass Insulation 7
3398 Metal heat treating shops 12
3444 Sheet metal shops 11
347X Electroplating and metal finishing 6
3599 Machine and sheet metal shops 11
3951 Paint and ink formulation 14
3952 " 14
3955 « » 14
3996 Paving and roofing 16
4911 Electric.services 6
4931 » » 6
5013 Auto parts and supplies: wholesale 3
5093 Scrap and waste materials 20
5211 Lumber and building materials: retail 11
5462 Betail bakeries 20
5531 Auto perts and supplies: retail 3
5541 Gasoline service stations 8
5812 Eating establishments 5
5983 Fuel oil dealers 8
7211 Laundries •
7213 " 9
7214 " 9
7215 " 9
7216 " 9
7219 " 9
7261 Funeral services 8
7332 Blueprinting and photocopying 4
7395 Photographic processing 17
7531 Auto body repair and paint shops 3
7535 " 3
7538 Engine & transmission work 3
7539 " 3
7542 Auto wash 3
8051 Nursing care facilities 13
8059 " " 13
8062 Hospitals 9
8063 " 9
8069 " 9
8211 Schools 21
8221 Universities 26
OTHERS Steam supply and non-contact cooling radioactive
materials
-------
AUTO BODY REPAIR & PAINT SHOPS 7531, 7535
• Chemical usage, destination, and storage - paint, thinner, other
solvents - proximity to floor drains.
• Paint booths (water curtain?)
• 'Floor washdovn procedures (frequency, water usage, detergents)
• Paint spray—gun cleaning procedures (destination)
AUTO PARTS AND SUPPLIES; WHOLESALE AND RETAIL 5013, 5531
• Look for floor drains first.
• If floor drains present, quantify storage of oils, paint,
anti-freeze, transmission and brake fluids, and any other
fluids.
batteries, battery acid
• Any machining or repair (see auto repair questions)
AUTO REPAIR (MECHANICAL) - ENGINE & TRANSMISSION WORK 7538, 7539
• Parts degreasers - solvents used, servicing procedures.
• Storage of fluids such as oil, transmission, brake, anti-freeze?
• Look for drains under service bays - destination?
- Presence of gas/oil interceptors (describe).
e Waste oil storage and eventual destination.
AUTO WASH 7542
• Is there any system for water reclamation such as a settling
tank?
• If a settling tank exists, how is the sludge from it handled and
by whom?
• What types of cleaners are used? Do any specialty cleaners such
as tire cleaners contain solvents? Do waxes contain solvents?
• Is there an oil and grease separator on discharge lines?
• Are liquids stored near floor drains?
-------
• What la water consumption?
BLUEPRINTING AND PHOTOCOPYING 7332
• Check to see If they do any offset printing (related questions).
• What type of blueprinting machines? With some the ammonia is
totally consumed while others will have a spent ammonia solution
to dispose of.
• Any significant amount of ammonia storage (floor drains).
CAMMED & PRESERVED FRUITS & VEGETABLES 2099, 2032, 2033, 2034, 2035,
2037
e What detergents and techniques are used in washing the fruits and
vegetables before rinsing?
• Besides water use for washing, rinsing and cooling, is water also
used for conveyance?
• Is peeling done chemically (i.e., caustic soda, surfactants to
soften the cortex)? Is there any discharge?
• Are equipment and floors washed down with water? Daily?
Periodically? Are any detergents used? Is the waste water
sewered? '
•
• Does your facility have a grease & solids recovery system? Any
other pretreatment before discharge?
• What is water consumption? How much is incorporated into
product?
• What percent of water use is recycled? Does this include any
uncontaminated water (for refrigeration, machinery, etc.)?
• What types of processing brines are used, if any? Are these
sewered directly or pretreated first?
• Are larger remains of processed waste fruit and vegetables ground
up and sewered or used as byproducts?
• Are containers made? Are they washed or sterilized?
• Are domestic and process wastewater segregated?
• Does a representative sampling point exist?
-------
DAISY INDUSTRY All 202-numbers
• What produces are manufactured at this plant?
• Are bottles washed? Are containers washed or sterilized? Any
chemicals used in the washdown?
• What chemical cleaners are used for equipment washdown? (acids
such as muriatic, sulfuric, phosphoric, and acetic, surfactants,
caustic soda, soda ash, and phosphates are commonly used as
cleaners)
• Are any by-products wasted? (buttermilk, whey, skisi milk are
very high in solids and BOO)
• How are spoiled materials disposed of?
• What sources of uncontaminated cooling water in the plant?
Recirculated or once—through? If once-through* what is the
destination? (cooling water is used in some pasteurization
processes, for condensation, refrigeration systems to cool the
ammonia compressor jacket, and space air conditioning)
• What is the water consumption per day on the average? How much
is incorporated into the product?
• Any pretreatment units such as settling or grease traps or
filtering devices or flocculating tanks?
• Frequency and volume of boiler Slowdown, if any? Additives?
• Is there segregation of process wastewater and domestic?
•• Accessible sampling point exist?
EATING ESTABLISHMENTS (Restaurants) 5812
• Presence of grease interceptor (describe, size) - How is it
serviced (frequency)? How is grease disposed of?
• What is done with spent cooking grease; amount generated.
• Janitorial cleaners (types, usage, storage).
• Do they have an automatic dishwasher-hrs/day usage, water con-
sumption, discharge water temperature.
Is it connected to grease interceptors?
-------
• Number of sinks - usage of sinks (pocs & pans or hand washing) .
• Grill cleaning residual destination.
ELECTRIC SERVICES 4911, 4931
Steam Electric Power Generation
• Are plants coal, oil, or gas fired?
• What type of boiler pretreatment is used - ion exchange, addi-
tives, etc.? What are wastes?
e How frequent is major boiler blowdown? Volumes?
• Are there air pollution control devices which use water?
• Are there ash handling systems which use water?
• What is the source of condenser cooling water (e.g. city, river,
wells)? Are there any water treatment chemicals added? What is
the ultimate destination of condenser cooling water?
• What is done with waste oils? Are they filtered and reused?
• Are process and domestic wastewater segregated?
PEPCO Substations
• Look for oil and solvent storage - proximity to floor drains
• Any contact cooling water discharge
• Possibility of leaking transformer oil - What would its destin-
ation be? - What is Z PCS constituent of oil?
ELECTROPLATING & METAL FINISHING All 347-numbers
e How often are cleaning solutions - both acidic and alkaline -
changed and how are they disposed of? Volumes? Discharged as
"slugs"?
• Are degreasing agents used - if so, what type and how is the
sludge handled? Is solvent redistilled, if used? Any cooling
water used?
• What types of chemicals make up plating baths? Is there cyanide?
Chromium? Ammonium persulfate (etching).
-------
Are plating (concentrated) bach solutions ever disposed of? If
so, how?
Is there any water reuse wlchin the plant? Pretreatment? Any
water cooled machinery? Discharge to and volumes?
If aasking is employed, are photographic processes involved?
(circuit boards)
Are there metal finishing operations - coloring, brightening etc.
associated with the plating operations?
If metal coloring is present, are organic dyes used?
i
Is the plant manager aware of how much plating is done in terms
of surface area (sq-ft, etc.)?
How is process wastewater from the plating room channeled to the
treatment plant or sewers? Are there floor drains in the plating
area? Are floors washed down regularly?
Are running rinses used? Countercurrent? Any still or dead
rinses used? Discharged to where?
Any interconnections to public water supply and processing (cross
connections)? Any backflow preventers?
Bow is sludge disposed of? If scavenger, who?
How are liquids stored? Any nearby floor drains leading to sewer?
What is water consumption? Source?
Are domestic and process wastewater segregated (and cooling
water, if applicable)? Do representative sampling points exist?
FIBERGLASS INSULATION 3296
What methods are used to bind and cool the glass after it has
been drawn into fibers? What wastes are generated from this
phase? Are these wastes sewered or pretreated prior to dis-
charge?
What method is employed for collecting the glass fibers? (i.e.
wire mesh conveyors, flight conveyors, etc.) What methods are
used to clean the conveyors of any glass fibers? Is this process
shut down or in service while cleaned? What type of cleaning
agent is used? Is the wastewater sewered?
-------
• Are wet air scrubbers used? Is wastewater sewered or pretreated
first? (i.e. sedimentation for particulate natter).
• How are backings applied (if applicable)? heat? adhesives?
e Any segregation of domestic and process wastewater?
FUEL OIL DEALERS 5983
• Record storage capacity (above or underground) .
i
e Is above-ground storage diked? Is there any leakage access to
storm or sanitary sewer?
• Is loading area diked? What is potential for spills to enter
either storm or sanitary sewer?
• Are any oils or fuels stored inside building - proximity to floor
drains.
• What type of absorbent is used for spills? How ouch is stored -
proximity to floor drains.
FUNERAL SERVICES 7261
e Embalming room chemical usage - how much formalin? What per-
centage of usage is discharged to sewer? How much blood dis-
charge/day? What is its destination? Any other chemicals
involved in embalming process?
• Chemical storage (floor drains).
• Embalming table - washing and cleaning procedures - detergents
and disinfectants used.
GASOLIHE SERVICE STATIONS 5541
• Waste oil storage - Is there a waste oil receptacle?
- drums or tank (proximity to floor drains)?
• Parts degreasers - solvents used - how are they serviced?
• Fluids storage (transmission, brake, anti-freeze, etc.) -
proximity to drains.
• Look for drain trough under service bays - is drain connected to
sanitary drain?
-------
Presence and description of gas/oil interceptor.
HOSPITALS 8062. 8063, 8069
• General layout of Facility - Types of labs, x-ray equipment,
morgue, laundry, food services, etc.
• Chemical Usage and Storage - Quantities and destination,
proximity to floor drains.
• Any special procedures for handling hazardous or infectious
wastes, names of any haulers picking up such wastes.
• Cleaning Procedures - Types and quantities of cleaners and germi-
cides utilized.
• See "Radioactive Materials" for further questions.
LAUNDRIES 7211. 7213, 7214, 7215, 7216, 7219
e Is dry cleaning done? If so, what is the solvent?
• Is sludge generated? Disposal?
• If solvent is used, is it redistilled on-site? Does this gener-
ate uncontaminated cooling water? Where is it discharged?
• Do washers have lint traps, settling pits?
• What is temperature of effluent, is heat exchange system used?
• Are printers rags, shop rags, or other industrial materials
cleaned?
• What types of detergents and additives are used? What Is pH of
effluent?
• Are laundry trucks maintained and washed on site? If so how are
waste oils etc. handled? Any floor drains leading to sewer in
the vicinity of vehicles?
e Any boiler blowdown - volumes, frequency of discharge'? Are there
any additives such as chromates? Where does discharge go?
• Any loss due to evaporation? Volume estimate?
• What is water consumption, source of water?
-------
Does appropriate sampling point exist?
Is there separation of process wastewater and domestic waste-
water?
LEATHER TANNING & FINISHING 3111
• What method was used to preserve the received hides? (Note:
hides preserved with salt will result in a high dissolved solids
count in the effluent.)
• What types of skins and/or hides'are tanned? (Note: if sheep-
skins or goatskins are tanned, there will be a separate solvent
or detergent degreasing operation)
• Is hair saved or pulped (i.e., chemically dissolved)? (Note:
in a save hair operation with good recovery of hair, the contri-
bution to the effluent strength is substantially lover than in
the pulp hair operation)
• Is delialng accomplished by treating with mild acids or by
bating? What is the destination of these wastes?
• What types of tannin are used? (Note; chrome and vegetable
cam ins are the most common. A combination of tannins may also
be used)
• Are chemicals stored near floor drains? (This is a very appro-
priate question to ask since many liquid chemicals are used in
the leather tanning industry)
• Are tannins recycled and/or chemically recovered?
• Any pretreatment units employed?
• If sludge is generated, how is it disposed of?
e Any water cooled machinery used? Discharge to?
• Any boiler blowdown to sever; frequency and volume? Any addi-
tives such as chromates?
• Any segregation of domestic and process wastewater?
• Does a representative sampling point exist?
10
-------
LUMBER & BUILDING MATERIALS; RETAIL 5211
• Storage of paint, thinner and other solvents, adhesive* (glue),
roofing materials (tar).
- proximity to floor drains.
• Paint "l^l^g (dry or does .it Involve water - sinks).
- possibility of spillage, cleanup.
• Cutting machinery - water cooled, oil lubed, possibility of
spillage, destination of spills and cooling water.
MACHINE & SHEET METAL SHO?S 3599, 3444
• What type of product is manufactured?
• What kind of material is machined?
• Are cutting oils used and are they water soluble?
• Are hydraulic oils used?
• Would any of these oils ever be discharged to the sever?
• Are any degreasing solvents or cleaners used? What are the
chemical make-up and/or brand names of che degreasers and how are
they used? How are the spent degreasing chemicals or sludges
disposed of? Is degreasing rinse water discharged to the sewer?
•
• Is there any water cooled equipment such as a vapor degreaser or
air compressor? Where is it discharged, frequency, volume?
• Is any painting done on the premises? How are waste thinners •
or paints disposed of? Is a water curtain used for control of
solvents entering the air and is contaminated water discharged?
• Is any type of metal finishing done, such as anodizing,
chromating, or application of a black oxide coating or an organic
dye? What are the chemicals used, volumes consumed, and destin-
ations of the finishing chemicals?
• Are there any floor drains where any of the chemicals and oils
are stored and used?
• What Is water consumption?
• Are there any pretreatment units, traps, etc?
11
-------
• Any segregation of domestic and process waatewater?
• Any representative sampling points?
MEAT PRODUCTS/POULTBY PRODUCTS 2011, 2013, 2016, 2017, 2077
• What types of livestock arc slaughtered and/or processed?
• What are the principal processes employed?
• What methods are used to dehair? Is the hair recovered from the
wast water stream?
• Does the facility cure hides? What brine solution is used specific-
ally? (i.e. sodium chloride) Are hides cured in vats? Are vats
ever discharged to the sewer? Frequency and Volume?
• What are the by-product processes?
• Is rendering practiced at the plant? What type of process is
used? Is the resulting vastevater treated or severed?
• Is grease and solids recovery practiced? How? (i.e. catch basins,
grease traps, air flotation etc.) Bow often are these systems
cleaned out? •
• What methods are used for clean-up operations? What detergents
are used? (i.e. caustic, alkaline etc.)
*
• Which wastewater streams if any (i.e. uncontaminated water)
bypass all treatment and discharge directly to a receiving water
or municipal plant?
• Any boiler or water tower blowdown to sewer? Frequency and
Volume? Any additives?
• If poultry, how are feathers removed? Disposal? How are chicken
parts (innards) disposed? blood?
• Is domestic wastewater segregated from process wastewater?
• Any representative sampling point?
METAL HEAT TREATING SHO?S 3398
• What kinds of metal are heat treated?
• What fluids are used for quenching metals? Are these ever
changed and discharged to the sewer?
12
-------
• Are sludges ever removed from the quenching tanks? How are the
sludges disposed of?
• Is any of the metal cleaned before or after heat treating? Are
any degreaaing solvents or cleaners used and how are they used?
• Are there any water cooled quenching baths, vapor degreasers or
other equipment? discharge to? volume?
e Are there any floor drains in the work or chemical storage areas?
• Any boiler blowdown, frequency and volume to sewer? Any
additives?
e What is water consumption?
e Is domestic and process wastewater segregated?
• Any representative sampling points?
HORSING CARE FACILITIES 8051, 8059
• Food service (see restaurant questions),
e Any chemical usage (lab facility).
e Janitorial chemicals - usage, destination and storage of germi-
cides and disinfectants.
• Boiler and cooling tower blowdown and additives.
ORGANIC CHEMICALS 2865, 2869
e Are processes batch or continuous?
• If batch processes are used, how frequent is clean-up and what is
done with wastes?
e Are waste disposal services or scavengers used? If so, for what
wastes? Are they licensed?
• What types of solvents are stored in bulk?
• What are the sources and points of discharge for cooling waters?
Are these contaminated or not contaminated? Is there an NPDES
permit for discharge to surface waters?
• What is the frequency and amount of high pressure boiler
blowdown? What additives -ire used (any chromates)? To where
discharged?
13
-------
• Is there wacar in contact with catalysts used - in cleaning
catalyst beds, for example?
• List all products and raw materials.
• Are there laboratories for research and for product testing? How
are laboratory wastes disposed of?
• Is water used in boiler feed or in processing pra-created? If
so, how? What wastes are generated?
• Are storage areas near drains leading to sewer?
• Are there any chemical reaction or purification techniques, such
as crystallization, filtration or centrifugation, which produce
wastewater and/or sludge wastes? What is the destination of
these waste streams?
• Any pretreatment units?
• Is deionized water used, how is it generated (on site)? Are
columns regenerated on site? Use acids, caustics? To where
discharge?
• Is water tower used? Frequency, volume, discharged where? Any
additives such as chromates£
• Is there segregation of process and domestic wastewater?
PAINT & INK FOBMDLATION 2851, 2893, 2899, 3951, 3952, 3955
• Are oil-base or water-base inks manufactured?
• What types of inks are made?
• What type of paints are manufactured? Water or solvent based?
• What are the pigments made of?
• Are extenders used?
• Are solvents used? If so what are they?
• What are the resin types?
• What other ingredients are used in formulating the product?
• Is there any discharge to the sewer system (washdown and/or bad
batches)? Are any chemicals used to clean production equipment?
14
-------
• Are there any floor drains in chemical storage and mixing areas?
• Is chare a scavenger service? If so, for what wastes?
• Is there on-site disposal of solids by burial?
• Any water cooled machinery used? Where is cooling water dis-
charged to?
• Any boiler blovdovn to sever, frequency, volume, additives?
• Is process wastewater segregated froa domestic?
• Any representative sampling points?
PAPER MILLS 2611, 2621, 2631, 2641, 2642, 2645, 2654
• What are the products manufactured at the plant?
• Which specific chemicals are used in the process?
• Is pulp bleached? If so, what is the process and what chemicals
are employed?
• Are any chemicals manufactured on-site? (chlorine dioxide,
hypochlorites, etc.) - any discharged from these operations?
• Any recovery systems? (white water recycle, cooking liquor
regeneration, cooling water reuse, etc.)
• Where is '•""ling water used in the plant? (condensers, vacuum
pumps, compressors) Where is it discharged?
• Describe the types of size, fillers, coatings, finishes, etc.
in paper making.
• What happens to bad batches, or liquids in case of equipment
failure? (to the sewer or treatment plant?)
• How much water is consumed, on the average? Source of water?
• Any boiler/water tower blowdown, frequency, volume, additives?
• Any representative sampling points?
• Is domestic wastewater segregated from process wastewater?
15
-------
PAVING & ROOFING 295L, 2952, 3996
Tar & Asphalt
• Does wastewater from wet air scrubbers used on the oxidizing
tower discharge directly to the sever? la it treated and
recycled?
• What method(s) are used to control the temperature of the oxidi-
zing tower? (i.e. water) Is this water discharged or recycled?
• What treatment methods are used to ranove suspended solids or
oil from wastewater? (i.e. catch basins, grease traps, sedimen-
tation, oil skimmers)
• Is water or air used to cool asphalt products. If water, is it
contact or aoncontact? If contact is this water discharged
directly to sever (note: mist spray used alone causes the
largest amount of solids present in wastewater).
e Any water cooled machinery used? Where is cooling water
discharged?
• Are solvents used/stored? Any floor drains nearby?
• Any boiler blowdovn, to .sever? frequency, volume, additives?
• Is process wastewater segregated from domestic wastewater?
• Representative sampling point?
PHARMACEUTICALS MANUFACTURING 2831, 2833, 2834
• What type of processes are used to manufacture product (s)?
(fermentation, biological and natural extraction, chemical
synthesis, mixing/compounding and formulation)
• If processes include fermentation and/or chemical synthesis, are
these continuous or batch-type operations?
• If chemical synthesis is involved, what processing steps
(crystallization, distillation, filtration, centrifugation,
vacuum filtration, solvent extraction, etc.) produce wastewaters?
Are these wastewaters discharged to Che sever system?
• What types of' solvents are used, if any? How are spent solvents
disposed of? How stored? Floor drains nearby?
• Is raw wacer Intake purified? If yes, by what method - ion
exchange, reverse osmosis, water softening, etc.? What types
and volumes of wastes are generated? frequency of discharge?
16
-------
• What is don* with Che spent beer generated by fementation?
• Regarding equipment and floor washdown - are any chemical
cleaners used? What is frequency? Volume of water used?
Destination of washwater?
• Is there any chance of spills or batch discharges?
• Does any equipment such as condensers, compressors, and vacuun
pumps require the use of once-through uncontamiaated coaling
water? If so, where do these waters discharge?
• Is there a research lab in the plant? What are the wastes gener-
ated in the facility? How controlled?
• Is process wmstewater segregated from domestic wastevater?
• Any representative sampling point?
PHOTOGRAPHIC PROCESSING 7395
It is important to determine what type of chemistry is used because some of
the chemicals may be toxic while others may not.
• What types of films are ^developed? Are prints made? Give an
estimate of how much total processing is done per day? How many
automatic processors are utilized and how long are they in oper-
tion per day?
•
e What chemical brands are used: Kodak, 3M, GAF, etc.? What type
of process chemistry is used: C-41, E-6, CP-30 etc.? What are
the names of each chemical used in «ach process, what are the
volumes used and which chemicals discharge to the sewer? Do any
of the chemicals used contain cyanide?
• Is silver recovery practiced? Is bleach regeneration practiced
and if so, is it done within the lab? What are the processes and
wastes involved?
• What is the wastewater flow from each of the photographic proces-
sing operations? Does the rinse water on the processors run
continously or does it shut off when film is not being processed?
How often are the processors cleaned and the chemicals changed?
What chemicals, if any, are used to clean the processor rollers
and trays? Are there any floor drains where the chemicals are
mixed or stored?
• Any pretreatment, pH control?
17
-------
• What Is water consumption?
• Is process wastewatar segregated from domestic?
• Any representative sampling point?
PLASTIC & SYNTHETIC MATERIALS MANUFACTURING 2821, 2823, 2824, 3079
• What is the product manufactured?
• What are the raw materials used including any accelerators and
inhibitors? Are any known toxics (such as cyanide, cadmium or
mercury) utilized in manufacturing the product?
• What type of polymerization process is employed? Does the proc-
ess use a water or solvent suspension? What are the was tea
generated from the process; what are the possible contaminants;
how are the wastes disposed of?
• Are there any product washing operations? Are reactor vessels
washed down between batches? Is water or a solvent used? Would
these wastes be discharged to the sewer?
e Is cooling water, heating water or steam used and is it contact
or non-contact? What is the destination of these streams?
e Any boiler blowdown to the sewer - frequency, volume, additives?
• Is there segregation of domestic and process wmstewater?
• Any representative sampling point?
PRINTING All 27 - numbers
Some of the following questions may apply while others may not;
experience will be the best judge. The SIC number for offset and
silkscreen printing is 2752 and letterpress is 2751. Other types
of printing are 27-.
• What kind of printing is done: offset, letterpress,, silkscreen
or other type of printing?
• If offset printing is done: Is film processing and plate
developing done in the shop?
• If film processing is done: Is an automatic film processor used
'or are trays used? Does the processor's rinse water run contin-
uously or does it shut off after processing is completed? How
often are the processor's chemical tanks cleaned out and what
18
-------
volume is dlschargtd to the sewer? How much developer, fixer and
stop bath (if applicable) are used and are these discharged to
the sewer? la silver reclamation practiced? Is cyanide used at
all for further reducing negatives? Are phototypositors used and
is so what chemicals are discharged?
If plate developing is done: What type of plates are used? If
they are aluminum plates are they developed with a subtractive
color key additive developer? What are the names of the
developers and what quantities are used? Is the developer washed
off the plates to the sewer or wiped-off with a rag? How many
plates are developed?
If paper plates are used: What type of processor is employed and
what are the names, volumes and destination of the chemicals
used? If a silver process is used, is silver reclamation
practiced?
In the press room* what type of fountain solution is used and
would this ever be discharged during normal use or cleanup oper-
ations? What type of solvent is used to clean the presses and
how is this applied? Would this solvent ever be discharged or
does it become associated with rags? Are these rags washed on
the premises or are they picked up by a commercial laundry? What
is the name of the laundry? Are there any floor drains where the
solvent or ink is stored? Are any of the presses water cooled?
Are there any waste oils from the presses.
If letter press printing is done: Is old lead type smelted in
the shop and if so are the molds water cooled? What type of
solvent is used to clean the presses and type? How is solvent
applied, is it ever discharged to the sewer?
If silkscreen printing is done: What kind of photosensitive
coating and what volume is used? What kind of developer is used
and is it discharged? Is a solvent or other cleaner used to
clean the screen after printing? Is this discharged to the
sewer? Are the screens used over again for making new stencils
or are they thrown away?
If a different type of printing is done, what kind is it and what
are the names and volumes of the chemicals used? Are these
discharged to the sewer or collected and disposed of? Who would
pick up the collected chemicals?
Any water cooled machinery used? Discharged to?
Is process wastewater and domestic wastewater segregated?
19
-------
• Any representative sampling points?
RETAIL BAKERIES 5462
• Primarily interested in washdowns and cleanup.
- Note waahdown procedures (sequence of steps).
Note number of washdowns/day.
Note types of detergents used.
Note number of floor drains.
• Storage of cleaning agents.
Storage of baking ingredients.
• Deep fry grease - how is it disposed of; amount.
• Presence and description of oil and grease interceptors.
RUBBER PROCESSING 2822, 2891, 3011, 3021, 3031, 3041, 3069, 3293
Synthetic or Natural
e What are the products manufactured?
e Is the rubber natural or synthetic? If synthetic rubber is used,
is it polymerized on-site and would it be a water or solvent
suspension? Is there a discharge associated with the process?
• What are the ingredients of the rubber, including all additives?
What n*"< of anti-tack agents are used? Are any known toxics
used in the plant?
e Are there any waste oils from rubber mixers or other processes
which require disposal and if so, how are they disposed of?
• What type of forming process is used? Is cooling water contact
or non-contact? Is it recirculated or discharged? If contact
cooling water is used, is it treated in any way before discharge?
What contaminants would be in the water?
• Is there any wastewater associated with the curing process e.g.,
steam condensate and what would the contaminants be?
• Is rubber reclaimed and if so, what type of process is used? Are
any chemical agents used and how are these disposed of when
spent?
• Are any final coatings applied to the rubber, paint, plastics,
etc.? Are there any wastes or wastewater associated with the
process and how would they be disposed of?
20
-------
• Doe* the plane have air pollution control equipment? Does it use
water as a scrubbing medium and would this be discharged?
• Any liquids stored? Near floor drains leading to sever?
• Any water cooled machinery? Discharge to, volume?
• Water consumption?
• Any boiler blowdown to sever - frequency, volume, additives?
e Are process and domestic wastevater segregated?
e Any representative sampling point?
SCHOOLS 8211
• Elementary Schools
1. Cafeteria (see restaurants).
2. Janitorial chemicals - usage, destination, storage.
e Junior High Schools
1. Cafeteria (see restaurants).
2. Janitorial chemicals.
3. Labs - chemical usage and disposal practices.
4. Art department - note any agents disposed of to the sever
(amounts) - paint, thinner.
5. Wood/Metal shop - solvents, paint, stain usage, destination,
storage.
• High Schools
Same as above.
6. If vocational, check - auto mechanics department; cosmetology
department.
SCRAP & WASTE MATERIALS 5093
• Any processing of the material - welding or smelting of metals
- Processing machinery cooling water - contact or non-
contact, - frequency of discharge.
21
-------
• Oil storage - describe including capacity.
• Any other liquid storage or reclamation.
SEAFOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRY 2091, 2092
General
e What types of seafood are handled? fish? shellfish? lobsters?
e Is processing performed or just distribution?
• Is there an ice machine, cooler and/or freezer? Are they
water-cooled? If 30, what is the destination of the cooling
. water?
• Are there traps in floor drains? What is frequency of cleaning?
What is destination of trapped solids?
e Is washdown performed? Is soap or disinfectant used with wash-
water? What is the approximate volume and destination of wash-
water?
Specific
Bottom Fish
e Is descaling performed? If so, what method (tnamial or
mechanical)? If mechanical, what is volume and destination
of flush water?
• Is filleting performed? Is brine solution used in conjunction
with filleting process? If so, what is volume and destination
of brine?
• Is glazing performed? If so, is glaze tank dumped? Are there
additives in glaze tank? If dumped, what is volume, frequency,
and destination?
• Is brine solution used? If so, is tank dumped? If so, what is
volume, frequency, and destination?
Herring
e How are fish transported into plant? If pumped with water, what
happens to water?
• Is fluming employed? If so, what happens to flume water?
22
-------
Lobsters
Is cooking performed? If so, is cook vater dumped? If so, what
is volume, temperature, frequency, and destination?
Shellfish
Is prewashlng performed? If so, what is volume and destination
of waahwater?
Is cooking performed? If so, what is volume, temperature and
destination of cooking water?
Is flumlng employed? If so, what is volume and destination of
flume water?
Is clam juice evaporated for broth? If so, what is volume,
temperature, and destination of condenser water?
Is brine flotation employed (for oysters only)? If so, is brine
tank dumped? If so, what is volume, frequency, and destination?
Menhaden
How are fish transported into plant? If pumped with water, what
is volume and destination "of water?
Is cooking performed? Is there discharge from cooking opera-
tions? If so, what is volume, temperature, destination?
•
Is pressing performed? If so, what happens to stidewater? Is
an evaporator used? If so, what happens to condenser water? If
discharged, what is volume, temperature, and destiny?
Whiting
How are fish transported into plant? If flumed, what happens to
flume water? If discharged, what is volume and destination?
Sardines
How are fish transported into plant? If pumped with water, what
happens to water? If discharged, what is volume and destination?
Are fish preserved? If so, is brine solution ever dumped? If
so, what is volume, frequency, and destination?
Are fish steamed? If so, what happens to stickwater?
23
-------
• Is washing performed? If so, what is volume, temperature and
destination of washwater?
• Are process and domestic wastewater segregated?
SOAP & DETERGENT MANUFACTURING 2841
General
• Are only soaps manufactured, detergents, or both? Classify the
plant.
• How is cooling water used? Discharge to?
• How are liquid materials stored? Floor drains nearby leading to
sewer?
• Are air scrubbers used? Do these use water? Caustics?
• In product purification steps, how are filter backwashes handled?
• Are process and domestic wastewater segregated?
• Any representative sampling points?
Soap
• What is the basic process employed for manufacturing soap: batch
kettles? Fatty acid neutralization? Other?
e Is process batch or continuous? If batch, what is frequency and
volume of reactor cleanout?
• Is waste soap from processing sewered?
• Are perfumes and additives used? If so, what are they?
Detergent
e What are additives used in the product?
• How are spray drying towers cleaned?
SUGAR PROCESSING 2061, 2062
• Are both liquid and crystalline sugar produced?
• What type of system exists in the plant for "sweet water"
recovery?
24
-------
• Are ion exchange systems used? If so what are the backwashing
systems likely to produce as wastes? How frequent is backwash?
\
e If char filtering systems are used does any washwater or trans-
port water go to the sewer?
e Are trucks or other heavy equipment maintained? Washed? Any
floor drains leading to sewers? Any traps?
• What bulk chemicals are stored and how? (Examples are acids used
in liquid sugar production).
• What happens to filter sludges in the plant? What type of filter
aids are used?
• Is cooling water used? Discharge to?
• What is the frequency of boiler blowdown and what are the addi-
tives used and volumes discharged?
• From cleaning of equipment what wastes are sewered and what
wastes are recycled through the plant - examples are filters,
evaporation pans, screens, etc.
e Are process and domestic wastewater segregated?
e Any representative sampling point?
TEXTILE MILLS All 22— and 23—numbers
• What are the products manufactured in the mill? What is the
approximate production of the mill?
e What types of fibers are used in the fabric?
• Does the raw fiber require cleaning before spinning and weaving?
• Are the fibers or fabrics scoured, mercerized, fulled, carbonized
or bleached? What chemicals and rinsing operations are used and
what is the destination of these wastes?
e Is any kind of sizing applied and if so what kind is it?
e Is desizing practiced and what are the chemicals used? Are these
chemicals discharged to the sewer?
• Is dye applied to fabrics? What are the types and chemical
constituents of the dyes and are the spent dye solutions and
rinse waters discharged to the sewer?
25
-------
• Ar« any antistatic agents applied to synthetic fibers before
spinning and weaving operations? Would these be removed from the
fabric and subsequently enter the wastevatar discharged to the
sewer?
• Are any further finishing operations practiced such as printing
or application of various coatings?
• What is the volume of waste water generated by each chemical
process?
• Are there any methods of pretreatment employed before discharge
of waste water to the sever?
• Any water cooled machinery used? Discharged to?
• Any liquids stored near floor drains leading to sever?
• Any .boiler blovdovn to sever - frequency, volume, additives?
e Are process and domestic wastevater segregated?
• Any representative sampling point?
UNIVERSITIES 8221
• Is a map of the campus available to inspectors?
• Can a master list of chemicals used on campus be provided? Which
chemicals are used most?
e Is there an organized waste chemicals pickup program? How many
pickups/year? How many gallons picked up/year? Who is
scavenger(s)? licensed? Frequency of scavenger pickups?
Central storage location(s) for waste chemicals that have* been
picked up?
• Are radioactive materials handled on Campus? If yes, in what
capacity? Are any wastes generated? If yea, how are these
wastes disposed of?
• Any photodeveloping facilities on campus? Any printing facili-
ties?
• Any prototype PC board work in the electronics labs on campus?
e How are pathogenic organisms disposed of?
• Any pretreatment 'facilities (marble chip acid traps, dilution
pits, etc.)?
26
-------
• How much water is consumed/year?
Has a study be«n done to account for all water uses? (cooling
water, laboratory wastevaters, cooling cower and boiler blow-
downs, evaporation and drift from cooling towers, lawn irri-
gation, etc.) Which, and how many of each, of the following
units (that usually discharge uncontaminated water Co che sewer)
does the university have in operation at various times: stills,
cold rooms, diffusion pumps, centrifuges, electron microscopes,
x-ray diffraction units, •lectrophorssis unics, air compressors,
ice machines, fermentors. What is total campus population,
including employees? How many reside on campus?
• Are there floor drains near liquid chemical storage areas (such
as Building & Grounds, chemical "supermarkets", waste chemical
storage area(s), fuel oil tanks)?
VETERINARY SERVICES 0741, 0742
• Chemical usage and storage - quantities, destination floor drain
proximity.
- alcohol, germicides, pesticides, cleaners, medicines
e Washing baths - detergents used and discharge producedures, any '
hair clogging problems. .
e Animal boarding - what is done with excretia material.
• Any special procedures for infectious wastes.
WOODWORKING SHOPS 243X,
e Chemical usage - look for solvents, chinners, paints, stains,
cutting oils, adhesives, etc.
• Disposal procedures for chemical wastes.
• How are brushes cleaned? Are any spray guns used - how are they
cleaned?
e Chemical storage - proximity to floor drains.
• How is cutting machinery lubricated and cooled?
are cutting oils discharged
any cooling uater (contact or non; recirculated or dis-
charged)
27
-------
RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS Ho SIC
• Quantify the «*••»•« «•"«• quantity of each radioouclide used, stored,
and discharged at the facility.
• How are liquid and solid radioactive wastes being disposed of?
are they being hauled away? If so what is the name of the
hauler and what is the destination of che waste?
are they being discharged to the sanitary sewer? If so,
how often and what are the ma-rinun concentrations in curies?
e Obtain a copy of radioactive user licenses.
i
• Obtain a copy of any protocols for handling radioactive materials
at the facility.
• Obtain a copy of any logs pertaining to radioactive discharges.
STEAM SUPPLY & NON-CONTACT COOLING No SIC
Steam Supply
• Is sytem high or low pressure steaa?
e What, if any, are boiler additives? Do they contain chromates?
e How frequent and what is the quantity of boiler blowdown?
e Is major cleaning and maintenance done? How often?
• Are ion exchange systems used for boiler feed water? If so, what
types of wastes are generated?
Non-Contact Cooling Water
e Are cooling towers used? If so what are the additives?
• How frequently are towers blown down? Where does blowdown go?
e Are closed systems ever by-passed?
28
-------
ATTACHMENT 11.5
SAMPLE TAG AND RECORD SHEETS
• EPA Sample Tag
• Chain of Custody Record
• Monitoring Results Report Form
• Sampling Record
-------
iJCAMPLE SAMPLE TAG
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
BUILDING 53, BOX 25227, DENVER FEDERAL C2HTE3
DENVER, COLORADO 80225
4>EPA
@
Project Code
Station No.
Mo./Bay/Tr.
Station Location
H
n
c-
B
sr
Eft
a
^
i—
n
^
Remarks:
Qi
B
rr
n
•*
P*I
0
o
«<
£
B
00
IV
»»
n
H*
r*
*<
It
»
>—
0
»•
a.
n
9
o
fT
»»
^
It
o
n
OB
3
f"
n
•
7
O
v*
•9
O
5*
r»
gi
3
r»
B
Time
Designate:
Coop . Grab
Samplers: (Signature)
o
3
n
a
n
n
w
0
B
O.
^^
PW>
n
a
a
(D
O
1
A
5
H»
a
n
n
>s
4
•9
S*
O
>—
>•
n
01
S
kt
o
»
z
e
rr
ir
>»
n
5
IT
a
CO
O
a.
a
^•^
M^
01
en
Q
e
M
^^
cn
•~
3
O
3
••»
o
3
09
^^^
= (0s
A »ej ^i ^^/
h*B ft ^^^••^•'^^
•< a
a "s
a Q' »
— J a
re
^
^
B
? "
D I
-------
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
MDC INDUSTRIAL WASTE MONITORING PROGRAM
SAMPLERS (Signatures)
Industry
Code
Seq.
No.
Date
Source Description
Container
Size G/P
Relinquished by:
Date/Time
Received by:
Relinquished by:
Date/Time
Received fay:
Relinquished by:
DateAlme
Received by:
Relinquished by:
Date/Time
Received by:
Relinquished by:
Date/Time
Received by:
REMARKS:
-------
TTTAMPT.it CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE CONTROL SECTION
" SAMPLE CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
SAMPLE*
DATE
TIME
TEMP
•c
DM
INITIAL! FINAL
INDUSTRY #
RELINQUISHED BY
EL1NQUISHEO BY
RELINQUISHED BY
TRC
mg/l
•
PRESERVATION
.
ANALYSIS REQUIRED
SAMPLERS
RECEIVED BY DATE TIME
RECEIVED BY DATE TIME
RECEIVED BY DATE TIME
DISTRIBUTION: Original . l_at>
Ytllow COPY • IOCS Fil*
«o»-aa
-------
EXAMPLE MONITORING RESULTS REPORT FORM
Facility Maae:
Permit So.:
Sampling Coda:
S * Scheduled
(I - Unscheduled
?C • Flow Proportion
* Composite (x • hours)
0 » Demand
M - Self Monitoring
G • Crab Sample
C •' Composict (x • hours)
i
I Permit Limits*
; Sample
Date 1 Coda
i
i
i
i
i
i
:
1
;
i
>
i
.
-
i
!
!
i
'
!
,
!
!
1
i
!
i
: ' ' ' *
Parameter 1 ;!.'!!!:!•'
Ill ' I :
Value mg/1 i ;' i , i
i • : i i i
l • i
; '
i i , ! i
• • I
i 1 1 !
Parameter ! ! ! i
Value ; ] 1 ! I j ! i
Parameter | ,' !
Value J ! j j ' ; i !
Parameter ; } 1 ; '. \ \
Value 1 i 1 !
Parameter ! j ! | ! ; !
Value | ! j i 1 !
Parameter i i i ! ! ; ! j
v^iue i ! ; i ! i i ;
Parameter ! } j ' '
Value i ; 1 1 !
Parameter I j III i
Value :' i ! III
Parameter | !
Value j j •
Parameter I i 1
Value . !i||
. Parameter ! • 1 |
. Value ! I i !
Parameter i j j j !
Value JS i ! i !
Permit limits' for 24 hrs. flow composite
-------
EXAMPLE SAMPLING RECORD
Person Sampling:
Date:
Facility Sampled:
Facility Location:
Sampling Location:
Sample Type:
Observation/Comments:
Time:
am/ am
Grab ( }
Composite ( )
Sample 3otcle I.D. (Marking)
Samples split with facility?
Name of Facility Representative:
Yes ( )
( )
Tide of Facility Representative:
1 1 aAHPI.fi,
| TIME/ DATE (RECEIVED BY
1
i
i
j A-rr ILLATION/ i
SIGNATURE j TITLE | COMMENTS j
I 1 i
1 ! :
i ! i
1 ! :
-------
ATTACHMENT 11.6
• Sampling Techniques
• Sample Containers, Preservation
and Holding Times
-------
B/REG. VI-5/#7
r
INDUSTRIAL USER SAMPLING TECHNIQUES
The foundation of the local pretreatment program is an industry's
compliance with applicable pollutant discharge limitations. An effective
pretreatment program must include the ability to take IU wastewater samples
and arrive at meaningful and supportable analytical results. Sampling and
analysis of an IU wastewater discharge is conducted to accomplish one or more
of the following objectives:
• Verify IU compliance with wastewater' discharge limitations
• Verify IU self-monitoring data
• Verify that parameters specified in the industrial user's permit are
consistent with wastewater characteristics
• Support reissuance and revision of industrial user's permits
• Support enforcement action.
The control authority's sampling program may consist of any combination
of in-house sampling and analytical capabilities or contracted services.
However, the control authority must ensure that the sampling program consists
of properly trained personnel, accepted sampling procedures, and protocol and
accurate record keeping to ensure the validity of the IU sampling results.
Data collected from a control authority will likely be the basis for deter-
mining compliance by lUs, therefore extreme care must be taken during all
phases of sampling and analysis. Section 403.8(f)(2)(vi) of the pretreatment
regulations states: "...Sample caking and analysis and the collection of
other information shall be performed with sufficient care to produce evidence
admissible in enforcement proceedings or in judicial actions."
This section will present guidelines and considerations for sampling and
analysis of IU discharges. IU sampling and analysis can be done independently
or in conjunction with a compliance inspection visit, and performed by the
same or different control authority personnel. If indeed IU sampling and
analysis is performed both independently and by control authority personnel
-------
B/REG. VI-5///7
different from the inspection personnel, it is strongly recommended that those
sampling personnel involved familiarize themselves with some of the same pro-
cedures and guidelines presented in Chapter C.
Pre-Sampling Considerations
The following areas should be addressed by the control authority when
developing sampling procedures for sampling lUs.
Selection of Representative Sampling Sites
Following are some considerations for the selection of a representative
sampling site(s) at an Industrial user facility:
• Samples should be taken at points of high turbulence flow to ensure
good mixing and prevent the deposition of any solids discharged.
• Sample sites should be easily accessible and free of any major safe y
hazards (i.e., spalling concrete).
• Normally, local discharge limitations apply where the IU discharge
enters the POTW. National Categorical Standards, however, regulate
the discharge only from an industrial process. Therefore, to verify
compliance with categorical standards, the control authority needs to
sample at the end of the regulated industrial process. If it is
impossible to segregate a regulated process wastewater flow from other
process wastestreams or dilution wastestreams (i.e., sanitary,
noncontact cooling water), the control authority needs to utilize the
combined wastestream formula (as outlined in Section 403.6(e) of the
General Pretreatment Regulations) to adjust the categorical standard
based on the addition of other wastestreams.
Sample Collection Techniques
Depending on the objectives or requirements of the monitoring program,
samples can be collected either manually or with automatic samplers. The
following general guidelines apply when taking samples:
•»
• Exclude large nonhomogeneous particles and objects
• Collect the sample facing upstream to avoid contamination
• Do not rinse sample container with sample when collecting microbi-
ological samples, but fill it directly to within 2.5 to 5 cm from the
top
-------
B/REG. VI-5/#7
• Fill the container completely if the sample is to be analyzed for
purgeable organics, oxygen, ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, free chlorine,
pH, hardness, sulfite, ammonium, ferrous iron, acidity, or alkalinity
• Collect sufficient volume to allow for quality assurance testing.
Types of Samples
The two types of samples, grab and composite samples, can be collected
either manually or with automatic samplers. These types of samples are
discussed below.
Grab Samples
Grab samples are individual samples collected over a period of time not
exceeding 15 minutes; the grab sample can be taken manually. The collection
of a grab sample is appropriate when a sample is needed to:
• Provide information about instantaneous concentrations of pollutant at
specific times
• Allow collection of a variable sample volume
• Corroborate composite samples
• Collect samples for parameters not amenable to automatic sampling
(e.g., oil and grease, volatile organics, coliform bacteria).
Composite Samples
These samples consist of grab samples collected at equal intervals and
combined proportional to flow; a sample continuously collected proportionally
to flow; or equal volumes taken at varying time intervals. Composite samples
should be used when:
• Determining average pollutant concentration during the compositing
period
• Calculating mass/unit time loadings
• Wastewater characteristics are highly variable.
-------
B/REG. VI-5///7
There are six methods for compositing samples; they may be collected
using either manual or automatic sampling technologies. The six compositing
methods, all of which depend on either continuous or periodic sampling, are
shown in Table A. In any manual compositing method, sample manipulation
should be minimized to reduce the possiblility of contamination.
To determine the pollutant loading rate into a POTW system or to flow
proportion a sample, it may be important for the control authority to make an
accurate flow measurement for each regulated discharge. Therefore, control
authority sampling staff should also be prepared to measure flow in case the
IU does not regularly monitor the amount of wastewater discharged.
Sample Volume
The volume of samples collected depends on the type and number of
analyses that are needed, as reflected in the parameters to be measured. The
volume of the sample obtained should be sufficient to perform all the required
analyses plus additional amounts to provide for any split samples or repeat
analyses. The laboratory performing the analysis should be consulted for any
specific volume required. A breakdown of the recommended minimum sample
volumes for different pollutant parameters can be found in EPA's "Methods for
Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes," 1979; "Handbook for Sampling and
Sample Preservation of Water and Wastewater," 1982; and the current, EPA
approved edition of "Standard Methods."
Selection and Preparation of Sample Containers
The selection and preparation of sample containers will be based on the
parameters to be measured. Wastewater samples for chemical analysis are
generally collected in plastic (polyethylene) containers. Exceptions to this
general rule are oil and grease samples, pesticides, PCBs, and other organic
pollutant samples. These are collected in properly rinsed glass jars or
bottles and sealed. Bacteriological samples are generally collected in
properly sterilized plastic or glass containers. The table beginning on page
14 presents the recommended sample container type for many of the sample
parameters that would be sampled for at an IU.
-------
TABLE A
COMPOSITING METHODS
Compositing
Principle
Advantages
Disadvantages
Comments
Constant sample
volume, constant
time interval
between samples
Constant sample
volume, time
interval between
samples
proportional to
stream flow
Constant time
interval between
samples, sample
volume proportional
to total stream
flow at time of
sampling
Minimal instrumen-
tation and manual
effort; requires
no flow measure-
ment
Minimal manual
effort
Minimal
instrumentation
Constant time
interval between
samples, sample
volume proportional
to total stream
flow since last
sample
Minimal
ins trumentation
May lack represen-
tativeness espe-
cially for highly
variable flows
Requires accurate
flow measurement/
reading equipment;
manual compositing
from flow chart
Manual compositing
from flow chart in
absence of prior
information on the
ratio of minimum to
maximum flow;
chance of collec-
ting too small or*
too large indivi-
dual discrete
samples for a
given composite
volume
Manual compositing
from flow chart in
absence of prior
information on the
ratio of minimum to
maximum flow;
chance of collec-
ting either too
small or too large
individual dis-
crete samples for
a given composite
volume
Widely used in
both automatic
samplers and
manual sampling
Widely used in
automatic as well
as manual sampling
Used in automatic
samplers and
widely used as
manual method
Not videly used in
automatic samplers
but may be done
manually
-5-
-------
TABLE A (Continued)
COMPOSITING METHODS
Compositing
Principle
Advantages
Disadvantages
Comments
Constant pumping
rate
Sample pumping rate
proportional to
stream flow
Minimal manual
effort, requires
no flow
measurement
Most representa-
tive especially
for highly
.variable flows;
minimal manual
effort
Requires large
sample capacity;
may lack represen-
tativeness for
highly variable
flows
Requires accurate
flow measurement
equipment, large
sample volume,
variable pumping
capacity, and
power
Practical but not
widely used
Not widely used
-6-
-------
B/REG. VI-5/07
It is essential that the sample containers be made of chemically resis-
tant material and do not affect the concentrations of the pollutants to be
measured. In addition, sample containers must have a closure that will
protect the sample from contamination.
Sample Preservation and Holding Time
In most cases, wastewater samples contain one or more unstable pollutants
that require immediate analysis or preservation. Prompt analysis is the most
positive assurance against error from sample deterioration, but this is not
feasible for composite samples, in which portions may be stored for as long as
24 hours. It is important that preservation of the samples be provided for
during compositing, where possible, in addition to being preserved before
being transferred to the laboratory. Procedures used to preserve samples
include refrigeration, pH adjustment, and chemical treatment. Proper preser-
vation and holding time for samples is essential to the integrity of the
monitoring program. The table beginning on page 14 provides the recommended
preservatives that should be used for specific sampling parameters.
Other Sampling References
Several additional documents are available which address sample collec-
tion and preservation and flow measurement. It is recommended that these
references be utilized by the control authority to ensure proper sampling and
flow measurement techniques. They include, among others:
• Handbook for Sampling and Sample Preservation of Water and Wastewater,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory, September 1982. Report No- EPA-600/4-82-029.
NTIS PB83-124503.
• Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
1978. Report No. EPA-500/4-79-020. NTIS PB 297686.
• Compliance Evaluation Inspection Manual. EPA, Office of Water Enforce-
ment, July 1976.
• NPDES Compliance Sampling Inspection Manual-MCD-51, USEPA Enforcement
Division, Office of Water Enforcement, Compliance Branch.
• Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. American
Public Health Association,15th Edition.
-------
; :vi-5-/#7
Chain-of -Custody and Quality Control
Documentation of all pertinent data concerning the collection, preserva-
tion and transportation of any 1U samples is critically important to the
overall success of the local pretreatment program, due to the fact that any IU
sampling data might be used as evidence in court proceedings against a non-
compliant IU.
Sample Identification Methods
Each sample must be accurately and completely identified. It is impor-
tant that any label used to identify the sample be moisture-resistant and able
to withstand field conditions. A numbered label associated with a field data
sheet containing detailed information on the sample may be preferable to using
only a label for information. The information provided for each sample should
include the following:
• Sample site location, discharge, and faciltiy
• Name of collector(s)
• Indication of grab or composite sample with appropriate time and
volume information
• Identification of parameter(s) to be analyzed
• Preservative used
• Indication of any unusual condition at the sampling location and/or in
the appearance of the wastewater
• Notation of conditions such as pH, temperature, residual chlorine, and
appearance that may change before the laboratory analysis, including
the identification number of instruments used to measure parameters in
the field.
Transfer of Custody and Shipment
In order to ensure the validity of the compliance sampling data in court,
there must be accurate written records tracing the custody of each sample
through all phases of the monitoring program. The primary objective of this
chain-of -custody is to create an accurate written record that can be used to
trace the possession and handling of the sample from the moment of its
collection through analysis and introduction as evidence.
-------
B/REG. VI-5///7
• When transferring possession of samples, the transferee must sign and
record that date and time on the Chain-of-Custody Record (see example
in Attachment C.4). In general, custody transfers are made on each
individual sample, although samples may be transferred as a group, if
desired. Every person who takes custody must fill in the appropriate
section of the Chain-of-Custody Record. The number of transfers
should be kept to a minimum.
• The person taking the sample is responsible for properly packing and
dispatching the samples to the appropriate laboratory for analysis.
This responsibility includes filling out, dating, and signing the
appropriate portion of the Chain-of-Custody Record.
• All packages sent to the laboratory must be accompanied by the
Chain-of-Custody Record and other pertinent forms. A copy of these
forms should be retained by the originating office.
• Mailed packages should be sent with return receipt requested. If sent
by common carrier, receipts are retained as part of the permanent
chain-of-custody documentation.
• Shipped samples should be properly packed to prevent breakage, and the
package sealed or locked so that any evidence of tampering may be
readily detected.
Sampling Quality Control
Control checks should be performed during the actual sample collection to
determine the performance of the sample collection system. In general, the
most common monitoring errors are usually caused by improper sampling,
improper preservation, inadequate mixing during compositing and splitting, and
excessive sample holding time. The following types of samples should be used
to check the sample collection system:
• Duplicate Samples. These are separate samples taken from the same
source at the same time. These provide a checl: on sampling equipment
and precision techniques.
• Split Samples. This is a sample that has been divided into two
containers for analysis by separate laboratories. These aid in
identifying discrepancies in analytical techniques and procedures.
• Spike Samples. This is a sample to which a known quantity of the same
substances has been added. These provide a proficiency check for
accuracy of the analytical procedures.
• Sample Preservative Blanks. This is a sample of distilled water to
which a known quantity of preservative is added. This sample is then
-------
B/REG. VI-5///7
analyzed to determine the efficacy of the preservative. These provide
a check on the contamination of chemical preservatives.
Data Handling and Reporting
To obtain meaningful data for the compliance monitoring program, a
properly preserved representative sample must be delivered for analysis. The
analysis must be performed in the prescribed fashion according to EPA approved
procedures. The calculations should be completed and the results converted to
final form so that the analytical data can be permanently recorded in meaning-
ful, exact terms.
The analytical information reported should include the measured param-
eters and the details of the analysis, such as original analytical instrumen-
tation readings, correction factors, blanks, and the reported data values.
The compliance monitoring records should include sampling date, time and
location, analyses dates and times, names of analysts, analytical methods/
techniques used, and analytical results. To ensure that data resulting from
various analyses are recorded, transferred, and stored correctly, the data
should be checked at the various transfer points.
Preparation for IU Sampling
Several considerations should be addressed by the control authority
sampling staff in preparation for an IU sampling visit. The following general
points assume that the control authority sampling staff have direct access to
the IU inspection reports and files or work directly in conjunction with the
inspection personnel. If neither is the case, then control authority sampling
staff need to gather the following information through some other sources or
through an inspection of the IU itself.
• The samplers should know:
- The exact locations to be sampled
- The parameters to be sampled
10
-------
B/REG. VI-5///7
- The type of samples to be taken (grab, time composite, or flow
composite)
- The type of sample containers
- The preservatives needed.
• The samplers should be aware of process and flow variations, recent
shut downs, etc. (i.e., weekends, holidays, seasonal production).
• Sampling and safety equipment should be calibrated and tested to be
sure it functions properly and the samplers are familiar with its
operation.
• All sampling "paperwork" should be filled out to the extent possible
and all containers properly marked. This would include sample
requests, sample tags, chain-of-custody forms, marked containers, etc.
• The laboratory doing the analysis should be notified in advance of the
number and type of samples expected, in order to prevent extended
holding times before samples are analyzed and to assist in overall
laboratory planning.
By the time the control authority sampling team reaches an IU, they
should already know what parameters they will collect samples for, where and
how they will sample, and have all the appropriate equipment (including safety
equipment, sample bottles, preservatives, field log sheets, lab forms, chain-
of-custody forms, etc.) readily available.
Ongoing Compliance Monitoring
In order to ensure IU compliance with applicable Federal, State and local
pretreatment discharge limitations, control authority sampling staff will need
to continually monitor the wastewater discharged by an IU. This ongoing
compliance sampling will either be scheduled or unscheduled with the IU, or
demand sampling in response to a spill, etc. This ongoing compliance sampling
does not have to always be as detailed and resource intensive as the first
scheduled IU sampling visit.
Generally, there are three considerations that could be evaluated by the
control authority; sample type, sample frequency, and sample parameters.
11
-------
B/REG. VI-5///7
• Sample Type - Simple grab samples or time composites could be utilized
between scheduled or unscheduled intensive 1U sampling visits to
spotcheck discharge conditions.
• Sample Frequency - A simple one-time grab or time composite only
during IU peak production periods may be used between scheduled or
unscheduled intensive IU sampling visits to spotcheck wastewater
discharge conditions. If violations are found, then increased sample
frequency may be warranted to properly document the IU noncompliance.
• Sample Parameters - At a minimum, the control authority should sample
an IU discharge for those parameters known to be present in the IU
discharge, as well as regulated by Federal, State and local discharge
limitations. Intensive monitoring at an IU may include sampling also
for those pollutants that have a potential to be discharged by an IU
and/or are of particular concern to the control authority (i.e., to
protect the treatment plant, receiving stream, and sludge quality).
The amount and type of IU sampling will depend on the resources available
to the control authority. Regardless of the type and frequency of IU sampling
performed however, as described in previous sections of this chapter, extreme
care should be taken to ensure that any IU sample taken and analyzed will be
able to be used as evidence against an noncompliance IU discharge.
12
-------
RECttfiffiNDED CONTAINERS, PRESERVATION TECHNIQUES, AND HOLDING TIMES
(Source: EPA, 1982)
Parameter
Bacterial Tests
Colifonn, fecal
and total
Fecal streptococci
Inorganic Tests
Acidity
Alkalinity
Ammonia
Biochemical oxygen
demand
Biochemical oxygen
demand,
carbonaceous
Bromide
Chemical oxygen
demand
Chloride
Chlorine, total
residual
Color
Cyanide, total and
amenable to chlori-
nation
Fluoride
Hardness
Container(l)
P,G
P,G
P,G
P,G
P,G
P,G
P,G
P,C
P,G
P,C
P,G
P.G
P,G
P
P,C
Preservative(2), (12)
Cool, 4°C
0.008Z Na2$203 (&)
Cool, 4'C
0.008Z Na2S203 (&)
Cool, 4°C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
H2S04 to pH<2
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
None required
Cool, 4'C
H2S04 to pH<2
None required
None required
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
MaOH to pH>12
0.6g ascorbic
acid (6)
None required
HN03 to pH<2
Maximum
Holding Time(3)
6 hours
6 hours
14 days
14 days
28 days
48 hours
48 hours
28 days
28 days
28 days
Analyze immediately
48 hours
14 days(9)
28 days
6 months
13
-------
RECOMMENDED CONTAINERS, PRESERVATION TECHNIQUES* AND HOLDING TIMES
(Source: EPA, 1982)
(Continued)
Parameter
Hydrogen ion (pH)
KJeldahl and organic
Nitrogen
Metals (4)
Chromium VI
Mercury
Metals, except above
Nitrate
Nitrate-nitrite
Nitrite
Oil and grease
Organic carbon
Orthophosphate
Dissolved oxygen.
Probe
Dissolved oxygen,
W inkier method
Phenols
Phosphorus
(elemental)
Contained 1 )
P,G
P,C
P,C
P,G
P,C
P.C
P,C
P,G
G, vide
mouth,
teflon
lined cap
P,G
P",G
G bottle
and top
G bottle
and top
G. only
G
Preservative(2), (12)
None required
Cool, 4»C
H2S04 to pH<2
Cool, 4*C
HN03 to pH<2
HN03 to pH<2
Cool, A*C
Cool, 4»C
H2S04 to pH<2
Cool, 4*C
Cool, 4'C
H2S04 to pH<2
Cool, 4'C
HC1 of H2S04 to pH<2
Filter immediately
Cool, 4'C
None required
Fix on site and
store in dark
Cool, 4'C
H2S04 to pH<2
Cool, VC
Maximum
Holding Time(3)
Analyze immediately
28 days .
24 hours
28 days
6 months
48 hours
28 hours
48 hours
.28 days
28 days
48 hours
Analyze immediately
8 hours
24 hours
48 hours
14
-------
RECOMMENDED CONTAINERS, PRESERVATION TECHNIQUES, AND HOLDING TIMES
(Source: EPA, 1982)
(Continued)
Parameter
Phosphorus, total
Residue, total
Residue, filterable
Residue, non-
filterable (TSS)
Residue, settleable
Residue, volatile
Silica
Specific conductance
Sulfate
Sulfide
Sulfite
Surfactants
Temperature
Turbidity
Organic Tests (5)
Purgeable
halocarbons
Container( 1 )
P,G
P.C
P.G
P.C
P.C
P.G
P
P.C
P.G
P.C
P.C
P.G
P.C
P.C
G, Teflon-
lined
septum
Preservative^), (12)
Cool, 4'C
H2S04 to pH<2
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C, add
zinc acetate plus
sodium hydroxide
to pH>9
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Rone required
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
0.008Z Na2$203 (6)
Maximum
Holding Time(3)
28 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
48 hours
7 days
28 days
28 days
28 days
7 days
Analyze immediately
48 hours
Analyze immediately
48 hours
14 days
15
-------
RECOMMENDED CONTAINERS, PRESERVATION TECHNIQUES, AND HOLDING TIMES
(Source: EPA, 1982)
(Continued)
Parameter
Purgeable arooatics
Acrolein and
acrylonltrile
Phenols
Benzidlnes
•
Phthalate esters
Ni trosamlnes( 7 )
PCBs
Nitroaromati.es and
isophorone
Polynuclear aromatic
Haloethers
Container(l)
G, Teflon-
lined
septum
G, Teflon-
lined
septum
G, Teflon-
lined cap
G, Teflon-
lined cap
G, Teflon-
lined cap
G,,Teflon-
linea cap
G, Teflon-
lined cap
G, Teflon-
lined cap
G, Teflon-
lined cap
G, Teflon-
lined cap
Preservative^), (12)
Cool, 4°C
.0.008% Na2S203 (6)
HCi to pH<2 (10)
Cool, 4"C
0.0082 Na2S203 (6)
•
Adjust pH to 4-5 (11)
Cool, 4"C
0.0082 Na2S203 (6)
Cool, 4«C
0.0082 Na2S203 (6)
Cool, 4*C
Cool. 4»C . .
store In dark
0.008Z Na2S203
Cool, 4'C8
pH 5-9
Cool, 4-C
^
Cool, 4«C
0.0082 Na2S203 (6)
store in dark
Cool, 4*C
0.0082 Na2S203 (6)
Maximum
Holding Time(3)
14 days
14 days
7 days until
extraction, 40
days after
extraction
7 days until
extraction, 40 days
after extraction
7 days until
extraction, 40 days
after extraction
. ex^ltSSn^O days
after extraction
7 days until
extraction, 40 days
after extraction
7 days until
extraction, 40 days
after extraction
7 days until
extraction, 40 days
after extraction
7 days until
extraction, 40 days
after extraction
16
-------
RECOKfENDED CONTAINERS, PRESERVATION TECHNIQUES, AND HOLDING TIMES
(Source: EPA, 1982)
(Continued)
Parameter
Container(l)
Preservacive(2),
Maximum
Holding Time(3)
Chlorinated
hydrocarbons
TCDD
Pesticides Tests
Pesticides
Radiological Tests
Alpha, beta and
radium
G, Teflon-
lined cap
G, Teflon-
lined cap
Cool, 4°C
Cool, 4°C
0.008Z
G, Teflon-
lined cap
Cool, 4°C
PH 5-9
P.G
HN03 co pH<2
7 days until
extraction, 40 days
after extraction
7 days until
extraction, 40 days
after extraction
7 days until
extraction, 40 days
after extraction
6 months
17
-------
NOTES
(1) Polyethylene (P) or Glass (G).
(2) Sample preservation should be performed immediately upon sample
collection. For composite samples, each aliquot should be preserved
at the time of collection* When use of an automated sampler makes it
impossible to preserve each aliquot, samples may be preserved by
maintaining them at 4°C until compositing and sample splitting is
completed.
(3) Samples'should be analyzed as soon as possible after collection. The
times listed are the maximum times that samples may be held before
analysis and still be considered valid. Samples may be held for
longer periods only if the permittee, or monitoring laboratory, has
data on file to show that the specific types of samples under study
are stable for the longer time. Some samples may not be stable for
the maximum time period given in the table. A permittee or monitoring
laboratory is obligated to. hold the sample for a.shorter time if
Knowledge exists to snow this Is necessary to maintain sample
stability. Maximum holding times include the time required to take
the composite sample.
(4) Samples should be filtered immediately on-site before adding
preservation for dissolved metals.
(5) Guidance applies to samples to be analyzed by GC, LC, or GC/MS for
specific compounds.
(6) Should only be used in the presence of residual chlorine.
(7) For the analysis of diphenylnitrosamine, add 0.0082 Na2S2<>3 and
adjust pH to 7-10 with NaOH within 24 hours of sampling.
(8) The pH adjustment may be performed upon receipt at the laboratory and
• may be omitted if the samples are extracted within 72 hours of
collection. For the analysis of aldrin, add 0.008Z ^28203.
(9) Maximum holding time Is 24 hours when sulfide is present.
(10) Sample receiving no pH adjustment must be analyzed within 7 days
of sampling.
(11) Samples for acrolein receiving no pH adjustment must be analyzed
within 3 days of sampling.
18
-------
NOTES (Continued)
(12) When any sample is to be shipped by common carrier or sent through
the United States mails, it must comply with the Department of
Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations (49 CFR Part 172).
The person offering such material for transportation is responsible
for ensuring such compliance. For the preservation requirements of
Table 5-1, the Office of Hazardous Materials, Materials Transportation
Bureau, Department of Transportation has determined that the
Hazardous Materials Regulations do not apply to the following
materials: Hydrochloric acid (HC1) in water solutions at concen-
trations, of 0.04% by weight or less (pH about 1.96 or greater);
Nitric acid (HNO3) in water solutions at concentrations of 0.15% by
weight or less (pH about 1.62 or greater); Siilfuric acid (H2S04) in
water solutions at concentrations of 0.35Z by weight or less
(pH about 1.15 or greater); and Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) in water
solutions at concentrations of 0.080Z by weight or less (pH about
12.30 or less).
19
-------
ATTACHMENT 11.7
INSPECTION GUIDE AND PRETREATMENT
RECOMMENDATIONS, CITY OF HOUSTON, TEXAS
-------
GENERAL PRETREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
SIC
CODE
7538
7539
J539
7542
5441
*
_BQZ1
8072
PROCESS
Automotive Repair
- General
- Specialty
including^engine repair
and repair of other parts;
part cleaning; oil change;
lubrication.
Battery pppalr
Service and repair of
automotive batteries.
Car washes
Convenience Store with
three (3) compartment sink.
Food preparation for retail
sale.
•- •
Dental Clinics
Dental Laboratories
General or specialized den-
tistry, dental lab processes
JncJuding the making of den-
tures and artificial teeth.
Industrial
Category
Service
Service
Service
Service
Service
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
floor drains in shop
areaj utility sinks ^
waste oil tank
add storage
drains in wash racks
Kitchen sink
dark room, lab sinks
Suspected
Pollutants
oil and grease
.
Heavy metals esp.
Pb; acids, pH
oil and grease
oil and grease. pH.
mud, sand and grit
Oil and grease. TSS.
pH
Silver. Oraanics
Required
Pretreatment
waste solvent
containment.
grease trap}
waste oil tank
.containment and
off-site disposal
grease/mud trap.
recycle system
grease trap
Silver recovery svstem
1 of 5
-------
GENERAL PRETREATMENI REQUIREMENTS
SIC
CODE
_m5
J26.1
7538
J5JJLJ
8062
8063
8069
PROCESS
f jlnj & PhQtO-Llnl5hJng_Stflci
EUm pCOC.OSSing and
photographic developing
funeral Homos
Preparing the dead for
burial, cremating the dead
Gas Stations with Auto Re-
pair shops and/or Car Washes
See Automotive Repair or
Car Wash
Grocery Stores
Retail sale of all sorts of
food
HnspHaK
- General medical and sur-
fjical
- Mental, Psychiatric
- Other Specialty
General medical and surgical
J ? rvic es »_d 1 a gnps 1 1 c med icaj
.scrvJceS-^JnpatienL-treat-,
ment for the mentally 111 , ai
nthor hn<;nit.i1 Anil l^n.ilth
care services.
Industrial
Category
Service
Service
Sendee
Service
*vpfVlf P
d
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
darkroom, photographic
equipment f lab sinks
preparation area
kitchen sink and meat
cuttinq area
radioloav labs; lab
iJ nksi-dack coom_s J nks4.
kitchen area; laundry
room
Suspected
Pollutants
-------
GENERAL PRETREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
SIC
CODE
7011
—
7215
J218
7213
7?11
7535
7531
PROCESS
Hotel, Motels
_P_TQYJ de_lodging*_Q£_Lodgtnij_
and meals for the general
public.
Laundries
- Coin-operated
- Industrial
- Linen Supply
Household and industrial
laundry.
lanndpiPS - Rnwpr
Operation of merhanlr.al
laundries with steam nr
other powep; family or com-
mercial.
Paint and Autobody Shops
- Paint shops
- Top and body repair shops
Repair of automotive tops,
bodies and interiors^ auto-
motive painting and re-
finishing.
Industrial
Category
Service
Service
Service
Service
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
laundry facillitv.
kitchen area
floor drains, washing
machines, steam
cleaners, sinks
steam cleaners, floor-
drains, utility sinks
-paJnL_trjp4_f_lo.Qr_=
drains, utility sinks
Suspected
Pollutants
Oil and grease. pH. TS.(
oil and grease, pH,
temperature
~
i)1 1 and grpdse pH
TS*;
oil and grease, Pb,
TSS
-
Required
Pretreatment
Grease trap, lint
tran
lint trap . waste heat
recovery
grease_tcap^-waste_heat
recovery
vaste oil tank, paint p
trap
3 of 5
-------
GENERAL PR E TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
SIC
CODE
_aou
7539
5R1?
_Z39J
4212
~TWl
PROCESS
Jbyskians1 offices
Practice of qeneral or
specialized medicine and
surgery.
Radiator Repair
Pressure test, check for
leaks, soldering.
Rpttaiif^nts
Retell sale of prepared
food and drinks.
Rpspflrrh Laboratories
Laboratory wbrk or other
physical research and
development
Tank Truck Washinq
•
Testing Laboratories
Product testing on a fee or
contract basis.
Industrial
Category
Service
Service
-Se.cjd.ce
• •»
Service
Service
Service
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
lab sinks, darkrooms.
x-ray developers
^austl£_cJeanfng_batiiA.
caustic cleaning tank.
hydrotestlnq tank.
floordrains
kitchen area
lab sinks, floordrains
safety showers
drains in washlna
area
Lab sinks, floordrains r
safety showers
Suspected
Pollutants
.Silver, nrnanlrc
pH. heavy metals '
oil and grease, pH,
TSS. BOD
-
nil. nrcianlcs. heavv
metals
pH, orqanlcs. heavy
metals, oil and grease
pHr organic.*, heavy
metals
Required
Pretreatment
Silver recovery unit,
waste containment
recycle system, waste
holding tank
grease trap
.neutralization -laaL.
wastes contained for
off-site disposal
separation. pH
adjustment ^sludges '
contained for off site
disposal
pM adjustment, waste
containment for off-Sitr
disposal
-------
GENERAL PRETREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
SIC
CODE
7692
7215
«_^
PROCESS
Welding Shops
General repair work by weld-
ing including automotive
welding, repair of cracked
casting and brazing.
Washaterias
Industrial
Category
Service
Service
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
cooling water tank.
hydrotestinq tank.
stripping tanks
See Coin-operated
Laundries
Suspected
Pollutants
pH. heavy metals
Required
Pretreatment
waste contained for
off-site disposal.
5 of 5
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
2091
JLJU
J1354
J1355
PROCESS
Adhesivejnd Sealants -
Manufacture of industrial
and household adhesives;
glues, caulking compounds,
sealants and linoleum, tile,
and rubber cements from vege-
table, animal, or synthetic
materials.
Aluminum Forming
- Aluminum Sheet, Plate Foil
Aluminum and aluminum base
alloy basic shapes such as
sheetLplate and foil are
formed by flat rolling or
continuous casting.
- Aluminum Extrusion
Extruding aluminum and
aluminum base alloy basic
shapes_such_ds_rod_aniLbflr
pin *nH hih*» "tr.
- ftluminiM_fioJLUn9_flnd_DcayL-
ing
Involves rolling, drawing
and other operations re-
sulting in the production
of Al ingots, cast rod and
bar.
Industrial
Category
_Mie.iiy.es_
and Sealant
Mfg.
Alumi/iura
Forming
,.
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
cooling water from
reactors, waste raw
materials, floor drain;
contact cooling water,
stripping baths, .-
machinery lubricants.
floordrains
Pollutants
oH. oraanics. hpat/v
mptalt tpmnprafiirp
III.I.UIJ, w».lll|.><- 1 u 1 "1 <
Heavy metals, pH, oil
and grease, organics,
temperature
_
1
Suggested
Pretreatment
solvent separation.
recharge or containment,
)H adjustment t cooling
tower for cooling water
pH adjustment,
oil skimming; solvent
recharge or containment
for off-site disposal
cooling towers for
cooling water
+
1 of 14
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
JJ69J
_3&93
_2fl65
3479
PROCESS
Hat'erf*
- Storage batteries
Manufacture of storage
batteries, alkaline cell
storage batteries and lea(
acid batteries.
- Primary Batteries
Manufacture of primary
batteries, dry or wet.
CoaLJarUCrudes andJnter-
mediates; Cyclic Dves and
Organic Pigments
Manufacture of coal tar
crudes and cyclic organics,
dyes and toners. I.e. deri-
vatives of benzene, toluene
and other cyclic products;
synthetic organic dyes and
pigments; light oil products.
Coil Coating
- Steel basis materials
- Galvanized basis materials
- Aluminum_bas.Ls_mater.lals
Metal-SurJace_is_cJeaned_and.
etched_by sandblasting to
Coating is mfg. and applied
l>y firing or fusing to basis
metal .
Industrial
Category
Mechanical
Machinery
Manufactur-
ing
-Industrial
.Organic
Coil Coat-
ing
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
wastewater from mfg.
process, floor drains,
sinks
wastewater from mfq.
mfg. process, floor-
drains, cooling water
wet scrubber discharge
cooling water, strip-
ping hath*, floordrain
Pollutants
Heavy metals esp.
Pb. pll
Organics. pH. oil and
qrease, phenols, poly-
aromatic hydrocarbons,
temperature
Heavy metals (incl. CN,
I'b, Cd. Cr); TSS; pll;
oil and grease; organics
temperature
Suggested
Pretreatment
/aste containment for
off-site disposal,
eutralization,
teavy metal ppt, sludge
ontained. pll adjustment
pH adjustment; oil
skimming; solvent
separation, recharge or
containment t cooling
towers for cooling
water
•vastewater recycle
where product quality
is not affected, oil
skimming, heavy metals
l>l)t, settling, sludqe
contained and hauled ofl
site, pH adjustment.
cooling tower for
coo liny water
2 of
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
_3444
3674
-J6Z9
3471
—
PROCESS
Copper fonnina
See Aluminum Forming
Electronic Components and
Accessories
- Semiconductor and Related
Devices
Manufacture of semiconductor
and related solid state de-
vices i.e., integrated micro-
circuits, diodes and stacks.
- Electronic Components
Manufacture of electronic
components such as printed
circuitSj switches^ antennas
and waveguides.
Electroplating. Platinq.
Anodizing and Coloring.
Chromium j)l at ing of metalSj
Cleaning, descaling, buffing
and polishing, electroplating
coloring and finishing.
Industrial
Category
Copper
Forming
Electronic
Components
Mfg.
Electro-
plating
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
See Aluminum Forming
spent etchant and
plating solution, plat-
ing rinse water, spent
fixer, cooling water,
stripping baths,
floordrains, sinks
spent plating solution
and plating rinse
water, stripping tank,
sink, floordrains
Pollutants
Heavy metals, pH, TSS
Heavy metals , esp.
Zn, Cr, Cd, Ni ; pH;
CN-
Suggested
Pretreatment
See Aluminum Forming
Precipitation and
filtration, hazardous
•/astes contained for
off-site disposal . pH
adjustment
'recipitation and fil-
tration, hazardous
vastes contained for
)tf-site disposal .
CN- and Cr reduction.
)H adjustment
*"
3 of H
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
2011
I
2099
Jm.
3361
.3362
2861
•
— —
PROCESS
Foul and Kindred Products
Manufacturing or processing
food and beverages for human
consumption.
Foundries
- Iron and Steel
- Aluminum
- Mon-ferrous
Manufacture of Iron, steel,
aluminum and non-ferrous
(brass, bronze and copper)
casting
Gum and Wood Chemicals
Manufacture of hardwood and
softwood distillation prod-
ucts, charcoal, natural dye-
stuffs and natural tanning
materials.
*•
Industrial
Category
Food
Processing
Foundries
Industrial
Orqanic
Chemicals
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
floordrains and sinks
in processing areas,
water treatment
floordrains, rinsing
baths
cooling water from
reactors and distil-
lation columns, floor-
drains
— - • -• --
Pollutants
oil and grease, TSS
BOD, pit
TSS, heavy metals, oil
and grease, pll, or-
ganics esp. phenols.
chloroform . temperature
"
organics, pH, TSS •
temperature
Suggested
Pretreatment
grease trap, biological
treatment, settling,
filtration, sludge con-
tained for oil-site
disposal , pH adjustment
process water recycled,
gravity sedimentation,
ch'eTcff ca 1 preci pitat \ on,
oil skimming, waste sol
vent separation and
recycle , cooling towers
for cooling water, pH
adjustment
solvent separation or
containment, pH ad-
justment, sedimentation,
cooling towers for
cooling water
*
of
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
2Q13
?Q|6
2011
3199
'
PROCESS
Inorganic Chemicals
- Industrial Gases
- Inorganic Piqments
- Industrial Inoroanic
Chemicals
Manufacture of jjases for
sale in compressed, liquid,
and solid forms; black,
white and color pigments:
inorganic salts of sodium
and potassium, etc by brine
extraction, electrolysis, aii
liquification {industrial
gas production).
Leather Goods
Manufacture of leather goods
such as saddlery, harness ani
whips, leather desk sets,
razor straps and leather
belts.
• •
Industrial
Category
Industrial
Inorganic
Chemicals
Manufactur-
ing
Leather
Tanning &
Finishing
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
Mfg. processes, tloor-
drains, sinks in labs
or work areas
sinks In staining and
sealing area, floor-
drains
Pollutants
oil and grease, TSS,
BOD, oil. heavy metals,
NII3
organics, _pH, oil and
grease
Suggested
Pretreatment
Oil separator, waste
holding tank; pit ad-
justment , nitration.
solids trap
grease trap, waste con-
tained for off-site dis
posal , pH adjustment
<
5 of 14
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
3452.
3494
3490
.3531
3533
•
PROCESS
Machine Shoos
- Maqhfn? Parts
- Valves and Pipe Fittings
- Fabricated Pipe and Pipe
Fittings
Manufacture of bolts, nuts,
screws, washers and rivets;
pjpe fittings and valves for
controlling the flow of gase;
and liquids in pipes and
mains i_and for machinery;
fabrication of pipe and pipe
fittings from purchased
pipe, by cutting, threading.
bending, etc.
Machinery aqd Equipment
- Construction
- Oilfield
Manufacture of heavy machin-
ery and equipment used by
the construction industries
such as bulldozers, concrete
mixers, cranesvand the oil
and
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
3390
2A2L
_2BS2
PROCESS
Metal Heat Treating
Heat treating of metal for
the trade such as annealing,
braziny, hardening, shot
pppning and tempering.
Millworks, Veneer, Plywoods,
Structural Wood Members -
Manufacture of fabricated
wood products from purchased
materials by cutting, nailim
glue inn. staining, sealing.
Products include wood mold-
inns, doors; railings, shut-
ters.
Organic Chemicals Mfg. incl.
1) non-cyclic organic acids
and their metallic salts 2)
solvents 3) alcohols 4) svn-
thetic perfumes and flavor-
ings 5) rubber processing
chemicals such- as accelera-
tors and antioxidants 6)
synthetic tanning agents &
7) esters, amines of poly-
hydric alcohols and acids.
Industrial
Category
Non-ferrous
Metals Mfg.
Timber
Products
Mfg.
•-
Industrial
Organic
Chemicals
Mfa.
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
wet scrubber discharge,
machinery lubricants,
cleaning solvent, sinks,
floordrains
1
floordrains. mixing
and reactor vats,
sinks in labs, cooling
water
Pollutants
pll, oil and grease,
heavy metals ,
temperature
oil and grease
organic solvents , pH
-
organics incl . acids.
aldehydes, phenollcs,
oil and grease, pH, Ibb
temperature
Suspected
Pretreatment
oi 1 skimming ; heavy
i!tetal$~ppt. and settttrv
pH adjustment,
waste sludges contained
for off-site disposal
cooling towers for
cooling water
waste oil and waste
solvents contained for
off-site disposal , pH
adjustment
solvent recharge or
waste solvent contain-
ment, oil ^epamtoUT—
pH adjustment, solids
sedimentation, waste
sluayes hauled off-3lte
:oo1ing towers for *
:ooling water
•
7 of 14
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
2051
2642
2643
2640
2653
2655
2879
—
PROCESS
Paint, Varnish. Lacquers
Enamels Mfg.
MaoufaciuttiLJ>f_j>£Qducl_fj:Qin
res i ns-.-pAgmeDts . aod_p.cganj«
compounds hy hafrh mixing
nnpratinn.
Paper and Pulp Fabricated
Materials Mfg. of:
- Envelopes
- Bags
- Stationery & Tablets
- Boxes
- Fiber cans, tubes, drums
by cutting, glueing, &
printing.
Pesticides
Eonnu 1 a t j on_aod_pnepa cat ion
of ready to use household
pest control chemicals, i.e.
insecticides, fungicides *
herbicides, from organic *
metal to-organic substances.
Industrial
Category
Paint and
Ink Mfg.
Pulp and
Paper Mills
*
Pesticides
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
washwater from vats,
mixers, cooling water
from ball mills, floor-
drains, lab sinks
'
-
non-contact cooling
water, washwater. from
floor spills, equip-
ment cleaning, lab
sinks
Pollutants
organics (acids, alde-
hydes, phenol ics, alco-
hols, acids, oils)
Heavy metals, inorganic
pigments , pH
pH, BOD. organics
-
chlorinated hydro-
carbons LTSSj pllj heavy
metals (esp. Hg, Cu,
Cd, As, CH-), COD,
phenols, temperature
Suggested
Pretreatment
waste solvent contain-
ment or solvent rechargi
separation . dissolved
air flotation,
filtration, pH adjust-
ment
neutralization,
biological treatment,
waste solvent recnarge
or containment
biological oxidafcion}
incineration, filtratioi
pil adjustment, metal
separation, cooling
towers for cooling
water
t
8 of 1
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
291L
2951
2034
2031
2833
•
PROCESS
PptrnffMim Refining
Paving Mixtures and Blocks
Production of gasoline,
kerosene and other products
from crude petroleum through
straight distillation of
crude oil, redistillation,
cracking or other processes;
mfq. of asphalt and tar pav-
ina mixtures.
Pharmaceuticals
Mfg. - Fabricating and
processing drugs in pharma-
ceutical preparations for
human or veterinary use in
the form of ampuls, tablets,
capsules »_. vial s .ointments .
etc, by fermentation, bio-
logical and natural extract-
Ion and chemical synthesis.
•••
Industrial
Category
P.ettQleum
Refining
Pharma-
ceuticals
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
cooling water from
reactors, tloordrains,
lab sinks
washwater from floor
spills and equipment
cleaning, lab sinks
Pollutants
pH, organic wastes.
TSS. HOD. heavv metals
(incl. Cr, Cr+6), sul.
fides, oil and grease,
COD
*
organicsA pHL phenol ^
cyanide, TSS, BOD, COO,
heavy metals
,
Suggested
Pretreatment
biQlogicaJ_and chemical
oxidation, heavy metal
separation, orqanics
separation, solvent
recharge, oil skimming,
pH adjustment, .yaste
sludges contained for
off-site disposal
pH adjustment,
solvent recovery, Cir
(lest ruction, biological
treatment t heavy metals
PPJla sludge wastes
contained
9 of VA
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
3061
_2821
_2B22
-JZfi.4
PROCESS
Photographic Equipment &
Supplies
Mfa, of photographic
apparatus, equipment, parts
_sensitlzed_film,_pjper_,
cloth, and plates.
Plastic & Synthetic Material
_Synthet1c Rubber
Mfg. of synthetic resins.
plastic materials. . non-
_yukan:Lzable_c_laii omens
synthetic rubber by poly-
_mer.1zatJorL_and_copaLyjnetL=_
Cation and wood pulp process
Ing.
porcelain Enameling
Processes similar to coil
coating, and metal forming
industries.
«•
Industrial
Category
Photogra-
1c Equip-
ment Sup-?
plies
Plastics &
Synthetic
Materials
Porcelain
Enameling
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
plate rinse, sinks
dark rooms, film
processors
cooling water, floor-
drainSj lab sinks,
solvent containers,
mixing vats
-
^.
See Coil Coating
i
Pollutants
heavy metals, pH
organics . Ag
organlcs. pll, oil and
grease , temperature
-
See Coil Coating
Suggested
Pretreatment
neutralization
hazardous wastes con-
tained for off-site
disposal, silver
recovery unit, pli
adjustment
pH adjustment,
waste oil tank, waste
organics contained for
off-site disposal,
cooling towers for
cooling water
See Coil Coating
10 of
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
_4911
•«BMBM_-
2751
2752
2753
2782
2893
PROCESS
power Plants - Steam
Electric
Generation, transmission
and/or distribution of
jeJectdC-.enecgy_f.o_r_SiiLe
which results from steam
produced by utilizing fossil
fuels (oil . gas. coal) or
nuclear fuel.
Printing (Commercial)
Commercial Letterpress and
Screen
Commercial Lithographic
Engraving & Plate Printing
Blankbooks, Looseleaf
Binders
Establishments engaged in
letterpress and screen
printing ; lithographic
process; engraving and
etching steel, copper, wood
and rubber plates; mfg. of
blankbooks, looseleaf bind-
ers and devices.
Printing Ink - Mfg. of
oil-base printing ink,
__gravure ink, screen process
and lithographic ink.
Industrial
Category
Steam
Electric
Power
Plants
Printers
Paint &
Ink Mfg.
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
wet scrubber discharge
ion exchange wastes,
lab sinks, boiler
blowdown, cooling tower
blowdown, chemical
metal cleaning wastes,
floordrains
sinks, floordrains,
film processors,
work area drains
cleaning solvent sinks
floordrains
Pollutants
heavy metals, pH,
PCB's, TSS, oil and
grease , temperature
Silver, pH, oil and
grease, organics,
heavy metals
_
heavy metals, organics
pentachlorophenol
Suggested
Pretreatment
heavy metals ppt ,
solids separation, oil
skimming, pH adjust-
ment, hazardous wastes
and sludges contained
for off-site disposal ,
cooling towers for
cooling water
Sliver Recovery^ pH
adjustment.
hazardous wastes and
sludges contained for
off-site disposal
wastes contained tor
off-site disposal
11 of 14
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
_2211
2721
2731
2732
_27J1
3011
3021
-3031
3041
3069
PROCESS
Publishing and Printing
Mpwtpapers
Periodicals
Dooks
Book Printing only
Miscellaneous Publishing
Commercial printing and
publishing newspapers, books
and periodicals.
Rubber and Plastic Products
Tires and Inner Tubes
Rubber and Plastic Footwear
Reclaimed Rubber
Rubber & Plastic Hose and
Belting
Miscellaneous Fabricated
Rubber Products
Rubber fabrication from
natural, synthetic, or re-
claimed rubber products sucl
as tires, footwear and rub-
ber sundries, molding
primary plastics for the
trade and other plastic
products.
Industrial
Category
Publishing
& Printing
Rubber
Processing
& Fabrica-
ted Ru6b~er.
Products
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
sinks, press cleaning
area, film processing
area
cooling water, wet
scrubber discharge,
floordrains. lab sinks
-
-
,
Pollutants
organics, Silver,
pH
oil and grease, organic
pH, TSS, COD, BOD,
lead
-
Suggested
Pretreatment
Silver recovery.
waste containment for
off-site disposal , pH
adjustment
hazardous wastes dis-
posed off-site, waste
oil tanK, pn adjust-
ment, " Chemical
oxidation^ biological
treatment, pn adjust-
ment
12 of
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
3341
_284J
2211
_222J
_2Z3_1
*
PROCESS
Smeltinn and Refining
Recovering non-ferrous me-
tals and alloys from new &
used scrap and dross; re-
covery and alloying of
precious metals by high
temperature fusing operatioi
Soap and other Detergents
Mfg. of soap and other
detergents and production of
jjlycerin from vegetable &
animal fats and oils.
Textile Mills Products
Broad Woven Fabric Mills,
Cotton
Broad Woven Fabric Mills.
Silk and Man-made Fibers
Broad Woven Fabric Mills,
Wool
Mfg. of broad woven fabrics
knit fabrics, carpet back-
ing, felted fabric by
bleaching, mercerizing,
dyeing, printing, rinsing,
fabric treatments.
Industrial
Category
Non-Ferrour
Metals Mfg
Soap &
Detergent
Mfg.
Textile
Mills
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
non-contact cooling
water, wet scrubber
discharge, machinery
lubricants, floordrains
.
washwater from reaction
vessels, noordrains,
lab sinks
wastewater from scour-
Ing wools; bleaching,
printing, dyeing fabric
and other textiles;
sinks; rinsing vats
Pollutants
heavy metals, oil and
grease, pH
pH, oil and grease,
TSS, BOD, COD,
organics
pH, TSS, oU_ and
grease, heavy metals
• (Cr), Sulfide, phenol,
DOD, CUD
Suggested
Pretreatment
heavy metals ppt and
settling, oil separa-
tion, pll adjustment
oil and grease separa-
tion; biological treat
ment; pH adjustment
pH adjustment ,
oil separation,
biological treatment,
waste sludge contain-
ment for off-site
disposal
13 of
-------
SUGGESTED PRETREATMENT METHODS FOR REGULATED INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS
SIC
CODE
_2491
_2493
_2429
•
PROCESS
Wood Products
Wood Preserving
Particleboard
Miscellaneous Wood Products
Treatment of wood with
creosotej pentachlorophenol
(PCP), and other fire
retardants such as inor-
ganic salts.
••
Industrial
Category
Timber
Products
Suspected Process
Effluent Sources
wastewater from wood
conditioning baths &
treatment baths
,
Pollutants
heavy metals (Cu.Cr.As)
PCP, organics, pll,
oil and grease, COD
-_
Suggested
Pretreatment
recycle wastewater,
heavy metals ppt, oil
separation, chemical
oxidation, waste
sludges contained for
off-site disposal, pH
adjustment
14 of
-------
ATTACHMENT 11.8
ENTRY PROCEDURES FOR CONTROL AUTHORITY PERSONNEL
-------
ENTRY PROCEDURES FOR CONTROL AUTHORITY PERSONNEL
This section outlines the procedures control authority personnel should
utilize when entering an industrial user (IU) for the purpose of inspection of
the IU facility and/or the sampling of IU wastewater discharges to determine
compliance with applicable Federal, State and local pretreatment discharge
requirements.
Authority to Enter an IU Facility
Section 403.8(f)(l)(v) of the General Pretreatment Regulations for
Existing and New Sources require that POTWs have the authority to carry out
all inspection, surveillance, and monitoring procedures necessary to determine
compliance with applicable standards and requirements independent of infor-
mation supplied by the IU. This authority is required to be at least as
extensive as provided in Section 308 of the Clean Water Act which states:
"... the EPA Administrator or his authorized representative,
upon presentation of his credentials shall have a right of entry
to, upon, or through any premises in which an effluent source is
located or in which an effluent source is located or in which any
records required to be maintained. . . and may at reasonable
times have access to anc copy any records, inspect any monitoring
equipment or method. . . and sample any effluents which the owner
or operator of such source Is required to sample. . ."
This authority to enter an ID facility will normally be secured in a
POTW's local sewer use ordinance. It is recommended that control authority
monitoring personnel be familiar with the legal authorities belonging to the
control authority for entering an IU,so the appropriate reference can be made
during any monitoring visit.
In many instances, the POTW or control authority employs an independent
contractor to perform all or certain aspects of the IU inspection and sampling
functions. Section 308 of the CWA grants the same authority as long as
appropriate authorization is given for the contractor to act as an agent of
-------
Che POTW or control authority in performing IU inspection and sampling
activities.
Arrival at IU Facility
Arrival at the facility should be during normal working hours unless
circumstances require otherwise. The facility owner or. agent in charge should
be located as soon as the inspector arrives on the premises and notified of
the control authorities intent (i.e., scheduled, unscheduled or demand
inspections and/or sampling). Certain Ills will notify the control authority
that their staff are welcome to enter the IU property at any time without
contacting IU personnel. It is strongly recommended, however, that control
authority personnel always notify the IU management of their presence and
objectives.
Presentation of Credentials
When the proper IU facility officials have been located, inspection
personnel should introduce themselves as inspectors for the control authority
and present the proper credentials. These credentials indicate that the
holder is a lawful representative of the control authority and is authorized
to perform pretreatment monitoring. The credentials should be presented
whether or not identification Is requested.
After IU facility officials have acknowledged the credentials, they may
if they wish telephone the appropriate local, State or EPA Regional Office for
verification of personnel identification. It is important that credentials
never leave the sight of inspection personnel.
Consent to Monitor
Consent to Inspect and sample on the premises must be given by the owner
or operator at the time of the inspection unless a search warrant has been
obtained. As long as control authority personnel are allowed to enter, entry
is considered voluntary and consensual, unless the personnel are expressly
told to leave the IU premises. Express consent is not necessary; absence of
-------
/ an express denial constitutes consent. Following are some additional
v considerations:
• Reluctance To Give Consent. The receptiveness of IU officials toward
control authority personnel is likely to vary from facility to
facility. Most compliance monitoring will proceed without difficulty.
If consent to enter is flatly denied, personnel should follow Denial
of Entry procedures. In other cases, officials may be reluctant to
give entry consent because of misunderstandings of responsibilities,
inconvenience to a firm's schedule, or other reasons that may be
overcome by diplomacy and discussion.
Whenever there is difficulty in gaining consent to enter, control
authority personnel should tactfully probe the reasons and work with
officials to overcome the obstacles. Care should be taken, however,
to avoid threats of any kind, inflammatory discussions, or deepening
of misunderstandings. If the situation is beyond the authority or
ability of the inspection personnel, the appropriate control authority
representative should be contacted for guidance.
• Uncredentialed Persons Accompanying an Control Authority Personnel.
The consent of the owner or agent in charge must be obtained for the
entry of persons accompanying an inspection personnel to a site if
they do not have specific authorization. If consent is not given
voluntarily, these persons may not enter the premises. If consent is
( given, these persons may not view confidential business information
v-- unless officially authorized for access.
• Waivers, Releases, and Sign-In Logs. When the facility provides a
blank sign-in sheet, log, or visitor register, it is acceptable for
control authority personnel to sign it. Note however that inspection
personnel should not sign any type of "waiver" or "visitor release"
that would relieve the IU facility of responsibility for injury or
which would limit the rights of the control authority to use data
obtained from the IU, The inspection personnel should not agree to
any such unwarranted restrictive conditions.
If such a waiver or release is presented, the control authority
personnel should politely explain they cannot sign and request a blank
sign-in sheet. If the personnel are refused entry because they do not
sign such release, they should leave and immediately report all
pertinent facts to the appropriate supervisory and/or legal staff.
All events surrounding the refused entry should be fully documented.
Problems should be discussed cordially and professionally. Facility
officials must not be subjected to intimidation by the Federal, State
or local government's right to inspect.
• Problems with Entry or Consent. Because monitoring may be considered
adversary proceedings by some lUs, control authority personnel may be
challenged as to their legal authority, techniques, and competency.
/ Facility officials may also display antagonism to the control author!'
\ ties personnel. In all cases, the personnel must cordially explain
-------
their authority's and objectives and the reasons for the protocols
followed. If explanations are not satisfactory or disagreements are
irresolvable, the personnel should leave and obtain further direction
from the appropriate control authority supervisory or legal staff.
Professionalism and politeness must prevail at all times.
Denial of Entry
If control authority personnel are refused entry into a facility for the
purpose of authorized monitoring, certain procedural steps must be followed.
The following procedures have been developed in accordance with the 1978 U.S.
Supreme Court decision in Marshal v. Barlow's. Inc.
1. Make certain that all credentials and notices have been properly
presented to the facility owner or agent in charge.
2. If entry is not granted, ask why. Tactfully probe the reason for the
denial to see if obstacles (such as misunderstandings) can be
cleared.
3. If entry is still denied, personnel should withdraw from the premises
and contact his or her supervisor. The supervisor may confer with
attorneys to discuss the desirability of obtaining an administrative
warrant.
4. All observations pertaining to the denial are to be carefully noted
by the personnel in the field notebook as soon as possible. Include
facility name and exact address, name and title of person(s)
approached, authority of person(s) who refused entry, date and time
of denial, detailed reasons for denial, facility appearance, any
reasonable suspicions that refusal was based on a desire to cover up
regulatory violations, etc. All such information will be important
should a warrant be sought.
5. Under no circumstances should the personnel discuss potential
penalties or do anything that may be construed as coercive or
threatening.
6. Control authority personnel should use discretion and avoid any
situations that may be potentially threatening or inflammatory. In
the event of a threatening confrontation, personnel should document
the event and report it immediately to their supervisor. If feasi-
ble, statements from witnesses should be obtained and included in the
documentation.
-------
Following are some additional situations that control authority may be
subject to:
• Withdrawal of Consent During Monitoring. If the agent-in-charge asks
control authority personnel to leave the premises after monitoring has
begun, personnel should leave as soon as possible, following the
procedures above for denial of entry. All activities and evidence
obtained prior to the withdrawal of consent are valid, control
authority personnel should ensure that all personal and government
equipment is removed from the facility.
• Denial of Access to Some Areas of the IU Facility. If, during the
course of the inspection or sampling, access to some parts of the IU
facility is denied, personnel should make a notation of the circum-
stances surrounding the denial of access and of the portion of the
inspection or sampling that could not be completed. Personnel should
then proceed with the rest of the monitoring. After leaving the
facility, personnel should contact the control authority supervisor to
determine whether a warrant should be obtained to complete the
monitoring.
Obtaining Warrants
Control authority personnel may be instructed by control authority
attorneys, under certain circumstances, to conduct compliance monitoring under
search warrant. A warrant is a judicial authorization for appropriate persons
to enter specifically described locations and to perform specific monitoring
functions. It is possible that a pre-inspection warrant could be obtained
where there is reason to believe that entry will be denied when personnel
arrive at the facility or when personnel anticipate violations that could be
hidden during the time required to obtain a search warrant. The control
authority staff should discuss various reasons and procedures for obtaining
warrants with the control authority. This prior knowledge of when and how to
obtain a warrant will save a great deal of time should such an event ever
become necessary.
-------
E/REGION 10/#13
CHAPTER 12
ANALYTICAL GUIDANCE
Accurate analysis of industrial user and municipal treatment plant waste-
water samples is a critical component of the pretreatment program. The
determination of the compliance status of an industrial user with the applica-
ble Federal, State and local standards is dependent on accurate, reproducible
field and laboratory analysis of the wastewater samples. Techniques for the
precise analysis of conventional and heavy metal parameters in wastewaters are
well recognized. Three often-referenced manuals that describe methods for
analysis of these pollutants are: the EPA 'Manual of Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes (PB 259973), available thru NTIS; Standard
Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater (15th Edition, 1980); and
Annual Book of Standards. Part 31 (Water, Atmospheric Analysis), 1975,
published by the American Society for Testing and Materials. Each of these
documents provides a synopsis of the analytical method for a parameter,
information on interfering substances, and step-by-step instructions on how to
carry out the analysis. Also included is information on the calculation of
results, the precision and accuracy of the analytical method, and techniques
for chemically stabilizing and preserving samples.
Procedures for the analysis of toxic organic chemicals have been proposed
by EPA in Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollu-
tants; Proposed Regulations (40 CFR 136). Some of these methods can also be
found in the Supplement to the 1981 edition of-Standard Methods. These
procedures were developed specifically in response to the compliance moni-
toring requirements of the Clean Water Act. Both sources include quality
control techniques, sample container requirements, and sample preservation
procedures for a variety of toxic organic pollutants. All analytical labora-
tories should have ready access to each publication. Each of these publica-
tions provides information necessary for a trained laboratory technician to
perform nearly all analyses required in support of a pretreatment program.
Although not as great as the error associated with poor sampling tech-
niques, the potential for error occurring during analysis of wastewater
samples can have a great Impact on the acceptability of monitoring
12-1
-------
E/REGION 10/013
information. Without the aid of independent checks and general quality
control, a POTW's laboratory technician may report erroneous results without
being aware that a problem exists. Analytical quality control guidance is
available from EPA in a document entitled Handbook for Analytical Quality
Control in Water and Wastewater Laboratories (PB213884). This handbook is
published by the EPA Technology Transfer Program and is available through
NTIS. Specific information is provided that can guide the laboratory tech-
nician or chemist toward sound and reliable techniques and procedures.
All of these sources address the laboratory considerations applicable to
large POTWs where in-house capabilities exist to handle industrial wastewater
analysis. However, if a POTW is not equipped with a laboratory capable of
analysis of some or all industrial user pollutants, the analytical work will
probably be performed by commercial laboratories. To ensure the quality of
the commercial service, a POTW should consider whether or not the laboratory
is certified (where a lab certification program exists) by the State or EPA.
The results of a particular laboratory's analysis of standard samples which
were provided by EPA, the State or the POTW is also a reasonable indication of
a laboratory's accuracy. Standard samples can also be sent to two or more
commerical laboratories and the results compared to determine the reliability
and accuracy of each laboratory's analysis. The consistency (reproducibility)
of a lab's accuracy for analysis of a particular parameter can be determined
by checking the analytical results of several different standard samples for
the same pollutant. If four analysis for a heavy metal are all accurate, it
is reasonable to conclude that the lab is well qualified to conduct heavy
metal analysis.
Samples spiked with known amounts of pollutants to check a laboratory's
accuracy.
12-2
-------
F/REG. X-1///7
CHAPTER 13
POTW ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM
According to 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(vi)(A), two remedies for noncompliance
must be available to the POTW: (1) injunctive relief, and (2) civil or
criminal penalties.
In addition, 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1 )(vi)(B) requires POTWs to have authority
to halt immediately any actual or threatened discharge to the POTW that may
present an imminent endangerment to public'health, the environment, or the
POTW. Where the health or welfare of persons is threatened, notification
should be immediate, such as by telephone. Where the environment or POTW
operations are threatened, the violating industrial user must be notified and
afforded the opportunity to terminate the discharge and mitigate any damage.
The POTW, under such circumstances, should have authority to suspend waste-
water treatment services, and/or revoke a permit.
A POTW's enforcement strategy is normally outlined in its sewer use
ordinance. An enforcement strategy should be reasonable and be based on a
review of all facts and circumstances surrounding an industrial user's
noncompliance mode, including the nature of the noncompliance and the compli-
ance history of the user.
Discharge violations may be detected through various means:
• Review of industrial user reports
• Sampling and inspection activities
• Sampling of POTW influent/effluent/sludge
• Evaluation of treatment plant upsets
• Information from workers or citizens.
It is important that these violations be generally verified before any
enforcement action is taken by a POTW. Verification must include sound
analytical techniques, chain-of-custody techniques and well documented
reports, since they may be used as evidence in a formal case. Enforcement
action may be initiated subsequent to the following:
13-1
-------
E/REG. 10/07
• Industrial user's failure to submit a permit application
• Industrial user's failure to submit appropriate reports
• Industrial user's failure to comply with appropriate pretreatraent
standards by the appropriate compliance deadline
• Industrial user's failure to comply with appropriate discharge limits
as determined from the review of self-monitoring reports or POTW
sampling
• Industrial user's falsification of information submitted to the POTW
• Treatment plant upsets and interferences tracked to an industrial user
• Any other violation of the sewer use ordinance.
Enforcement activities should generally be of an escalated nature. A
typical program would begin with administrative remedies (i.e., notices of
violation, informal meetings, revocation of permit) and gradually escalate to
show cause hearings and issuance of administrative orders, then to injunctive
and judicial relief. Appropriate fines and penalties should be levied as
stipulated in the municipality's ordinance and determined according to the
nature of the incident. Depending upon the severity of the violation or
offense, the POTW may seek immediate injunctive relief. An example would be
emergency suspension of service when a substantial or imminent endangerment to
the health and welfare of persons or the environment or threatened inter-
ference of the municipality's treatment works. If an industrial facility has
been a chronic violator, the POTW may also seek injunctive relief.
The following is a general outline of a POTW's enforcement strategy for
general noncompliance with reporting requirements and wastewater discharge
limits.
1. The POTW surfaces noncompliance.
2. The POTW determines type of noncompliance.
• Noncorapliance with reporting requirements. No verification
needed.
• Noncompliance with wastewater discharge limits. The POTW will
conduct verification sampling.
13-2
-------
F/REG. X-1///7
CHAPTER 13
POTW ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM
According to 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(vi)(A), two remedies for noncompliance
must be available to the POTW: (1) injunctive relief, and (2) civil or
criminal penalties.
In addition, 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(vi)(B) requires POTWs to have authority
to halt immediately any actual or threatened discharge to the POTW that may
present an imminent endangennent to public h'ealth, the environment, or the
POTW. Where the health or welfare of persons is threatened, notification
should be immediate, such as by telephone. Where the environment or POTW
operations are threatened, the violating industrial user must be notified and
afforded the opportunity to terminate the discharge and mitigate any damage.
The POTW, under such circumstances, should have authority to suspend waste-
water treatment services, and/or revoke a permit.
A POTW's enforcement strategy is normally outlined in its sewer use
ordinance. An enforcement strategy should be reasonable and be based on a
review of all facts and circumstances surrounding an industrial user's
noncompliance mode, including the nature of the noncompliance and the compli-
ance history of the user.
Discharge violations may be detected through various means:
• Review of industrial user reports
• Sampling and inspection activities
• Sampling of POTW influent/effluent/sludge
• Evaluation of treatment plant upsets
• Information from workers or citizens.
It is important that these violations be generally verified before any
enforcement action is taken by a POTW. Verification must include sound
analytical techniques, chain-of—custody techniques and well documented
reports, since they may be used as evidence in a formal case. Enforcement
action may be initiated subsequent to the following:
13-1
-------
E/REG. 10/#7
• Industrial user's failure to submit a permit application
• Industrial user's failure to submit appropriate reports
• Industrial user's failure to comply with appropriate pretreatment
standards by the appropriate compliance deadline
• Industrial user's failure to comply with appropriate discharge limits
as determined from the review of self-monitoring reports or POTW
sampling
• Industrial user's falsification of information submitted to the POTW
• Treatment plant upsets and interferences tracked to an industrial user
• Any other violation of the sewer use ordinance.
Enforcement activities should generally be of an escalated nature. A
typical program would begin with administrative remedies (i.e., notices of
violation, informal meetings, revocation of permit) and gradually escalate to
show cause hearings and issuance of administrative orders, then to injunctive
and judicial relief. Appropriate fines and penalties should be levied as
stipulated in the municipality's ordinance and determined according to the
nature of the incident. Depending upon the severity of the violation or
offense, the POTW may seek immediate injunctive relief. An example would be
emergency suspension of service when a substantial or imminent endangerment to
the health and welfare of persons or the environment or threatened inter-
ference of the municipality's treatment works. If an industrial facility has
been a chronic violator, the POTW may also seek injunctive relief.
The following is a general outline of a POTW's enforcement strategy for
general noncompliance with reporting requirements and wastewater discharge
limits.
1. The POTW surfaces noncompliance.
2. The POTW determines type of noncompliance.
• Noncorapliance with reporting requirements. No verification
needed.
• Noncompliance with wastewater discharge limits. The POTW will
conduct verification sampling.
13-2
-------
E/REG. 10///7
3. The POTW will notify the violating industrial user by certified mail
once the violation is verified or upon the user's failure to submit
reports. Attachment 13.1 provides an example of a notice of viola-
tion form.
With regard to any compliance schedule, progress report or final
compliance report, if the POTJ determines that the industrial user
has not shown good faith, then formal enforcement action should be
undertaken (i.e., notice of Violation—show cause—issuance of
administrative order with stipulated penalties).
4. The user should be given a deadline for responding (usually 15 days).
5. The POTW will review the response (and may meet with the industrial
user) to determine the next step. /The following scenarios may apply:
• The industrial user corrects the violation or the POTW determines
that the response does not warrant escalating enforcement. No
further action warranted.
• The industrial user fails to submit a response, fails to comply,
or the violation is not corrected. The POTW initiates a show-
cause hearing, which results in issuance of an administative
order. (The user may appeal the order.)
• The industrial user fails to comply with the issued order. The
POTW will pursue judicial and injunctive relief.
6. Appropriate fines and penalties will be levied as indicated in the
sewer use ordinance.
Public Notification in Local Newspaper of Violators
The POTW is required, on an annual basis, to publish in the local news-
paper all significant violators over the past 12 months (40 CFR 403.8(f)
(2)(vii). A significant violation is one which remains uncorrected 45 days
after notification of noncompliance; which is part of a pattern of noncorapli-
ance; which involves a failure to accurately report noncompliance; or which
resulted in the municipality exercising its emergency authority.
The following Attachment 13.2 contains a draft enforcement strategy
prepared by the EPA. When final it will be distributed to POTWs implementing
pretreatraent programs.
13-3
-------
ATTACHMENT 13.1
NOTICE OF VIOLATION FORM
• Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, Oregon
-------
unified
sewerag*
ISO North First Avenue
Hillsboro, Oregon 97123
503 648-8621
Notice of Violation
DATE OF NOTIFICATION.
User Information:
Name:
Phone:.
Address:.
City:
Zip Code:.
Business Agent:
Principle Business Activity:
SIC No.
User 1s Issued which type of permit: MONITORING TJ NON-MONITORING Q OTHER Q
Pentrit No: Location Code:
Violation Information:
Discharger Is 1n violation of which Agency rule(s)?.
Has user been notified of a similar violation previously? No Q Yes
When?
Brief explanation of current violation:
Proposed enforcement action:
Corrective Action proposed by user (user 1s to complete and return within days).
Acknowledgement:
User Representative
Title
Date
Agency Representative
Title
Date
-------
ATTACHMENT 13.2
EPA DRAFT ENFORCEMENT STRATEGY
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
WATER
MOV 5 1984 OFFICE OF
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECTS Guidance to POTWs for Enforcement of Categorical Standards
T\«Arccc^«- VYT^/-^**-**-* —
FROM: Rebecca W. Hanmer, Director
Office of Water Enforcement and Permits (EN-335)
Acting '
Associate Enforcement Counsel for Water (LE-134W)
TO: Regional Water Management Division Directors
Regions I-X
State Program Directors
Attached is a copy of the Pretreatment Program Guidance to
POTWs for Enforcement of Industrial Categorical Standards. The
Guidance is now final. It is important to provide enforcement
guidance to managers of POTWs because the compliance deadlines for
electroplaters have recently passed.
The purpose of this guidance is to advise POTWs with approved
pretreatment programs of their authorities and responsibilities for
enforcing categorical pretreatment standards. Specifically, it
sets forth what EPA considers as appropriate responses to industrial
users who fail to comply with categorical standards by the required
deadlines. On that basis, it also serves as guidance for the EPA
enforcement activities relating to categorical standard violations.
This guidance was developed with the assistance of the Regional
Offices, several State representatives, PIRT task force members
and POTWs as well as the Office of General Counsel (OGC).
As part of each POTW's responsibility to enforce categorical
standards, there is a regulatory requirement to obtain 90 Day
Compliance Reports. To assist POTWs in obtaining this information,
we have enclosed a model letter to be sent by POTWs to each industrial
user.
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
November 1, 1984
OFFICE OF
WATER
Pretreatment Program Guidance to POTWs for
Enforcement of Industrial Categorical Standards
Purpose
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to
publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) on the enforcement of
industrial categorical pretreatment standards. Under the Clean
Water Act and the National Pretreatment Program Regulations, 40
CFR 403, POTWs with approved local pretreatment programs
are typically the primary enforcement authorities for industrial
categorical standards^/.
Application
Section 307(b) of the Clean Water Act requires the Environmental
Protection Agency to promulgate pretreatment standards to prevent
the introduction of pollutants into POTWs which are determined not
to be susceptible to treatment by such POTWs, which would interfere
with the operation of such POTWs, or would limit opportunities to
recycle and reclaim municipal sludges. EPA has been under court
order to establish pretreatment standards for 26 specific industrial
categories determined to be the most significant sources of toxic
pollutants. These categorical standards contain numerical limits
for pollutants commonly introduced into POTWs by the covered
industries. Attached is the list of categorical standards which
have been promulgated since 1981 and those which were recently
proposed to be promulgated (see Attachment 1).
Notification and Industrial Reporting
Based on its industrial waste survey, each approved POTW
should have a list of all industrial users which discharge into the
POTW and the industrial categories to which they belong. POTWs
are required to notify categorical industries about their responsi-
bility to comply with appropriate categorical standards. Each
industrial user is required to submit a baseline monitoring report
I/ In some instances States have chosen to administer the pretreatnu
program directly with limited or no assistance from local POTWs.
-------
-2-
(BMR) by a specified deadline (see Attachment 1) which indicates
whether it meets the categorical standard(s) at the time of
submission. Although POTWs are encouraged to notify industrial
users of the baseline monitoring requirement, industrial users
must comply with this requirement even if they do not receive
a POTW notification. Where an industrial user's baseline
monitoring report indicates noncompliance with the standards, it
must establish in its baseline monitoring report a schedule of
activities that will result in compliance with the standard by
the compliance deadline. Categorical industrial users are required
to submit additional reports within regulatory timeframes. (See
Attachment 2 for specific regulatory reporting requirements.)
Industrial users which fail to submit required reports or who
submit inadequate reports are subject to enforcement action by
EPA, the State (if approved), or the POTW (if approved).
Compliance Deadlines
For each categorical pretreatment standard, the Clean Water
Act requires EPA to set a deadline for compliance no later than
three years after the effective date of the standard. In most
cases, EPA provides industry with three years to comply. (See
Attachment 1 for the compliance dates established in the categorical
pretreatment standards.) An industrial user which fails to meet
the categorical pretreatment standard by the deadline is in
violation of the Clean Water Act. Each approved POTW has the
primary responsibility for enforcing the standards and bringing
each violator of the regulatory deadline in the POTW's service
area into compliance as rapidly as possible. The following
guidance is intended to address instances of noncompliance
with regulatory deadlines of categorical standards.
Enforcement
Timely compliance with categorical pretreatment standards
is an essential requirement of the Clean Water Act. Therefore,
where an industrial user has failed to comply with the deadline
specified in an applicable categorical pretreatment standard, the
POTW should take an enforcement action to obtain compliance,
to deter future violations of the law by the violator, and* to
promote fairness among members of the regulated community. The
enforcement action may take the form of a judicial action or, in
appropriate circumstances, an alternative procedure as discussed
below. Following are three recommended procedures for different
instances of industrial user noncompliance:
-------
lo if the industrial user in violation has not demonstrated
good faith and could have met the regulatory deadline by a prompt
and conscientious effort? the POTW should file a judicial
action and seek (by court decision or consent decree) an expeditious
compliance schedule and an appropriate penalty<>£/ The penalty
should be sufficient to deprive the industrial "user of any economic
benefit or competitive advantage derived from delayed compliance„
The amount should also reflect the seriousness of th© violation,,
the lack of diligence demonstrated by the violator„ and any other
relevant circumstances<> POTWs that have the authority to
administratively assess penalties and mandate compliance schedules
may do so in lieu of judicial actiono
2o If the industrial user has made a good faith effort to
comply with the standard,, but will miss the deadline by more than
90 days, the POTW should bring the industrial user into compliance
through judicial or administrative enforcement procedures»
Regardless of the procedure used? this action should include a
written document issued to the industrial user which contains an
enforceable schedule for achieving compliance,, Violators should
be allowed no more time than is absolutely necessary to achieve
complianceo Also? the enforcement action should seek monetary
penalties for failure to comply0 If the POTW does not have the
authority to impose penalties administratively, it should seek
penalties through judicial enforcement actiono
3o If the industrial user has made a good faith effort to
comply with the standard by the legal deadline and failed by a
period of 90 days or less? the POTW should either take enforcement
action or closely monitor the progress of the industrial user
towards achieving compliance0
Good faith is to be narrowly construedo The legislative
history of the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1977 described "good
faith™ as follows?
2/ A POTW is required to have authority to file a judicial action
^ and seek penalties as a condition for program approval» &
POTW may also have authority tos issue an administrative
compliance order (with or without the consent of the industrial
user)? impose administrative penalties (authorized by ordinance,
contract^ permit? or compliance order)? or revoke an industrial
user's right to discharge into the sewer° A POTW should
consult its attorney to determine existing administrative
authoritieso
-------
-4-
The Act requires industry to take extraordinary
efforts if the vital and ambitious goals of
the Congress are to be met* This means that
business-as-usual is not enough. Prompt,
vigorous, and in many cases expensive pollution
control measures must be initiated and
completed as promptly as possible.
In assessing the good faith of a discharger,
the discharger is to be judged against
these criteria. Moreover, it is an established
principle, which applies to this act, that
administrative and judicial review are
sought on a discharger's own time. Legislative
History of the Clean Water Act No. 95-14,
Vol. 3 at 463.
For information on how this good faith test applies
specifically to electroplating facilities, please see Attachment 3
-------
ATTAOMENT 1
Revised 8/08/84
SUMMARY STATUS OF NATIONAL CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS: MILESTONE DATES
Estimated
Number •
Of Indirect
Industry Category Dischargers
Timber Products 47
Electroplating 10
Textile Kills
Metal Finishing
Pulp, Paper, Paperboard
Steam Electric
Electrical Components I
Iron and Steel
Inorganic Chemicals I
Leather Tanning
Porcelain Enameling
Petroleum Refining
Coil Coating I
Electrical Components II
Copper Forming
Aluminum Forming
Pharmaceuticals
Coil Coating (canmaking)
Battery Manufacturing
Nonferrous Metals I
Organic Chemicals
Pesticides
Metal Molding and
Casting (Foundries)
Inorganic Chemicals II
Nonferrous Metals Forming
Nonferrous Metals II
.500
930
—2
261
85
242 x
162
21
140
88
53
39
—5
23
60
72
277
f
D
81
131
85
468
38
327
—7
23
107
— B
37
Promulgation
Date
—11
1-26-81
1-28-81
9-02-82
7-15-83
11-18-82
11-19-82
4-08-83
5-27-82
6-29-82
11-23-82
11-24-82
—11
10-18-82
12-1-82
12-14-83
8-15-83
10-24-83
10-27-83
11-17-83
3/9/84
3/B/B4
(2/85)
(11/84)
(12/84)
7/26/84
(10/84)
(11/84)
Effective
Date
3-11-81
BMR Due Date
PSES*
Compliance
Date
3-30-81 9-26-81 (Non-integ.) 4-27-84(Non-Integ. )
6-25-83 (Integrated) 6-30-84 ( Integrated )
10-18-82
8-29-82
1-3-83
1-2-83
5-19-83
7-10-82
8-12-82
1-06-83
1-07-83
12-01-82
1-17-83
1-27-84
9-26-83
12-7-83
12-12-83
1-2-84
4/18/84
4/23/84
(4/85)
(2/84)
(2/85)
(9/84)
(12/84)
(1/85)
—1
2-25-83 —3
6-30-84 (Part 433, TTO)
7-10-85 (Part 420, TTO)
2-15-86 (Final) —3
7-2-83
7-1-83
7-1-84
7-1-84
11-15-83 7-1-84 (TTO)— 4
11-8-85 (As)— 9
1-6-83
2-9-83
7-5-83
7-6-85
7-16-83
7-25-84
3-25-84
6-4-84
6-9-84
7-1-84
9/5/84
9/4/84
(10/85)
(8/84)
(6/8S)
(3/85)
(5/85)
(2/85)
7-10-85
8-12-85
11-25-85
11-25-85
3-23-80
12-1-85
—10
7-14-86
8-15-86
10-24-86
10-27-86
11-17-86
3/9/87
3/9/87
(2/88)
(2/87)
(12/87)
(B/87)
(10/87)
(1/88)
Parentheses Indicate expected milestone dates for categories that do not yet have final standards
* Pretreatroent Standards for Existing Sources
-------
Footnotes:
(1) No numerical pretreatroent limits have been established for the Textile Mills industrial category, and there is •
no final compliance date for categorical pretreaonent standards. Firms in this industry are required to comply^
only with the General Pretreaonent Regulations in 60 CFR 403. Local authorities should specify case-by-case
reporting for these industrial users.
(2) Industries regulated by the Metal Finshing categorical pretreaonent standards are included in the 10,500
indirect dischargers estimated for the Electroplating .category.
(3) Existing sources that are subject to the Metal Finshing standards in 40 CFR Part 433 must ccnply only with the
interim limit for Total Toxic Organ!cs (TED) by June 30, 1984. Plants also covered by 40 CFR Part 420 must
comply with the interim TTO limit by July 10. 1985. The compliance date for Metals. Cyanide, and final TTO
is February 15, 1986 for all sources.
(4) The compliance date for existing Phase I Electrical and Electronic Components manufacturers for TTO is
July 1, 1984. The compliance date for arsenic is November 8, 1985.
(5) Industries regulated under the Phase II Electrical and Electronic Components categorical pretreatment
standards are included in the 240 indirect dischargers estimated for Phase I.
(6) Industries regulated under the Caraaking subcategory of the Coil Coating Categorical standards are included
in the 32 indirect dischargers estimated for the Coil Coating Category.
(7) Industries regulated under the Phase II Inorganic Chemicals categorical standards are included in the 44
Indirect dischargers estimated for Phase I.
(8) Industries regulated under the Phase II Nonferrous Metals Categorical standards are included in the
indirect dischargers estimated Phase I.
(9) Subpart B only
(10) Subpart C only
(11) These regulations reaffirmed the pretreacnent standards that were previously promulgated and become effective
in the mid 1970's.
[This table is intended to provide POTWs with general information concerning each major industrial category. A
more detailed account of each category can be obtained through the Code of Federal Regulations.]
-------
CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS:
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS AND DUE DATES
Item Due
Report Due Date
Description of Report
1. Baseline Monitoring Reports (BMR)
Due 180 days after the
categorical standard
effective date.
* Nonintegrated 9/12/81
Integrated 6/25/83
Initial process description and a statement
certifying conplianoe or non-conpliance with
the standards. A compliance schedule required
from noncomplying facilities. See 40 CFR 403.
12 (b). .
2. Periodic Progress Report
Within 14 days of each
milestone date in the
compliance schedule
submitted with the BMR.
Noncomplying facilities are required to
submit a compliance schedule for achieving
compliance by the final compliance date.
Progress reports indicate whether or not action
items were completed on time, and if not, steps
taken to cone back into compliance.
3. 90-Day Compliance Status Report
Within 90 days following
the date for final compli-
ance with the applicable
Pretreatment Standard(s).
*Nonintegrated 7-27-84
Integrated 9-30-84
All facilities, regardless of compliance status,
must file this report certifying whether compliance
with the standards was achieved and, if not, steps
being taken to come into compliance. See 40 CFR
403.12(d).
4. Self-Monitoring (Semi-Annual) Reports
June and December of each
year, or more frequently
This report indicates the continued compliance
of the facility with the standards. It must be
submitted biannually but more frequent reports
can be specified by Control Authority. See 40
CFR 403.12(e).
*Electroplating Categorical Industry Only
-------
ATTACHMENT 3
Enforcement of Electroplating Pretreatment Standards
The deadline for non-integrated electroplating facilities to
comply with the electroplating pretreatment standards was April 27,
1984. The deadline for integrated facilities was June 30, 1984.
Facilities that have acted expeditiously in good faith to achieve
compliance should generally have been able to comply with the
standards by the applicable deadlines.
The electroplating pretreatmerit standards (40 CFR Part 413)
were promulgated on January 28, 1981 (46 Fed. Reg. 9467). These
standards (with the exception of those applicable to integrated
facilities, discussed below) have remained in effect since
promulgation, and facilities have thus had three years and three
months from the date of promulgation to achieve compliance. As
discussed in the main section of this guidance, compliance with
these standards is essential, and appropriate enforcement action
should be taken against violators.
Some industry members challenged the electroplating pretreatment
standards soon after their promulgation. The court upheld these
standards in their entirety on September 20, 1983. National
Association of Metal Finishers v. EPA, 719 F.2d 624 (3rd Cir.
1983). It is clear from the legislative history of the Clean
Water Act and other sources that companies must litigate on their
own time and are not entitled to delay compliance pending the out-
come of litigation. See, e.g., Train v. Natural Resources Defense
Council, 421 U.S. 60, 92 (1975). Therefore, electroplating
facilities who have delayed compliance activities while awaiting
the outcome of the NAMF litigation should not be considered as
having acted in good faith.
Another factor that does not justify delayed compliance is
EPA's ongoing review of the pretreatment program. In the past,
EPA has considered the possibility of amending some aspects of
the general pretreatment regulations. EPA is continuing to
examine the pretreatment program and may at various times amend
the regulations. This is a normal occurrence in the evolution of
any regulatory program. However, the basic program has been unchanged
since June 26, 1978, and no changes are currently contemplated that
will affect the status of the compliance requirements of the
electroplating pretreatment standards.
-------
- 2 -
Similarly, the existence of pending legislative proposals
relating to the pretreatment program does not constitute an
appropriate grounds for delaying compliance with pretreatment
standards. Existing statutory and regulatory requirements are
valid and enforceable unless and until they are modified.
Some special considerations pertain to the June 30, 1984
categorical standard compliance deadline for integrated electro-
plating facilities. (These considerations do not pertain to non-
integrated electroplaters.) In early 1981, EPA established and
then suspended a March 30, 1984 compliance deadline for these
facilities. On July 8, 1982, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit held that the suspension was illegal and reinstated
the March 30, 1984 compliance deadline, (NRDC v. EPA, 583 F.2d 752
3rd Cir. 1982). The Third Circuit later extended the deadline
by three months to June 30, 1984.
Subsequently, some owners and operators of integrated
facilities petitioned EPA to extend the deadline. EPA determined
that an integrated facility acting in good faith could comply
with the electroplating pretreatment standards by June 30, 1984.
Therefore, EPA denied their request on June 3, 1983 (48 Federal
Register 24933). This denial was upheld in General Motors v. EPA
(Nos. 83-3418 and 83-3432, June 26, 1984).
In general, an integrated manufacturer that began its
compliance program promptly after the July 8, 1982 NRDC decision
and pursued it diligently since then should have been able to
meet the June 30, 1984 deadline. However, a few integrated
plants may be able to demonstrate that despite good-faith efforts
since July 8, 1982, they could not comply by June 30, 1984. In
such cases, these good-faith efforts should be taken into account,
and the POTW should exercise its enforcement authority in a
manner consistent with this enforcement policy.
-------
MODEL TRANSMITTAL LETTER
(FROM THE REGION OR STATE TO THE CONTROL AUTHORITY)
INSIDE ADDRESS
Dear
With approval of your municipal pretreatment program has
come new responsibilities, including enforcement of national
pretreatment standards for certain industries which discharge
into your municipal sewerage system. These industries of concern
are known as "categorical industries". The Federal categorical
standards for each affected industry can be found at 40 CFR 405
to 40 CFR 471.
In a continuing effort to assist municipal managers such as
yourself who are implementing pretreatment programs, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency has developed guidance, pretreatment
training workshops, and seminars. As part of this effort, enclosed
is the Pretreatment Program Guidance to POTWs for Enforcement of
Industrial Categorical Standards.
This guidance explicitly offers you information concerning
your authority and responsibilities to conduct certain activities
as a part of implementing your program. It sets forth what EPA
considers as appropriate responses to industrial users who fail
to comply with categorical standards by the regulatory deadlines.
As part of each POTW's responsibility to enforce categorical
standards, there is a requirement to obtain 90 Day Compliance
Reports. By regulation 40 CFR 412, each industrial user affected
by a categorical standard must submit a compliance report to the
Control Authority within 90 days after the compliance deadline of
the categorical standard.
To assist POTWs in obtaining this information, we have en-
closed a model letter to be sent by POTWs to each industrial user
which may be required to submit a compliance report. (Note: The
model letter enclosed pertains to electroplating industrial
users. Most other categorical industry letters would be less
-------
complex, and would have alternate compliance reporting dates.)
A summary of the compliance report response should be maintained
with the POTW's enforcement records.
This guidance is of a general nature. Should you have any
specific questions please contact (Regional or State contact).
Sincerely,
(Appropriate EPA or State
Official)
Enclosure
-------
MODEL LETTER
(FROM THE CONTROL AUTHORITY TO CATEGORICAL IU)
Subject: Electroplating Industry Compliance
Dear Sir:
The National Pretreatment Program, established under the
authority of the Clean Water Act of 1977, requires that certain
industry groups, including electroplators, meet pollutant
limitations before discharging such pollutants into local-publicly
owned treatment works (POTW).
The Electroplating pretreatment standards are published in the
Code of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR 413. There are two distinct
deadlines which apply to this industry based on plant operations.
"Integrated" plants are those which, prior to on-site treatment,
combine electroplating waste streams with significant process
waste streams not covered by the electroplating category. "Non-
integrated" facilites are those which have significant wastewater
discharges only from operations addressed by the electroplating
category. According to our records, your facility is subject to
the Electroplating Categorical Standard (40 CFR 413). If you
believe that you are not subject to either of these rules, please
notify us immediately by submitting a request for a categorical
determination as provided by regulation, 40 CFR 403.6.
If your facility is a non-integrated electroplating facility,
you were to comply with the appropriate pretreatment standards
for metals and cyanide by April 27, 1984. In addition, you were
to submit a Compliance Report advising us as to whether you met
the April 27 deadline by July 27, 1984. If you did not meet the
compliance deadline, then your Compliance Report must include a
Compliance Schedule describing the actions you are undertaking
to meet the pretreatment standards and the earliest date by
which you can and will comply.
If your facility is an integrated electroplating facility, the
deadline for compliance with pretreament standards was
June 30, 1984. Your Compliance Report was due by September 28,
1984, and must include, if applicable, your Compliance Schedule.
-------
- 2 -
The content of the compliance report must comply with regulation
40 CFR 403.12(d):
"Within 90 days following the date for final compliance with
applicable categorical Pretreatment Standards . . . any
industrial user subject to pretreatment standards and
requirements shall submit to the Control Authority a report
indicating the nature and concentration of all pollutants
in the discharge from the regulated process which are
limited by pretreatment standards and requirement standards
and the average and maximum daily flow for these process
units in the Industrial User which are limited by such
pretreatment standards and requirements. The report shall
state whether the applicable pretreatment standards or
requirements are being met on a consistent basis and,
if not,what additional O and M and/or pretreatment is
necessary to bring the industrial user into compliance with
the applicable pretreatment standards or requirements.
This statement shall be signed by an authorized represent-
ative of the industrial user, (further defined in the
regulation), and certified to be a qualified professional."
Please submit the required reports to:
(Address to be indicated for Regional Office, State, or POTW)
If you have any questions or if you require additional information,
please contact .
Sincerely,
-------
D/REG 10///10 *
CHAPTER 14
DATA MANAGEMENT
An integral part of a POTW's pretreatment program implementation is the
management of data. Data is defined as:
• Industrial user survey results
• Permit applications/data disclosure forms
• Permits/contracts/orders/etc.
• Industrial reports (self-monitoring data and compliance reports)
• POTW reports
• Compliance monitoring and inspection reports of industrial users
• Accident spill plans
• Industrial treatment plans and specifications
• Enforcement records on industrial users
• Confidential information.
Depending on the size of the POTW, a manual filing system may be ade-
quate. An automated system is recommended for a medium to large size POTW. A
number of automated systems are in place nationwide; a POTW only needs to
correspond with other POTWs with ADP systems.
The arrangement of any filing system should consider the following:
• System should be logical
• All data for each industry should be contained in one file. Confi-
dential information should be filed separately under lock and key
• Files should be arranged in alphabetical order by industry name,
industry category, or SIC Code
• Information should be easily accessible, with capabilities to sort by
SIC code, key manhole, etc. (e.g., master lists, cross-references)
• Records must be kept for at least three years.
Another facet of data management is the development of standard forms,
and standard review procedures for processing industrial reports. The more
standardized a POTW can make its system, the more efficient it will be when
14-1
-------
D/REG 10///10 *
one considers staff time and available resources. Attachment 14.1 provides
several examples of standardized forms that could be used by a POTW for its
data control.
An example procedure for assimilating an industrial report is presented
below.
• A master list or log of reports expected during a specified time frame
(monthly is sufficient)
• A procedure to enter date of receipt of each report (usually on the
master list or log), and follow up for reports not submitted
• A procedure to screen and compare reported values and compliance
information with discharge standards and compliance schedules
• A procedure (if the screening is done by a nontechnical person) to
refer problem submissions to a technical specialist for more thorough
evaluation and follow up
• A filing system to ensure that the data are retrievable and maintained
for an appropriate period of time (three years or longer is recom-
mended)
• A system to cross-reference permit, contract, and POTW monitoring
files, if applicable.
A process flow diagram of a typical review process is shown below. It
indicates how self-monitoring and POTW monitoring reports as well as compli-
ance schedule reports are received from industrial users and entered into a
master log, then compared with the user's limits or schedule, and finally
referred for noncompliance investigation when necessary. If the industrial
users meet their effluent limits and compliance schedules, their reports
should be placed in the POTW's files for future reference.
14-2
-------
I.U.
SUBMITS
SELF-MONI-
TORING
REPORTS
COMPARE UB
RESULTS WITH
POLLUTAHT
LIMITATIONS
* Failur* co submic nay b« cause for
pcoaicy
** A acgacive decenuoacioc say b«
cauaa for oen»l;v
REVIEW PROCESS FOR INDUSTRIAL SELF-MONITORING REPORTS
14-3
-------
ATTACHMENT 14.1
STANDARDIZED FORMS
• Industrial Waste Application Status Report
• Industrial Application Review - Summary Sheet
• Industrial Waste Program - Sampling Data
• Industrial Log
(Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, Oregon)
-------
Industrial Waste Application Status Report
ORIGINATING
AUTHORITY
DATE
APPLICATION
IttUlD
APPLICANT
ADDRESS
DATE IWPC
RECEIVED
OATt UMT
TO TECHNICAL
ANALYSIS
OATt APPLICANT
NOT ir ico or
DECISION
RENEWAL
DATE
f
-------
Industrial Application foy/ew-Summary Sheet
I.
Z.
4.
V
5. Av£gA££ NUrt£cJ£ OF
&. TYPB OF SH/FT*
7. 5/X AflSVT?/
3. ClJ££EU7 LM7A7/ON5
-------
Industrial W&te Prcgran? -
Ma.
/. J-
uors
. CONTACT pEg<=>o/
-------
•INBUSTKY
-------
CHAPTER 15
REGULATION OF WASTE HAULERS
UNDER THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
Introduction
POTWs that accept discharges from waste haulers must have a system to
protect the integrity of their plant operations. Wastewater treatment plants,
as a rule, are not designed to treat industrial wastes that a waste hauler may
discharge. Even high strength domestic waste (septage) can occasionally
create treatment plant problems. Therefore, POTWs must establish procedures
to control the wastes from waste haulers, and to ensure that the wastes are
compatible with the treatment processes. The procedures should be similar to
those employed for control of fixed discharges that can impact treatment
operations.
Waste hauler discharges to a POTW, including septage waste, fall within
the scope of the General Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR Part 403). Section
403.l(b) states, "This regulation applies to pollutants from non-domestic
sources covered by Pretreatment Standards which are indirectly discharged into
or transported by truck or rail or otherwise introduced into POTW's..."
Also, Section 403.5 of the Pretreatment Regulations applies Prohibited
and Specific Discharge Standards "to all non-domestic sources introducing
pollutants into a POTW". The general and specific prohibitions contained in
40 CFR §403.5 are designed to protect the integrity of treatment plants by
preventing instances of pollutant pass through, interference, and sludge
contamination. This application of the Pretreatment Regulations conforms to
the intent of Section 307(b) of the Clean Water Act, which mandates the
establishment of pretreatment standards for those pollutants which are
determined not to be susceptible to treatment by such treatment works or which
would interfere with the operation of such treatment works. Under Section
502(6) of the Clean Water Act, "pollutant" is defined to include solid waste,
sewage, sewage sludge, chemical wastes, and biological materials. These
provisions thus include the control of septage wastes and other wastes from
waste haulers that are capable of interfering with POTW operations.
15-1
-------
As a result, a POTW must establish the legal authority and procedures
necessary to ensure that all waste hauler discharges comply with Federal pre-
treatment standards (see 40 CFR §403.8(f)(l) and (2)). Since there are no
National Categorical Standards for waste hauler discharges, the waste hauler
control program should be designed specifically to prevent violations of the
discharge standards contained in 40 CFR §403.5(a), (b) and (c). These pro-
hibitions apply not only to toxic pollutants, but also to excessive strength
conventional pollutants.
Waste Hauler Permit System
A permit system is the most direct and efficient method of regulating
waste haulers that discharge to a POTW. It provides control and authority for
the POTW to regulate the waste haulers. Implementing a permit system provides
the opportunity to monitor and regulate septic haulers based on the operating
conditions of the treatment works. Figure 1 presents an overview of the
procedures of a waste hauler permit system.
Waste Hauler Permit Application Procedures
The first step in implementing a waste hauler permit system is to
identify all waste haulers utilizing the POTW for waste discharge. Waste
haulers can be identified by using municipal or county business license re-
cords or by consulting local telephone directories. Waste haulers within the
immediate and surrounding service area should be considered potential dis-
chargers to the POTW system and should be notified of the permit system
requirements.
After all waste haulers who actually discharge to the POTW are identi-
fied, each should be required to complete a permit application. The permit
application form should be designed to provide the POTW with all of the la-
formation necessary to control waste haulers. Figure 2 is an example of a
permit application showing the information a POTW may require.
Conditions for Waste Hauler Permits
To effectively protect a POTW from possible hazardous or problem-causing
discharges from waste haulers, certain conditions should be developed for the
permitting system. An approved application could also serve as the permit if
these conditions are incorporated into the application.
15-2
-------
POTV notifies
hauler of
permit system
requir etnen t s
Hauler
applies
for permit
POTW
approves
permit
Hauler
receives
customer
wastes
Hauler
records
manifest
entry
POTW sets
specific
permit
conditions,
if
necessary
POTW random
sampling
of load
POTW compliance
action if permit
violated
Hauler
provides
copy of
manifest
to POTW at
time of
discharge
POTW
assess
trip fee
Figure 1. PROCEDURES OF A WASTE HAULER PERMIT PROGRAM
15-3
-------
FIGURE 2
EXAMPLE WASTE HAULER PERMIT APPLICATION
Company Identification
Name of Company
Company Address
Telephone Number
Vehicle Information*
Vehicle Make/Model Vehicle License Number
Vehicle Tank Capacity Licensing State
Waste Transport Information
Does this vehicle transport any wastes other than household septic tank
wastes? Yes No
If yes, list the other types of wastes (i.e., chemical wastes, oil and grease,
used motor oil, etc.) and from where they originate (i.e., industry,
restaurant, gas station, etc.)
• S
Name, Address, and Type of Operation
Type of Waste of Non-Domestic Customer
* If more than one vehicle is used, include information on all other vehicles
on a separate page and attach to this application.
15-4
-------
Figure 2 - Continued
Permit Information
List all other permits or authorizations for the disposal of any wastes
mentioned above:
Permit Type and Number Issuing Agency Expiration Date
I have personally examined and am familiar with the information contained in
this application and believe that the submitted information is true, accurate
and complete. In addition, I am aware of the conditions and requirements of
the Waste Hauler Permit and agree to meet them at all times. Failure to
comply with Permit conditions may result in the immediate suspension of the
Waste Hauler Permit and/or possible penalties as outlined in Section of
the Sewer User Regulations.
Date Signature of Owner or Authorized Official
Title
15-5
-------
permitting system. An approved application could also serve aa the permit if
these conditions are incorporated into the application.
Following is a list of conditions that a POTW may wish to Include in
their waste hauler permits:
• Non-Domestic Loads - Some POTVs may not be capable of treating any or
only certain types of non-domestic wastes, and thus must limit the
waste hauler to discharging only domestic waste. However, if a POTW
can treat non-domestic wastes (or only certain non-domestic wastes),
then provisions for these discharges should be made. In order for a
POTW to account for the non-domestic wastes it receives from waste
haulers, the POTW should request a list of customers from the hauler
and the type(s) of waste hauled from each customer.
• Prohibited Discharges - Waste hauler dischargers should always be
prohibited from discharging wastes with the following characteristics
(as dictated by 40 CFR 403.5(b)):
- Pollutants that will create a fire or explosion hazard
- Pollutants that will cause corrosive structural damage, but in no
case discharges with a pU lower than 5.0
- Solid or viscous pollutants in amounts that will cause obstruction
to flow
- Oxygen demanding pollutants discharged at a concentration or volume
that will cause interference
- Heat in amounts that will inhibit biological activity; in no case
should discharges cause the POTW influent to exceed 104 °F
- Any other type of waste that may be untreatable by the POTW, or will
interfere with the operation of the POTW (i.e., oil and grease,
radioactive wastes, or toxic and hazardous wastes).
• Pretreatment Standards - If waste haulers are permitted to discharge
non-domestic wastes to the POTW, then the sources of these wastes
should be regulated by local and/or national pretreatment standards.
• Number of Loads - If a POTW is susceptible to hydraulic overloading,
it may consider a limit on the maximum number of loads that a waste
hauler can discharge over a given period of time.
• Discharge Site Selection - Three primary factors should be considered
in the establishment of discharge sites for waste haulers: potential
plant impacts, monitoring ease, and accessibility.
15-6
-------
Ideally, there should be one discharge site that is located on plant
grounds that can be monitored at all times by POTV personnel to record
discharges and ensure proper handling. The discharge site should be
located in an area that vill not interfere with normal treatment plant
traffic. If a treatment plant is prone to upsets from slug loads, the
acceptance of waste hauler discharges directly at the head of the
plant without equalization facilities is not desirable. Therefore, a
site in the sewer system may be selected that will allow mixing and
dilution of the waste slug before it reaches the plant. A sice near a
lift station would provide a uniform flow and would dilute the slug.
The discharge site should be monitored at all times, if possible, to
prevent illegal discharges. For the same reason, controlled access is
also desirable. If the site can be only partially monitored, it
should be readily accessible to POTV personnel for spot checks.
Time Limitations - Specific days and/or hours that waste haulers are
allowed to discharge should be stated in the conditions. Following
are some considerations POTWs should keep in mind when developing time
limitations:
- The days and hours per day that POTV personnel are available at the
disposal site
- The times that peak and low flows occur in the collection system and
treatment plant.
Documentation of Origin of Wastes - A POTV should develop a condition
that would require the waste hauler to provide documentation con-
cerning the nature and origin of the wastes being discharged. A
manifest system or waste hauler log is the most efficient means for a
POTV to record this information. Figure 3 is an example of a manifest
system form. This type of system would require a waste hauler to
complete an entry on the fora for each load the hauler received,
including information such as:
- Name and address of customer
- Type of waste
- Approximate volume received.
Prior to each discharge the POTW should require a completed form from
the waste hauler. Each manifest sheet should be completed in
triplicate: one copy for the waste hauler, one for the POTV treatment
plant (or other appropriate department) file, and one copy for POTV
administrative/billing purposes. The POTV would usually supply blank
manifest forms to the waste haulers.
Random Sampling - The POTV should have a condition allowing for the
random sampling of waste hauler loads prior to discharge to the POTV.
This will give the POTV a mechanism to ensure that discharges conform
to appropriate standards and regulations.
15-7
-------
Figure 3
Waste Hauler Manifest Fora
Waste Hauling Waste Hauler
Company Name Permit No.
DATE NAME OF CUSTOMER TYPE OF ESTIMATED VOLUME
CUSTOMER ADDRESS WASTE OF WASTE
1.
a
2.
_.
_
__
_.
T. '
__
T.
__
__
__ ; ,
I certify chat the information listed here is true, accurate and complete. I
am aware of the conditions and requirements of the Waste Hauler Permit. I
understand that failure to comply with the Permit may result in immediate
suspension of the Permit and/or possible penalties as may be allowed by law.
Driver/Operator Signature: .
TO BE COMPLETED BY POTW REPRESENTATIVE AT TIME OF DISCHARGE TO POTW SYSTEM
Date: Time: Vehicle Discharge Class:
Sample ID * (if collected):
Comments:
Signature:
Title:
15-8
-------
• Modification of Conditions - The permit should contain .a statement of
the POTV's authority to impose permit modifications reflecting special
limits or requirements that are necessary to correct operational
problems at the POTW.
• Non-Transferabilicy - So that the POTW always has up-to-date Informa-
tion on its septic haulers, a condition should be Included In the
permit that will prohibit the transfer of waste hauler permits without
POTW approval.
• Limited Duration - The duration of the permit should be included in
the permit. One year permits are preferable. This will allow the
POTW to periodically review the permit discharge conditions and/or
review the list of non-domestic customers of the waste haulers.
* Revocation of Permit - This condition can act as an enforcement tool
for the POTW when waste haulers violate any of the permit conditions.
• Penalties/Fines - Any penalties and/or fines which a waste hauler may
be subject to if the permit is violated should be stated in the
permit.
Cost Recovery
If a POTW desires to recover the costs associated with the implementation'
of a waste hauler permit system, it should consider a two-tiered cost recovery
system. First, a flat rate permit fee should be assessed at the time a waste
hauler is issued a discharge permit. The permit entitles the hauler to
unlimited discharges for the duration of the permit. Second, a trip fee
should be charged for each disposal. Predetermined fees for each trip should
be made by the POTW. Fees should normally be based on the capacity of the
vehicle waste tank and not the actual volume contained In the tank for each
load. Trip fees allow costs to be proportionately distributed to all haulers
based on use*
Example Trip Fee Schedule
Vehicle Class Vehicle Capacity (Gal) Trip Fee
A 0-799 $10.00
B 800-1499 $15.00
C 1500T3000 $30.00
D Over 3,000 $40.00
•»• $10.00 per
1,000 gal.
15-9
-------
In determining the magnitude of the discharge fees to be levied- on waste
haulers, a POTW should consider the cost of administering the permit process.
This includes staff time to review and issue permits and to monitor the dis-
charge sites. The cost of laboratory analysis should also be factored into
the establishment of a fee structure. In conjunction with these considera-
tions, the unit cost of waste treatment at the POTW should also influence the
final fee rate determination.
15-10
-------
GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING SOLVENT
MANAGEMENT PLANS IN LIEU OF
TOTAL TOXIC ORGANICS (TTO) MONITORING
-------
B/Region 10/#8
CHAPTER 16
TOXIC ORGANIC MANAGEMENT PLAN
In lieu of monitoring for TTO, the Control Authority may allow dis-
chargers subject to Electroplating and Metal Finishing regulations to certify
that no dumping of toxic organics to the wastestream has occurred. In cases
where monitoring to determine TTO compliance is necessary, sampling and
analysis for TTO will only be required for those organics "which would
reasonably be expected to be present" in the industrial user's effluent
[Section 413.03(c)]. When dischargers request that no monitoring be required,
they must submit a toxic organic management plan (sometimes referred to as a
solvent management plan) that specifies the toxic organic compounds used, the
»
method of disposal used (instead of dumping into wastestreams), and procedures
for assuring that toxic organics do not routinely spill or leak into waste-
water discharged to the POTW. This certification is added as a comment to the
baseline monitoring report as well as periodic reports.
A toxic organic management plan provides methods for the reduction of
toxics in effluents and assists Industrial facilities in achieving compliance
with Categorical Pretreatment Standards. Some of the elements of a toxic
organic management plan are presented below.
The plan has three basic steps:
Step 1 - Process engineering analysis should consist of:
a. An examination of published reports on the specific industry;
b. A wastewater flow diagram to identify all possible wastewater
sources;
c. A list of raw materials used in the industrial processes, including
chemical additives, water treatment chemicals and cleaning agents,
and the wastewater stream that each material potentially enters;
d. Comparison of the toxics found in the effluent with the list of raw
materials and selection of the most probable wastewater source;
e. Evaluation of the toxics found in the effluent, but not on the raw
materials list and determination of those formed as reaction products
or by-products;
16-1
-------
B/Region 10/#8
f. Examination of sources such as equipment corrosion or raw materials
impurities contributing inorganic pollutants.
Step 2 - Pollutant control evaluation should be determined on a case-by-
case basis and may include:
a. Inplant process modification, including chemical substitution,
partial or complete recycling, reuse, neutralization, ion exchange,
or operation changes.
Step 3 - Toxics reduction evaluation report is submitted to the Control
Authority and contains:
a. Identification of source(s) of pollutant(s);
b. Control options explored;
c. Effectiveness of control options in meeting effluent limits;
d. Industrial user's choice of options and the projected schedule for
achieving necessary control.
In certain cases, the industrial user will not achieve compliance with
the effluent standard. In these cases, additional evaluations will be
necessary.
It is anticipated that more detailed guidance will be issued by the EPA
in the future.
16-2
-------
ATTACHMENT 16.1
GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING SOLVENT
MANAGEMENT PLANS IN LIEU OF
TOTAL TOXIC ORGANICS (TTO) MONITORING
-------
V GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING SOLVENT MANAGEMENT PLANS
IN LIEU OF TOTAL TOXIC ORGANICS (TTO) MONITORING
Total Toxic Organic Standard Compliance
Certain categorical pretreatment standards regulate the discharge of
toxic organic pollutants by setting a limit on the total toxic organic (TTO)
pollutant concentration or mass that can be discharged to a POTW. For these
standards, TTO refers to the sum of'the masses or concentrations of certain
toxic organic pollutants found in the process discharge at a concentration
greater than 0.01 mg/1. The toxic organic pollutants regulated by the TTO
limit in a standard differs for each standard in which TTO is limited. The
standard should be consulted to determine the regulated toxic organic pollu-
tants.
Since TTO monitoring is costly, EPA has made available alternative
options for such monitoring in the standards. The option available to the
Aluminum Forming, Copper Forming, and Coil Coating categories is monitoring
and controlling oil and grease at a designated limit. Oil and grease is less
costly to sample and test for and at the option of the I. 0. may serve as an
indicator parameter for total toxic organic pollutant levels.
For the Electroplating and Metal Finishing categories, industrial users
have the option (upon approval of the Control Authority) of preparing and
implementing a solvent/toxic organic management plan (STOMP). The purpose of
a STOMP is to identify all potential sources from vhich toxic organic
materials could enter the wastewater treatment system and to propose control
measures for each source that will eliminate the potential for toxic organics
to enter the wastestream. Thus, the STOMP alternative permits the Industrial
user to, instead of monitoring for TTO, install control technology that will
reasonably insure that toxic organics will not enter the wastewater treatment
system. Industrial users must also certify that no dumping of concentrated
toxic organic pollutants has occurred and that the facility's STOMP is being
implemented. This STOMP must be submitted to the Control Authority at the
time monitoring for TTO is first required (TTO monitoring for the Baseline
Monitoring Report) or when the certification option is first exercised.
-------
This section provides guidance to assist industies and control
authorities in preparing and reviewing solvent/toxic organics management
plans. The guidance is based, in part, on two sources: 1) Guidance Manual
for Electroplating and Metal Finishing Pretreatment Standards. EPA, Effluent
Guidelines Division and Permits Division, February, 1984, and 2) guidance that
was prepared by EPA Region V. An example solvent/toxic organic solvent
management plan is included. Guidance regarding TTO monitoring is also
included.
-------
GUIDANCE FOR THE PREPARATION OF A SOLVENT/TOXIC
ORGANICS MANAGEMENT PLAN
A STOMP should specify the toxic organic compounds used, the method of
disposal used (instead of dumping into was test reams), and procedures for
assuring that toxic organlcs do not routinely spill or leak into wastewater
discharged to the POTW. Guidelines for preparation of a STOMP are presented
below as four basic steps:
»
Step 1 - Process engineering analysis
A process engineering analysis should be conducted to determine the
source of toxic organic pollutants found in the facility's wastewater dis-
charge and those that could reasonably be expected to enter the wastewater in
the event of spills, leaks, etc., based on the type of~operations conducted at
the particular plant. Such an analysis should be based on the results of one
or more analyses of the plant's wastewater for the toxic organic pollutants
included in the definition of TTO for that Industrial category (see TTO
- monitoring guidance dischssed below). The process engineering analysis should
also include:
a. An examination of published reports on the specific industry;
b. A water flow diagram to identify all possible wastewater sources;
c. A list of raw materials used in the industrial processes, including
chemical additives, water treatment chemicals and cleaning agents,
and the wastewater stream that each material potentially enters;
d. Comparison of the toxics found in the effluent with the list of raw
materials and selection of the most probable wastewater source;
e. Evaluation of the toxics found in the effluent, but not on the raw
materials list and determination of those formed as reaction products
or by-products;
f. Examination of sources such as equipment corrosion or raw materials
impurities contributing inorganic that could include toxic organic
pollutants.
-------
Section 413.02 of the Electroplating Regulations and Section 433.11 of
the Metal Finishing Regulations provide a definition for the TTO term. The
final development document for these regulations (EPA 440/1-83/091, June 1983)
states that the toxic organics generated by these industries are primarily
from the dumping of spent solvents used in degreasing and paint stripping
operations* The list of compounds in Sections 413.02 and 433.11 is rather
extensive and includes some extremely toxic chemicals. Since some are more
commonly found in wastewaters from the regulated metal finishing operations
Tables I and II are included to provide lists of specific compounds that will
be most prevalent in and of particular concern to electroplating and metal
finishing facilities. Please note that these lists are provided as guidance,
and therefore may not be all-inclusive for site-specific facilities.
Step 2 - Pollutant control evaluation
An evaluation should be made of the control options that could be
implemented to eliminate each source or potential source of toxic organic
pollutant introduction to the treatment system. Those may include in—plant
modifications, solvent or chemical substitution, partial or complete recycle,
'reuse, neutralization, and operational changes. The analysis should be
conducted on a case-by-case basis and should result in one or more feasible
options to control each source or potential source of toxic pollutant intro-
duction. Finally, evaluation of the available control options including the
advantages and disadvantages of each lead to a decision of whether a solvent/
toxic organics management plan is a feasible alternative to TTO control and
monitoring and, if so, will lead to a selection of that plan.
Step 3 - Preparation of solvent/toxic organics management plan
The solvent/toxic organics management plan should document:
a. The identification of source(s) of pollutant(s);
b. Control options explored;
c. Effectiveness of control options in meeting effluent limits;
d. Industrial user's choice of options and the projected schedule for
achieving necessary control.
-------
A solvent/toxic organic pollutant management plan should include at a
minimum, the following items:
a. A complete inventory of all organic chemicals used in, or found
through sampling and analysis to be present in the wastewater from,
its electroplating or metal finishing process operations (organic
constituents of trade-name products should be obtained from the
appropriate suppliers as necessary);
b. Descriptions of the methods of disposal other than dumping used for
the inventoried compounds, such as reclamation, contract hauling, or
incineration;
c. The procedures for ensuring that the organic pollutants listed do not
spill or routinely leak into process wastewaters, non-contact cooling
water, groundwater, or surface waters (i.e., Spill Prevention,
Control, and Counteroeasures (SPCC) Plan); and
d. Determinations or best estimates of the identities and approximate *
quantities of organic pollutants used in, as well as discharged in the
wastewaters from, the electroplating or metal finishing manufacturing
processes. Compounds present in wastestreams that are discharged to
sanitary sewers may be a result of regulated processes or disposal,
spills, leaks, rinse water carryover, wet air pollution control, and
other sources.
Step 4 - Submission of Solvent/Toxic Organic Management Plan and Certification
Statement
The STOMP should be submitted to the Control Authority at the time the
baseline monitoring report is required if the I. D's. initial election is to
choose this option. Alternatively, an I. U. may submit a STOMP at any later
time and request that TTO monitoring requirements be discontinued upon
approval and imlementation of the STOMP. A prerequisite for use of the
certification approach should be a fully approved, implemented, and ongoing
solvent/toxic organic management plan. In addition, a certification statement
should be required both at the time of submission and with each periodic I. D.
report (i.e., semi-annual report). It should be signed by an officer of the
company or manager responsible for overall plant operations. A statement such
as the following should be required:
-------
"Based on my Inquiry of Che person or persons directly responsible for
managing compliance with the TTO limitations, I certify that, to the best
of my knowledge and belief, no dumping of concentrated toxic organics
into the wastewaters has occurred since filing of the last report. I
further certify that this facility is implementing the toxic organic
pollutant management plan submitted to the Control Authority on
(date) (Officer)
If the user is unable to make the above certification statement, the user
should notify the Control Authority sixty days (60) prior to the due date for
filing the compliance reports. At that time, the Control Authority should
determine the appropriateness of requiring sampling and analysis for specific
toxicants and notify the user accordingly.
-------
GUIDANCE FOR TOXIC ORGANIC POLLUTANT MONITORING
The Electroplating and Metal Finishing industries may elect to submit a
STOMP rather than perform TTO monitoring. However, these facilities must
(with the exception of the small operations defined below) perform an initial
compliance sampling and analysis for those toxic organics reasonably expected
to be present. This requirement is necessary to determine compliance and
verify individual pollutants that may be of concern.
Facilities that are categorized as non^ntegrated and noncaptive according
to the regulations, and that discharge less than 10,000 GPD, may be excluded
from the monitoring requirements if they successfully complete the certifica-
tion procedures. The minimum number of consecutive sampling days should be
three in a two week period for facilities discharging less than 250,000 GPD
and six in a two week period for facilities discharging more than 250,000 GPD
and must occur during peak operational periods. However, in lieu of this
sampling frequency, recent (1 year old or less) historical sampling data that
is representative of peak operational periods may be accepted.
At least two grab samples for volatile pollutants and either an 8-hour or
a 24-hour (depending upon the length of the normal operating day) composite
sample for acid and base/neutral pollutants should be obtained on each
monitoring day. Wastewater samples must be prepared and analyzed by GC-MS in
accordance with U.S. EPA proposed methods 626 and 625 (July 1982) for the
specific compounds in Table I and any others designated by the Control
Authority. A single analysis for volatile pollutants (method 624) may be run
for each monitoring day by proportionately compositing the grab samples
directly in the GC purge and trap apparatus in the laboratory.
In addition to the quantitive analysis for the compounds in Table I, an
attempt should be made to Identify and quantify any additional substances,
whether or not they are "Priority Pollutants", indicated to be present in
the extracts by peaks on the reconstructed gas chromatograms (total ion plots)
more than 10 times higher than the adjacent peak-to-peak background noise.
Identification should be by reference to the EPA/NIH computerized library of
-------
mass spectra, with visual confirmation by an experienced analyst* Quantifi-
cation may be an prder-of-magnitude estimate based upon comparison with an
internal standard. The Control Authority should require a statement des-
cribing the quality assurance/quality control procedures exercised throughout
the monitoring program in sufficient detail to enable the quality of the data
to be evaluated.
After reviewing the results of the toxic organic pollutant monitoring
program, the Control Authority may require specific effluent limitations for
toxic organic pollutants in addition to, or.'in place of, the TTO limit and may
modify the compliance monitoring program as appropriate.
8
-------
ATTACHMENT 16.2
EXAMPLE TOXIC ORGANIC/
SOLVENT MANAGEMENT PLAN
-------
TOXIC ORGANIC SOLVENT MANAGEMENT PLAN
LONGHORN REFRIGERATION CORPORATION
TEASIP. TEXAS
FORTY ACRES PLANT
I. Description of Facilities and Solvent Use
A. Process Description
The Longhorn Refrigeration Corporation, Forty Acres Plant, manufactures
automotive radiators, condensers, and compressors from metal coils and metal
castings manufactured by other suppliers. The forming and assembly processes
include metal forming, degreasing, chromating, and brazing in preparation for
painting and final assembly. The metal castings are machined, washed,
assembled, and degreased prior to final assembly.
Wastewater types and volumes and the current wastewater treatment system
are depicted in Figure 1. The primary sources of process wastewater are the
degreasing, chromating, fluxing, and parts washing operations. Other sources
of wastewater are cooling, tower blowdown and boiler blowdown. Wastewater from
the degreasing operations is treated by dispersed air floatation for oil and
grease removal and then discharged to a combined wastestream containing the
wastewater from all other sources. The combined wastestream is then treated
by coagulation/flocculation with chemical and polymer addition for solids and
metals reduction. The treated effluent is discharged to the city sewer
system.
B. Identification of Toxic Organic Chemicals Entering the Plant Wastewaters
1. Chemical Analysis of Treated Wastewaters
Samples were taken of the plant's treated wastewaters for analysis for
the 111 toxic organics regulated under the metal finishing categorical
pretreatment standards. Samples collected were 24 hour flow proportioned
composite samples for acid extractible and base/neutral compounds. Grab
samples for volitile organics were taken every four hours and were composited
before analysis. Samples were taken over a period when all production lines
were operating at peak production rates. Samples were analyzed by gas
chromatography with compound identification and quantification .by mass
-------
K>
Foralng Degreasing - 5,000 gal/day-—
Casting Degreasing - 2,600 gal/day —
Chromating * 6,000 gal/day -
Fluxing - 1,500 gal/day
Parts Washing - 12,000 gal/day
Cooling Tower Slowdown - 5,700 gal/day-
Boiler Slowdown - 1,600 gal/Hay
Dispersed Air
Flotation
Chenical and
i Polymer
Addition
Coagulation/
Floculatlon
Mixer
Clarlfler
Discharge to
City Sewer
FIGURE 1
' UASTE1MTEH GENERATION AND T8EATMKNT
1X)NGIIORN REFRIGERATION CORPORATION ACRES PLANT
-------
spectrophotometer (GC/MS). EPA procedures 630 and 631 were followed for GC/MS
analysis. Toxic organic compounds detected at concentrations greater than
0.01 mg/1 are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
Compound Concentration
1,1,1 Trichloroethane 1.320
Napthalene 0.210
Chloroethane 0.131
Benzene 0.532
Phenol 0.681
2. Identification of Solvents Used in Manufacturing Operations
a. Greasefree is a degreasing solvent used in the forming process.
Greasefree's principle ingredient is 1,1,1 Trichloroethane. We have
contacted the manufacturer of Greasefree, Doubt Chemical Corporation,
who informs us that their analysis of Greasefree indicates that no
other priority toxic pollutants are contained in Greasefree. Doubt's
letter confirming their analysis is enclosed as Attachment 1.
b. Hoguewash is a degreasing solvent used in the metal castings
process. Hoguewash is a multlcomponent solvent we purchase from
Pound Chemical Corporation. At our request Pound has analyzed
Hoguewash and found it contains napthalene, benzene, and phenol.
Pound represents that no other toxic organic pollutants were
identified in its analysis of Hoguewash. Pound's letter documenting
its analysis is enclosed as Attachment 2.
c. Rustaway is a corrosion inhibitor used during the metal castings
washing process to prevent rust formation. We buy Rustaway from the
Exit Chemicals Corporation. The primary ingredient of Rustaway is
carbon disulflde. Exit refused our request for a chemical analysis
of Rustaway. We, therefore, submitted an aliquot of Rustaway to
Whatsinit Laboratories, Inc. for analysis. Whatsinit's report is
-------
enclosed as Attachment 3 and documents that Rust away contains
chlorethane. No other toxic organlcs were detected.
3. Identification of Other Potential Sources of Toxic Organic Pollutant
Introduction to the Wastewater Treatment System
;- - a* Durable Paints are used to finish forming process items.
Although not detected in the wastewater analysis, Durable Paints are
known to contain toluene. The floor drains in the forming process
painting area discharge to the wastewater treatment system.
Therefore, any spilled paint would enter the process wastewater
treatment system.
-" --" """ I?j '
b. De.gr easing Areas - Floor drains in both degrees ing areas
'similarly are connected to the main wastewater system. Spills of
--.' - degreasing agents could, therefore, enter the treatment system.
'c. Solvent Storage Areas - Solvents, paints, and corrosion
inhibitors are stored in bulk quantities in four different areas of
the plant—the twd degreasing areas, the washing area, and the
painting area. Spills could occur by accidental dumping, spillage
during routine transfer, etc. Such spills would enter the wastewater
treatment system through the floor drains.
II. Description of Control Options Explored
A. Solvent Substitution
For the degreasing, corrosion inhibitor, and painting sources of toxic
organlcs, Longhorn explored the feasibility of substituting another product
that does not contain toxic organic materials. Obviously, this would be the
most effective manner of eliminating toxic organic discharges both from
process operations and potential spillage to floor drains. Longhorn obtained
samples of degreasing agents, corrosion inhibitors, and paints that do not
contain toxic organlcs from vendors and conducted pilot tests of their
effectiveness. Longhorn concluded after these tests that the alternative
degreasing agents and paints could not be used without adversely affecting the
process and final products. The alternative degreasing agents were not nearly
as effective as the ones currently used and, therefore, would impair the
effectiveness of subsequent operations. Alternative paints could not be
applied evenly to our products. One alternative corrosion inhibitor,
Chromisorb, appears to be an acceptable alternative to the Rustaway product we
currently use. Chromasorb is somewhat more expensive Chan Rustaway and
-------
contains the toxic metals zinc and chromium. Thus, the option of eliminating
chloroethane discharges by substituting Chromasorb for Rustaway as a corrosion
inhibitor was considered.
B. Process Modifications
The major alternative to the substitution of degreasing agents is to
institute changes in the degreasing process that do not result in a wastewater
discharge. This would be accomplished by wiping parts rather than rinsing
them. After a thorough wipedown parts would be air dried in an area under a
vacuum hood. Any material used for wiping would, of course, be treated as a.
hazardous material. It would be transferred to drums and disposed to a
r
licensed disposer or reclaimer. Thus, process changes could be made that
would eliminate discharge of process wastewaters containing-1,1,1 trichlore-
thane, napthalene, benzene, and phenol. Solid waste generation would, of
course, increase. . " ~-'!' >-- -
C. Segregated Drain System
Spills of toxic organics could be eliminated from the process wastewater
stream if a segregated floor drain system were constructed. Longhorn investi-
gated this option and found that, because of location of some existing drain
pipes, such modification would require a major disruption of the plant and
would cost far more than routine TTO monitoring. Moreover, such an option
would create a significant additional wastewater treatment problem for these
cases in which drained water is not contaminated by spilled material.
D. Sealing Floor Drains
Introduction of toxic organics to wastewaters through floor drains could
be eliminated if floor drains were sealed. In the process areas this option
is not feasible because of State safety requirements. In storage areas,
however, such an option may be practical.
E. Installing Sumps in the Floor Drains
Under this option sumps would be installed such chat prior to entering
the drain, floor waters would pass through a sump or holding tank. The
sump would be as large as the largest spill of solvent reasonably expected
-------
pips a 10 percent freeboard allowance. Thus, if a solvent spilled, the
• .' " " .7 £1. -. -7 . -L - .
discharge to the drain would be turned off. The solvent could, then, collect
,» »
•in the sump and be recovered.
TTC'7U r:*.- **~ii.- f' 5 iil'"-' - .' i °~ '.
III. Toxic Organic Solvent Management Plan
As a result of the above analyses, Longhom believes that all of its
•> » . ; 1 -: v > . :-;. : ••.-•..•-••.
toxic organic pollutant discharges can.be controlled by a solvent management
plan in lieu of routine toxic organics monitoring.
A. Solvent Substitution
Discharge of chloroethane will be eliminated by use of a substitute rust
• . I-r:-• T -, : : .. - * ~ r~. .- - - '..:
•inhibitor. Longhom will discontinue use of Rust away as a rust inhibitor.
.Instead, Longhom will use Chrpmasorb to prevent rust formation in its metal
'' . .re./-'.irie:';.. rv-.ij, .«••.: •.':.;••• ..-.
casting line.. '-. Chromasorb is a zinc-chromate rust inhibitor that can be used
to-prevent rust formation in place of Rustaway. Chromasorb contains the toxic
: metals chromium and zinc. The existing wastewater treatment system, however,
is designed to remove1'metalic Folioitants.:" BjT adjustment of the chemical and
'polymer feed, Longhorn anticipates that it can0 maintain current levels of
A. - - • • ,
metals discharge while- eliminating chloroethane discharges.
. r:::r:.-rtc rs;' :i>L- •.•;..-. •-•-';
•B. Process Changes
/
Longhorn will eliminate discharge of process wastewaters containing 1,1,1
. trichloroethane, napthalene, benzene, and' phenol by instituting changes in the
. i
'decreasing process. Solvent cleaning wilt be accomplished by immersion and
manual wipedown. Parts will be' allowed to air dry in an area covered by a
vacuum hood prior to any_water washing. Materials used for wipedown will be
collected in drums, sealed, stored in a secure area and transferred to
Usitagin Reclamation. Company. Usitagln is a licensed hazardous waste
disposer.
C. Solvent Storage Procedures . -. -,-;.
Storage procedures for all solvents containing toxic organic compounds
will be changed. Storage will be in a central location for all such
materials, including paints. The storage area will be diked to contain a
-------
volume equal to the largest container stored, 55 gallons, plus 50 percent.
There will be no floor drains in this area.
All incoming containers of solvents or paints will be labeled upon
r ".-"," : '•:;£ .. D r.-:.cT
receipt with the following information:
***********************************
Material Contains Regulated Organic Solvents" ""-• = • •'•••-- 5i"'-.*• ..--• i^-.3y— -
' ,-•-.*"''
: -.... ~ ~~ :..-'..,". ••_•.::;: srj-rc"' ic i
1. Use only in designated areas *
2. Do not permit this material to enter plant vastewater * . - »•
stream ' , - •• ' * :;v2:::. 1-v•••.:•" :
3. Dispose of only in designated and identified containers * ~^~~tT
A******************************************************,********** 7..'"" ?'"" " ~~''
.."i f--Mj '•:r::l2.-.r :• •...^r_|_ii >v i.'.'-n '.;•--'
All in-plant usage containers will also be marked with _ the above information^
D. Installation of Sumps in Process Areas . ." •"".':" V"-.'
In all process areas where materials containing-toxic organic compounds -_ _ c-, ,,
are used, sumps will be installed prior to any floor drains. The .sumps., will ,-...,, - c.
be designed to allow rapid shut-off of flow to the drain and to hpldjju. ypl^ffle-.. •—^. -
equal to the largest container of solvent used in that area plus ten percent.
E. Spent Solvent Disposal Practices
Spent solvents are collected in 55 gallon drums, sealed,, and stored ,10. an c...,--.
existing, secured storage area. The storage area contains ,no.,-floo.r .drains, .5fci -.--r s
Longhorn sells spent solvent to the Usltagin Reclamation Company.,
P. Training - x t
H . . - - " ' S'.'^v •£ f .'-. i-iTC'S _
All personnel involved in degreasing, chromating, -painting, and cleanup •
activities will receive instruction in the proper handling and disposal of
solvents and cleanup materials in order to keep regulated organic containing
materials out of Industrial wastewater. New employees will be trained in _'_;-
these procedures immediately. All personnel working in these activities are ....
familiar with this solvent management plan and will follow the procedure
established in that standard to eliminate regulated organics from entering the.
water wash system.
-------
r' Training consiats Tpf classroom instruction .which reviews the following:
•* - •*• 7 51 '•• •• f- c •' ' ~'t-. " . ;-.•'-->•' - -i* .-v , •
"".•:' • \ I/ ~TTCB,;6rgaal.ic Jsjo'lyents an4 cleaners known to be in use at the plant and
..- - '• f"1 "^« areaJsTi'jin ;wiilch they" are., used. .., .,-..;:•-•
locaiionTB/qf ll^t^stationa^nd drains with emphasis ypoh the
'- - V;.'.":'."r-^'-idcBfiDoBC^iof ;.pr'e^r^atn«nt'-*ewr,sV8ti8ms tor^each area in the plant.
-".--".;:^.' 3^ r^e~ Sp^y7«ftjC'^HaMge!i^€t"Plany a^ih^^ proper procedures for "handling
G^ ' "n^,-"r _. •::- .
• •-• .—-^jfc • -Inspections.
.» andjbleening operations will be ^inspected
.^ re«t;iQelj_ by!'4$w£*?*«.^superyisar to\ verify, cleaning procedures and
:~^hera to insure that TTO does not
."spli.i;'.qir l«alc~intO plant aewers." ,/•••••": .•:.•::••£.: '•-• •• "
,-»-•- .-.; _. .•;. ^-^.. ^. y. ^.
cleaning, and,.solvent handling,.reuse, ani
. ./i£well' as./i|ftV-ffl|*?rlal and waste solvent storage'
inspected weekly"by" a dea^gnaced environmenxal
"• ^7rr~""rejpre8eHtatiV«;to yetJfy proper, sol vent storage, handling;? and
: .t-A^---..^,,,.:;^-.—*. -.. •,-4,.i--i,,»M^^-^||gg agd^sign^off -will be oaiatained by
''^epresent"ativ«n^;: .t. :-:'.'
^r -.4*1 proviaioni^Qrtnia^ plan Hili'be'fuily^iapleiiiieated by April 1, 198A.
as. i" r.v ,itt'i.-.::7r'ioTrche-'per?>:i or pc'fSdr./- ----- "-1-.
Based on i^- inquiry 6f the person or persons directly responsible for
°
with the TtdTUaitatipns, I certify that, to ths'best of
•y knowledge antf belief,::BO-: dumping: of Concentrated toxic organic.*! ^tto the
-JW.HYi"^1? .$*& ;0«-Curred since filing o1!*the'riast'repcrt.' T furthe? certify
L-i£_w«l^_^i_43,*?fe5?ii^^^n^g|'ivg--^6: to^J-oigaj^g. 'pollutant management plan
Placi. J*ana«-.
Plant
_ .
Darrell Royal
Manager
Forty Acres Plant
-------
TABLE 1
Halogenated Solvent Constituents
Di,tri,tetra-chloromethanes
Di,tri,tetra-chloroethanes
Di,tri,tetra-chloroethylenes
Chlorinated Pluorocarbons
Chlorinated Benzenes
Non-Halogenated Solvent Constituents
Benzene Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Phenol Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
Nitrobenzene Ethyl Acetate
Ethylbenzene Ethyl Ether
Toluene Acrylonitrile
Xylene Carbon Disulfide
Cresol Cyclohexane
Methanol Cyclohexanone
Butyl Alcohol Pyridine
Acetone Napthalene
TABLE II
Generic Names of Solvents
Kerosene
Napthas
Ethers
Heavy Aromatics
Cellosolves
Cresylic Acid
Mineral Spirits
Petroleum Distillates
Esters
Oleum Spirits
Ligroin
------- |