PRETREATMENT BULLETIN JUNE 1989 BULLETIN #6 Contents National Pretreatment Coordinators Meeting p. 1 Pretreatment Awards p. 1 Enforcement Update p. 2 Pretreatment Enforcement Initiative Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Summary Report Sludge Enforcement Initiative Koppers Settlement Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. Pulp and Paper Mill Dioxin Discharges p. 3 Regulatory Update p. 4 Sludge Regulations Storm Water Regulations Guidance Update p. 5 Guidance Manual for Slug Loadings to POTWs Enforcement Response Guide Additional Local Limits Guidance City Attorneys' Workshop Upcoming Events p. 7 Index of Pretreatment Bulletins 1-6 p. 8 On April 14, 1989, Virginia became the 26th state with an approved pretreatment program. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water Enforcement and Permits EN-336 401 M St. SW Washington, DC 20460 D \ tu u / ------- ------- PRETREATMENT BULLETIN #6 J(JINJ 1 flS 1989 National Pretreatment Coordinators Meeting Denver, CO was the site of the 1989 National Pretreatment Coordinators Meeting held by EPA from April 11 through April 13. Over 100 participants including representatives from 35 states, 23 representatives from EPA Headquarters, and 35 representatives from all 10 EPA Regions attended the meeting. For the first time, the meeting was international thanks to attendance by a Ca- nadian representative from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment. The objectives of the Pretreatment Coordinators Meeting were to exchange information concerning the Pretreatment Program, provide EPA Headquarters with feedback on successes, identify future challenges, and obtain recommendations from EPA Regions and States regarding issues of importance. The two and one half day meeting consisted of technical presentations, small group discus- sions, and general meetings of all attendees. Just a few of the topics discussed were PIRT and DSS requirements, enforcement issues in pretreatment, EPA’s Pollution Prevention Program, implementa- tion of SNC and RNC for POTWs, regulation of lUs in non-pretreatment cities, and development of a long-term pretreatment program strategy. As in previous meetings, State coordinators met to discuss issues of particular concern. Later the State coordinators presented their top five issues of concern: 1) Sludge technical standards, particularly with regard to the need for additional local limits guidance and the time for POTWs to achieve compliance 2) Inadequate staff and staff turnover 3) Toxicity testing and the cost of Whole Effluent Toxicity testing for POTWs 4) The need for additional technical guidance regarding local limits development for toxic organics 5) State Communications Network- an electronic bulletin board for the states While state coordinators met, EPA Regional and Headquarters representatives met to discuss the need for a revised National Pretreatment Strategy - the first pretreatment strategy was initially developed in 1978 (see 38 Fed.Reg. 30982). EPA hopes that this revised strategy will allow the Agency to better meet the changing needs of the Pretreatment Program. The National Pretreatment Coordinators Meeting was an excellent opportunity for EPA and the States to look back at program achievements. Attendees also looked forward to future challenges which include increasing POTW effectiveness in implementation and enforcement of pretreatment standards and requirements, continued improvement in the oversight process, development of more comprehensive NPDES permits, and documentation of pretreatment successes. The 1989 National Pretreatment Coordinators Meeting provided a chance for participants to assess current issues and move toward future goals. programs. These awards will be modeled after the FYI... Operation and Maintenance Awards and the Bene- ficial Sludge Use Awards given annually by the Pretreatment Awards - This year the Office of Office of Water. The goal of the awards is two- Water is adding a new approach acknowledging fold: to recognize POTWs for outstanding efforts the efforts of POTWs to implement and enforce in the area of pretreatment, and to heighten overall approved pretreatment program requirements. public awareness and support of local wastewater EPA is developing Pretreatment Excellence treatment-related programs. Awards to acknowledge exemplary pretreatment EPA Regions and States have been asked 1 ------- JUNE 1989 PRETREATMENT BULLETIN #6 to nominate POTWs they believe to be operating exemplary pretreatment programs. After screen- ing nominations at EPA Headquarters, EPA will notify POTWs of their nomination and ask them to submit an awards application which includes in- formation that an Awards Committee (comprised of pretreatment experts from EPA Headquarters, EPA Regions, and States) will use to evaluate the local programs. The Awards Committee will choose win- ning POTWs in four size categories based on actual flow: 1) 0 to 2.00 million gallons per day (mgd) 2) 2.01 to 5.00 mgd 3) 5.01 to 20.00 mgd 4) Greater than 20.01 mgd EPA will notify winning POTWs of their selec- tionin August 1989 andpresent theawardsdunng the Water Pollution Control Federation’s annual national conference in October, 1989. One repre- sentative from each of the first place POTWs will be invited to attend the WPCF Conference in San Francisco as a guest of EPA. Pretreatment Enforcement Lnitiptive - EPA and the States are now in the process of targeting POTW candidates forenforcemerit actions to address fail- ure to adequately implement approved local pre- treatment programs. This national pretreatment enforcement initiative began with a February 1989 memorandum signed by Edward Reich, Acting Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforce- ment Compliance and Monitoring, and James Elder, Director of the Office of Water Enforce- ment and Permits. In this memorandum, Regions were asked to identify potential enforcement can- didates, to request state participation, and to begin taking appropriate enforcement action (civil refer- rals or administrative penalty actions) against each of these POTWs. EPA anticipates that this enforcement ini- tiative will be larger in magnitude than those ini- tiatives used in 1985 and 1986 to address failure to develop approvable local pretreatment programs. The initiative is part of a continuing effort to ensure that appropriate enforcement action is taken to address POTW failure to implement approved local pretreatment programs. It is antici- pated that a national press release providing addi- tional details will be available in September 1989. Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and Enforce- ment Summary Report- - The Enforcement Divi- sion of the Office of Water Enforcement and Per- mits is currently in the process of compiling a Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and Enforce- ment Summary Report. This summary will pro- vide analyses of pretreatment data on industrial users, POTWs, States, and EPA. This data is obtained primarily from the Pretreatment Permits and Enforcement Tracking System (PPETS), the national pretreatment data tracking system, which contains information obtained by EPA Regions and States during pretreatment audits, pretreat- ment compliance inspections, review of annual reports and other sources. A draft version of this summary will be transmitted to EPA Regions and certain States for their review and comment in July 1989 . Public release of the summary is planned for September 1989. Sludge Enforcement Strategy - In response to the statutory mandate in section 405(d) of the Clean Water Act of 1987, EPA proposed technical regu- lations outlining disposal/use practices and pollut- ant standards for municipal sludge at 54 Fed. Reg. 5746,Feb 6,1989. EPA isin theprocessofevalu- ating potential enforcement responses to the re- quirements set forth in proposed Part 503 sludge regulations, and gathering information on existing sludge permits in order to identify and analyze en- forcement issues related to sludge. This informa- tion will be used by EPA to develop a sludge en- ENFORCEMENT UPDATE The summary will include graphs, tables, and accompanying text related to such information as issuance of control mechanisms, significant noncompliance rates of significant industrial users (SIUs), inspection of SIUs, enforcement actions taken by POTWs against SIUs, publication of significant violators, and technical analysis for local limits. 2 ------- rKIl I KLA I lVIt,IN I I$ULLL I tIN #0 JUINt .. I9 S9 forcement strategy which will be in place by the time the technical regulations are promulgated in final form. The enforcement strategy will cover the following areas: assessing the effect of the sludge regulations on EPA and State inspection proce dures; developing a definition of SNC for sludge violations; procedures for reporting SNC viola- tions on the QNCR; and assessing compliance with Best Professional Judgement and other exist- ing sludge limits. This strategy is due to be completed by the end of FY89. Koppers Company Pays $950.000 to Settle Clean Water Act Case Brought By U.S. EPA - On Octo- ber 12, 1988, Koppers Company, Inc., a Fortune 500 company, agreed to pay a civil penalty of $950,000 to the United States to settle a Clean Water Act enforcement action brought against the Company by U.S. EPA. The settlement order, signed by U.S. District Court Judge Richard B. McQuade, in Toledo, Ohio, represents the largest penalty assessed for violations of the Clean Water Act pretreatment standards at a single facility. This penalty recovers more than the economic benefit that Koppers Company may have obtained from its noncompliance. The complaint, filed in 1987, alleged that Koppers Company, while the owner of an iron and steel coke plant in Toledo, Ohio, violated pollutant discharge limitations and reporting requirements promulgated under the Clean Water Act. Specifi- cally, U.S. EPA alleged that Koppers Company discharged ammonia, phenol, and cyanide to the local Toledo sewage treatment plant for almost two years in violation of the categorical pretreat- ment standards and requirements for iron and steel manufacturing, cokemaking subcategory, 40 C.F.R. section 420.15(b). Koppers, by the terms of the settlement, did not admit any of the viola- tions alleged by U.S. EPA. Koppers sold its Toledo coke plant in May 1987 to Toledo Coke Corporation. The case against Toledo Coke is pending. Ocean Spray Cranberries. Inc. Fined - After dis- charges with very low pH caused interference with proper operations at the receiving POTW, Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. was warned repeatedly of the need to pretreat its wastes properly. As a result of a criminal enforcement action for negligentl willful violations, Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. was fined $400,000 on December 20, 1988 after pleading guilty to 20 misdemeanor counts for pre- 4 Regulation of Pulp and Paper Mill Dioxin Discharges EPA and the States have been evaluating and regulating the discharge of dioxin from pulp and paper mills that use chlorine to bleach chemical pulps. There are 104 of these mills in the United States; eight are indirect dischargers. Numerous data on the levels of dioxin in effluent, sludge and pulp from these mills have been collected as part of an USEPA/Paper Industry Cooperative Dioxin Study. Data regarding levels of dioxin in fish have been collected as part of the National Bioaccumuladon Study. In addi- tion, various Regions and States have been conducting additional ambient water sampling around a number of these mills. On August 9, 1988, the Office of Water issued the Interim Dioxin Strategy for the Regulation of Pulp and Paper Mill Dioxin Discharges to the Waters of the United States. Comments on the strategy and its implementation are welcome. However, the strategy should be used now. The goal of the interim strategy is to eliminate the presence of dioxin in discharges from pulp and paper mills to the waters of the United States. The interim strategy calls for (1) aggressive standards for dioxin applicable to all water bodies where mills using chlorine bleach processes are discharging; (2) col- lection of data on each of the 104 affected mills, including dioxin levels in the puips, effluents, sludges; (3) detailed technical evaluation of wastewater treatment technologies and/or in-process changes to reduce or eliminate the presence of dioxin in wastewater discharges; and (4) issuance of NPDES permits that regulate and require monitoring for dioxin, examine effluent toxicity and provide for modification to tighten controls consistent with the final strategy and the requirements of (continued on p. 4) 3 ------- JUNE 1989 PRETREATMENT BULLETIN #6 treatment violations and I misdemeanor count for direct discharge to wetlands. In addition, Ocean Spray was ordered to buy a sludge press for the Town of Middleboro’s sewage treatment plant, as restitution for damages caused to the POTW by Ocean Spray’s violations. REGULATORY UPDATE Sludge Regulations - The 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act (CWA) require that permits issued to treatment works contain sludge stan- dards. EPA proposed technical standards for pollutants of concern in sludge for five major use or disposal methods (40 CFR Part 503) on Febru- ary 6, 1989 (54 Fed.Reg. 5746). The public comment period on the pro- posed sludge standards will close August 7. 1989 . EPA will hold public hearings and work- shops to discuss the proposed standards as fol- lows: Workshops May 23-24 Philadelphia, PA May 31- June 1 Seattle, WA Public Hearings July 6 Washington, DC July 13 Boston, MA July 18 Chicago, IL July 20 San Francisco, CA Further information about the workshops and public hearing may be obtained by calling EPA’s Sludge Hotline at (617) 648-7898 or 7899 or Mark Morris at (202) 475-7312. On May 2, 1989, EPA published final rules for incorporating sludge conditions in NPDES permits and for approving State Sludge Manage- ment programs (54 Fed.Reg. 18716). For further information contact Debora Clovis, U.S. EPA, Permits Division (EN-336), 401 M St. SW, Wash- ington, DC 20460 Tel. (202) 475- 7052. The 1987 CWA amendments also state that, prior to development of the Part 503 technical standards, the Administrator shall put sludge con- the Clean Water Act. A final strategy should be issued after review of comments received and the results of the EPA/Paper Industry Cooperative Study which is under way. The settlement and agreement in the EDFINWF v. EPA dioxin lawsuit requires the strategy to be issued by April 1990. On October 20, 1988, EPA issued data from a dioxin treatability study and provided sugges- lions for interim control measures for regulating dioxin dischargers from pulp and paper mills. On March 15, 1989, EPA issued Guidance for section 304(1) Listing and Permitting of Pulp and Paper Mills which describes three lists used to organize information on dischargers: the ‘a” or “long” list of all impaired waters, the “b’ or “short” list of impaired waters impacted by certain point sources, and the “c list of facilities impacting waters on the “b’ list. This guidance indicated that re- ceiving waters for every mill or associated POTW should be listed on the section 304(l)(1)(B) “short list” if 2,3,7,8-TCDD is detected in fish (whole or fillet) (unless the State has adopted criterion for the pollutant which establishes a risk level less stringent than 10.6 and the State’s criterion is not vio- lated) or if the 2,3,7,8-TCDD data for the effluent indicate, after use of appropriate procedures specified by the State regarding mixing zones and risk levels, that there will be a violation of water quality standards. Chlorine bleaching pulp mills or associated POTWs should be identified on the 304(l)(1 )(c) list for each water identified on the (B) list. The Guidance goes on to indicate that the Permits for those facilities on the (C) list should contain (I) a calculated water quality-based permit limit for 2,3,7,8-TCDD, (2) a statement in the permit that the detection level is the threshold for compliance/non-compliance determinations and (3) a statement in the permit citing the analytical protocol set out in Appendix C of the USEPA/Paper Industry Cooperative Screening Study. For more information on the permitting of these facilities, please contact Laura Phillips at (202) 475-9532. 4 ------- ditions in permits issued to POTWs or take other appropriate action to protect public health and the environment. To implement this requirement, EPA has developed a “Strategy for Interim Im- plementation of Sludge Requirements in Permits Issued to POTWs.” The draft strategy, which was made available for public comment, is undergoing revision in response to public comments and to reflect new regulation. EPA expects to issue the revised guidance this summer. In addition, EPA has prepared two draft guidance documents to help permit writers in developing interim sludge conditions for POTW permits. The first is the “Guidance for Writing Case-by-Case Requirements for Municipal Sludge, Sept. 1988.” This guidance is now being revised in response to comments received and is sched- uled for availability at the end of this fiscal year. Limited quantities of the September 1988 draft are still available by contacting Robert Goo at (202) 382-6961. The second draft guidance is the “POTW Sludge Sampling and Analysis Guidance Docu- ment, June 1988,” which is also undergoing revi- sion in response to comments and is expected to be finalized this summer. For further information or copies of the draft, contact Cristina Morrison at (202) 475-7052. Storm Water Regulations - On December 7, 1988,pursuant to the Water Quality Act of 1987, EPA proposed regulations (53 Fed.Reg.49416), for permit application requirements for Storm water discharges from medium municipal sepa- rate storm sewers serving a population of 100,000 or more, large municipal separate storm sewers that serve a population of 250,000 or more, and storm water discharges associated with industrial activity. A 90-day comment period ended on March 7, 1989. The proposal requested comments on several issues including the appropriate definition of municipality, sampling procedures, and spe- cific industries covered by the regulation. EPA is currently reviewing 450 comments submitted by a variety of industries, municipalities, and state agencies. EPA anticipates that final regulation will be promulgated in early 1990. Copies of the proposal can be obtained by contacting Tom Seaton, Kevin Weiss, or Mike Mitchell, Permits Division (EN-336), U.S. EPA, 401 M St. SW, Washington DC, 20460. Tel. (202) 475-9518. GUIDANCE UPDATE = = Guidance Manual for Control of Slug Loadings To POTWs - Slug loadings are defined as any pollut- ant discharges which violate the specific prohibi- tions under40 CFR 403.5(b), including: (1) fire or explosion, (2) corrosion, (3) obstruction, (4) inter- ference, or (5) excessive heat. Under 40 CFR 403.12(f), all categorical and noncategorical in- dustrial users are required to notify the POTW immediately of slug loadings. The Report to Congress on the Discharge of Hazardous Wastes to Publicly Owned Treat- ment Works (called the Domestic Sewage Study) documented the problem of slug loadings of toxic pollutants and hazardous constituents by indus- trial users ( lOs) and recommended expansion of pretreatment controls. The study acknowledged that categorical industrial pretreatment standards, locally -derived numerical limits, and reporting requirements were not always effective in han- dling accidental spills or irregular high strength batch discharge which may be received at the POTW as slug loadings. This guidance manual was developed by EPA to aid all POTWs (not just those that have been required to establish federally-approved pre- treatment programs) in developing and imple- menting specific programs and measures to con- trol JU slug loadings. Technical guidance is pro- vided for imposing a range of slug loading control measures on lUs and, where prevention fails, engaging in remedial measures at the POTW. By supplementing existing or future cate- gorical standards and numerical local limits, slug control measures will help reduce influent load- ings overall, including loadings of toxic pollutants and hazardous constituents. In addition, slug controls can be useful to help POTWs comply with NPDES effluent limitations on specific chemicals or whole effluent toxicity. 5 ------- JUNE 1989 PRETREATMENT BULLETIN #6 A limited number of copies have been distributed to EPA Regions and further distribu- tion is planned. Enforcement Response Guide - EPA is complet- ingdevelopmentofan enforcementresponse guide. The manual entitled, Guidance for Developing POTW Pretreatment Enforcement Strategies. is intended to supplement the Domestic Sewage Study Proposed Rule (November 23, 1988) which proposes to amend 40 CFR 403.8(f) to require all POTWs with pretreatment programs to develop enforcement response plans describing how POTWs will investigate and respond to instances of noncompliance, including time frames within which the responses will take place. The manual will provide municipal pre- treatment personnel with guidance for developing effective enforcement strategies. The guidance will present the advantages, disadvantages and proper use of enforcement remedies and responses which in EPA’s experience, are typically available to municipalities. The enforcement response guide assists in the selection of both initial and follow-up enforcement responses by identifying appropriate enforcement response time frames for carrying out these actions. To further guide Con- trol Authority personnel, the manual includes a model enforcement response guide illustrating these concepts. Finally, the manual contains a lengthy analysis of each of the common enforce- ment remedies and responses with the advantages and disadvantages of each tool described as well as recommendations on how to use them. Sample documents, which Control Authorities may use as appropriate, are also included. The Agency believes that the process of developing these plans will be very valuable and that such plans will make it easier for EPA to determine whether a POTW is complying with its pretreatment implementation requirements for enforcement. The guidance manual is anticipated to be available in the Fall of this year. This manual will complement an earlier document prepared by EPA entitled, Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and Additional Local Limits Guidance - As a supple- ment to the 1987 Guidance Manual on the Im- plementation and Development of Discharge Limitations Under the Pretreatment Program (the Local Limits Manual) EPA is now preparing additional local limits guidance which it expects to be available later this year. The additional guid- ance includes: 1) The Domestic/Commercial Loading Report- This report examines sampling results based on domestic and commercial background sources and will serve as a source of additional data that can be used as comparison data when developing local limits. Although the Local Limits Manual pro- vides literature data for domestic loadings, this re- port identifies several additional types of dis- charges as significant sources of loadings. Data has been compiled on radiator shops, laundries, septic haulers, landfill leachates, photo proces- sors, hospitals and car washes. 2) Removal Efficiency Estimation for Local Limits Development- The 1987 Local Limits Manual presents the concept of the decile approach as an alternative method for calculating removal effi- ciencies. This guidance elaborates on the con- cepts presented in the guidance manual and an- swers questions not addressed there. The study also provides a “worksheet” approach to decile calculations which should allow POTV ’s to follow step-by-step procedures in calculating removal ef- ficiencies based on deciles. City Attorneys’ Workshop - In a continuing effort to improve the implementation of the National Pretreatment Program, EPA is currently develop- ing a workshop for local city attorneys. This workshop is designed to: (1)facilitate and enhance coordination between the POTW personnel and municipal attorney; and (2) to educate the local attorney in bringing adminis- trative and civil enforcement cases against noncompliant industrial users. The substantive content of the workshop will include: an overview of the federal pre- treatment program; a review of a typical sewer Enforcement Guidance (PCME (July 1986) . 6 ------- PRETREATMENT BULLETIN #6 JUNE 1989 use ordinance, including an analysis of common obstacles to enforcement which occur in the ordinance; administrative enforcement proce- dures and techniques; civil enforcement issues and procedures, including admissability of evidence and procedures for bringing cases; and model pleadings for civil and administrative enforcement. The overall goal of the workshop is to promote institutional coordination between the POTW and city attorney’s office and to encour- age a more active role on the part of the city attorney in the enforcement process. a- UPCOMING EVENTS Workshops and Hearings regarding proposed sludge technical regulations, see p. 4 Workshop on Toxic Air Pollutants and POTWs Washington, D.C., July 10 & 11, 1989. Contact: Atal Eraip, USEPA, (202)382-7369 Basic NPDES Permit Writers’ Course Hartford, CT., August 7-11, 1989 Contact: Roxanne Gentry, ERC Environmental, (703) 471-5550 7 ------- J UIN t . 1Y8Y A A 1L . I & ./% I AI.I A IJ .J — - INDEX OF PRETREATMENT BULLETINS #1-6 Categorical standards (#1, attachment a) Changes to.. .(#2, p.7) Compliance dates (#3, p.3) Implementation of.. .(#2, p.5) Industries considered for. ..(#3, pA) Industries subject to categorical standards, final regulations (#1, atiB) Isolated wastestreams (#4, p.13) Leather tanning and finishing (#4, p.3) Metal finishing cyanide standards (#1, p.6) Milestone dates (#2, p.6) Organic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic fibers (OCPSF) (#2, p.8;#4, p.3) Pesticides (#2, p.8) Pre-1977 standards (#4, p.2) Stand-alone R&D facilities (#3, p.5) Clean Water Act Amendments- Pretreatment effects (#3, p.1) Definitions- Final rules for new source, interference, and pass through definitions (#2, p.2) Significant noncompliance (#2, p.2) Domestic Sewage Study- Federal register notice of public comments (#3, p.2) Proposed ammendments to 40 CFR parts 122 and 403 (#5, p.3) Public comments on the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) (#2, p.13) Enforcement Actions- Kopper’s Settlement (#6,p. 3) Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. (#6, p.3) FDF variances (#3, p.2; #4, p.2) General pretreatment regulations (#1, attachment a) Domestic Sewage Study (#5, p.3) Other changes (#2, p.1) PIRT rule (see Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force) Revisions to appendix D (#2, p.2) Technical Ammendments (#2, p.1) Guidance Document Summaries- Development of Industrial User Permits (#3, p.9; #4, p. 5 ; #6, p.7) Enforcement Response Guide (#6, p.5) Evaluating and reporting POTW noncompliance (#3, p.’7) Identification of hazardous wastes delivered to POTWs by truck, rail, or dedicated pipe (#3, p.9) Local limits Technical Guidance (#2, p.12) Additional Guidance (#6, p.6) PCME guidance and training materials (#3, p.6; #6, p.5) Preventing Interference at POTWs (#2, p. 1 3) Slugs Discharge Control (#3, p.10) Loadings to POTWs (#6, p. 5) — - — - fl - - - r t WWWd 4 8 ------- PRETREATMENT BULLETIN #6 JUNE 1989 National Pretreatment Coordinators Meeting Summary #5 (#4, p. 7 ) Summary #6 (#6, p.1) NPDES form 2a (#4, p.6) Organic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic fibers (OCPSF) final regulations schedule (see Categorical Standards) Pesticides (see Categorical Standards) Pretreatment Enforcement Initiative (#6, p.2) Pretreatment Excellence Awards (#6, p.1) Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force (PIRT)- Regulatory changes (#5, p.1) EPA responses to PIRT- Applicability of categorical standards to federal facilities (#1, p. 4 ) Compliance by industrial users after a change in ownership (#1, p.4) Enforcement against interference (#1, p.3) Enforcement against POTWs without program applications (#1, p.5) Enforcement of pretreatment standards (#1, p.5) Interaction between EPA, States, and POTWs (#1, p.4) Local limits (#1, p.2) Regulation of small industrial users (#1, p.3) Tracking the development of State Water Quality Standards (#1, p.5) Pulp and Paper Mill Dioxin Discharges Received by POTWs (#6, p.3) Radioactive Waste (#3, p.10) RCRA requirements for POTWs (#1, p.6) Removal Credits (#3, p.3) Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruling (#2, p.3) Reportable noncompliance (#2, p.10) Sludge regulations (#3, p.2; #4, p.1; #6, p.4) Enforcement Strategy (#6, p.2) Required limits in permits (#2, p.2) Strategy forinterim implementation of sludge requirements in permits issued to POTWs (#4, p.1) Software- PCME (#3, p.6; #5, p.3) PRELIM (#2, p.11) PPETS (#3, p.7; #4, p.7) Storm Water Regulations (#6, p. 5) 9 ------- JUNE 1989 PKEIKLAIMIM’ll DUJ_,L 111 WU Superfund wastes and POTWs (#4, p.5) Training- City Attorneys’ Workshop (#6, p.6) Local limits workshops (#4, p.5) PCME instructor’s manual (#4, p.5) Pretreatment facility inspection field-study training program (#4, p.4) A ------- |