United Slates
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Wastewater
Enforcement and Compliance
November 1991
U.S. EPANPDES
BASIC PERMIT WRITERS
COURSE
WORKBOOK
                  Prtnltd on rrcyclfd paptr

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION IIrLE
I NPDES Program Overview/Background
2 The Application Process
3 Standard Permit Conditions
4 Effluent Limitations Guidelines-Based Limits
5 Overview of Variances to Effluent Guidelines
6 Best Professional Judgment-Based Limits
7 Water Quality Standards
8 Determining the Need for and Derivation of
Water Quality-Based Limits
9 Monitoring Conditions and Analytical
Methods
10 Municipal NPDES Permit Development
11 Municipal Sludge Permit Conditions
12 Storm Water Permitting
13 Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Permitting
14 Special Permit Conditions
15 Pollution Prevention
16 Permit Issuance Procedures
17 Compliance and Enforcement

-------
COURSE ORGANIZATION
The course is designed around the process of issuing a
permit...from receipt of the application form, to the
development of effluent limitations, monitoring conditions
and special conditions and, ultimately, issuance of the permit.

-------
PRIMARY COURSE REFERENCES
• Text
• Workbook
• Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
• EPA Quality Criteria for Water 1986 (Gold Book)
• EPA Technical Support Document (TSD) for
Water Quality-Based Toxics Control
• EPA Permit Writer’s Guide to Water Quality-Based
Permitting for Toxic Pollutants
• EPA Abstracts of Industrial NPDES Permits
• EPA Treatability Manual
• EPA NPDES Best Management Practices
Guidance Document
• EPA Case-by-Case Permitting of Municipal
Sewage Sludge
• Additional Miscellaneous Guidance
• Practical Exercises

-------
NPDES PROGRAM OVERVIEW!
BACKGROUND

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• NPDES Program Overview
• Statutory Evolution
• NPDES Program Implementation
NPDES STATUTORY FRAMEWORK
• All “point sources”
• “Discharging pollutants”
• Into “waters of the States” must obtain an NPDES
permit from EPA or an approved State
OVERVIEW OF THE NPDES PROGRAM
• What is a permit?
• Universe of permittees
• Contents of a permit
• Methods for developing permit limits
• Universe of regulated pollutants
• Overview of the issuance process
1—1

-------
WHAT IS A PERMIT?
• Itisalicense...
• Issued by the government to persons conducting business in the
United States
• Granting permission to do something which would be
illegal in the absence of the permit
• There is no right to a permit and it is revocable for
cause (noncompliance)
• For our purposes, NPDES permit is license to discharge
CLASSIFICATION OF NPDES FACILITIES
• Municipals (POTWs)
• Majors ( 1 MGD design flow)
- Minors
• Non-Municipal
- Majors ( 80 points)
- Minors
NOTES:
1-2

-------
CLASSIFICATION OF MAJOR AND MINOR
INDUSTRIAL PERMITS
• Toxic pollutant potential
• Flow/stream flow volume
• Conventional pollutants
• Public health impact
• Water quality factors
• Proximity to near coastal waters
DISTRIBUTION OF DISCHARGERS
TOTAL DISCHARGERS: 64,229
• Municipals (15,605)
- Majors: 3,857
- Minors: 11,748
• Non-Municipal (48,624)
- Majors: 3,275
- Minors: 45,349
• Percentage of permittees
- Industrials: 76%
- Municipals: 24%
NOTES:
1-3

-------
CONTENTS OF THE PERMIT
• Cover sheet
• Effluent limitations
• Monitoring requirements
• Standard conditions
• Special conditions
METHODS TO DEVELOP EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS IN PERMITS
• Effluent limitations guidelines
• Water quality standards
• Best professional judgment
NOTES:
1-4

-------
CWA CLASSES OF POLLUTANTS
Conventional pollutants
- BOD
- TSS
- Oil and Grease
- Fecal coliforms
- pH
Toxic pollutants
- Heavy metals
- Copper
- Lead
- Zinc
- Nickel
- Chromium
- Etc.
- Organic chemicals
- Benzene
- 1,2 - Dichlorobenzene
- Carbon tetrachloride
- Etc.
• Nonconventional pollutants
- Ammonia
- Chlorine
- Toxicity
NOTES:
1-5

-------
PERMIT ISSUANCE PROCESS
Permit Application
Permit and fact sheet
development
• Effluent limits
• Monitoring conditions
• Standard conditions
• Special conditions
1
Public notice
and public comments
4
Administrative record
3
Final permit
3
Compliance
1-G

-------
FWPCA - 1972 AMENDMENTS
• Established NPDES and pretreatment programs
• Incorporated permits from 1899 Act and standards
from 1965 Water Quality Act
• Dischargers must identify themselves
• Permits are privilege - not a right
• Effluent limits must be both technology based and water
quality based
• Compliance deadlines are specified
- 7/1/77 for BPT and water quality standards,
- 7/1/83 for BAT
• Maximum duration is 5 years
• States and public must be involved in issuance process
• Established significant penalties for permit violations
• Indicated that permit compliance is a shield
• Provided for State programs
• Established Construction Grants Program for POTWs
NOTES:
1—7

-------
NRDC CONSENT DECREE - 1976
• EPA sued by the NRDC, and other environmental
and industrial groups
• Established the list of 129 (now 126) priority pollutants
• Established 34 industrial categories to be regulated
by NPDES and pretreatment
• Required development of BAT effluent guidelines and
categorical pretreatment standards by 1983
CLEAN WATER ACT AMENDMENTS - 1977
• Adopted the provisions of the NRDC consent decree,
including “toxic” pollutants
• Established BCT for conventional pollutants
• Extended BAT/BCT compliance deadlines (7/1/84)
• Clarified that Federal facilities are subject to State
programs
• Authorized EPA to approve local pretreatment programs
• Required NPDES States to modify their programs to
include pretreatment oversight
NOTES:
1-8

-------
WATER QUALITY ACT - 1987
• Extends compliance deadline again (3/31/89)
• Specifies storm water permitting requirements
• Increases civil and criminal penalties and makes
administrative fines available to EPA
• Designates that Indian tribes be considered “States”
• Creates the Federal sludge management program
• Phases out construction grants program
• Creates new programs for nonpoint sources (runoff)
NPDES IMPLEMENTATION
Before approval:
• EPA issues permits
• EPA conducts compliance and monitoring activities
• EPA enforcement
After approval:
• States implement as above
• EPA role = oversight
- Grants
- Administrative, technical and legal support
training
- Enforcement as necessary
1—9

-------
.
NOTES:
SNAPSHOT: NPDES PROGRAM APPROVALS
Eligible jurisdiction* 57
NPDES approved 39
Pretreatment approved 27
Federal facility approved 34
General Permits approved 22
*Not including Indian tribes
NPDES ACCOMPLISHMENTS TO DATE
• $70 Billion - POTWs (1972)
• 75% construction completed
• 65,000 permits issued
• 75% water - fish/swimmable
• 361,000 + miles of streams and 12 million lake acres fully support
their designated uses
• Still experiencing 350 fish kills per year; fishing bans due
to pollution in 21 States
1-10

-------
EPA ORGAMZATION: HEADQUARTERS
• Compliance and Enforcement Policy
• Inspections and Sampling
• AdministrativelJudidal Case Review
• Compliance/Enforcement Oversight
• Data Management
• Effluent Guidelines
• Water Quality Standards
• Pretreatment Standards
• Sludge Standards
• NPDES Permits Policy
• State Programs Approval
S
S
£ I a. atSi. aa. nIq.fl aLI aI
Sludge Permits Policy
1—li

-------
EPA ORGANIZATION: REGIONS
Regional
Admin&rator
Lawyers
Water
Man
Division
Air
Wade
Drinking
Water
I I I I I I
Groundwater
Dredge and
Waler
Fill/Ocean
Quality
Dumping
Standards
Permits
Enforcement
1—12

-------
NPDES TERN INOLOGY
APPLICATION FORM — Any of the federal forms (or State forms)
required to be filled out by a discharger
prior to issuance of a permit.
BAT — Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
(applies to non—conventional and toxic pollutants)
BCT — Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (applies
to conventional pollutants)
BPT — Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
(generally applies to conventional pollutants and some
metals)
BMP — Best Management Practices; measures supplemental to
numerical effluent limitations to control discharges
from storage piles, spills, leaks, etc. Frequently,
BMPS are procedural or qualitative rather than
quantitative.
BOD — Biochemical Oxygen Demand; a pollutant commonly limited
in NPDES permits.
BPJ — Best Professional Judgement; the broad authority of the
Act authorizing the development of permits conditions
on a case—by—case basis in the absence of national
standards.
CFR — Code of Federal Regulations where effluent limitations
guidelines, the NPDES regulations etc. are found.
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT(S) — BOD, TSS, fecal coliform, oil and
grease, and pH.
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS — The limit (usually daily maximum and
monthly average) on a pollutant required
to be met by the permit expressed as mass
(lbs/day) or concentration (mg/i).
EFFLUENT LIMITATION GUIDELINE — A national standard prescribing a
limit on specific pollutant (in
lbs/day or mg/l) from point
sources in a particular
industrial category (e.g. textile
mills).
INDIRECT DISCHARGERS — those facilities which discharge waste
water to receiving waters indirectly
i.e. through a POTW (also termed ‘IUs )
1-13

-------
MAJOR PERMIT - any perinit(ee) with a design flow of IMGD or
greater (municipal)
any permit(ee) which scores 80 or greater on the
major/minor permit classification scale
(industrial)
MINOR PERMIT - any permit which is not a major permit.
MIXING ZONE — an allocated impact area in a water body where
numeric water quality criteria can be exceeded as
long as acutely toxic conditions are prevented.
NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT — any pollutant which is neither a
conventional nor a toxic pollutant
(ex. manganese, ammonia, etc.)
NPDES — The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
prescribed by Section 402 of the Clean Water Act.
NBDC CONSENT AGREEMENT — 1976 Settlement agreement between EPA
and the National Resources Defense
Council concerning the control of toxic
pollutants through BAT effluent
guideline and categorical pretreatment
standards.
NSPS — New Source Performance Standard
pH — a measure of acidity or alkalinity (pH 7 is neutral) of a
waste water; a common pollutant limited in NPDES permits.
POINT SOURCE — a discrete conveyance such as a pipe, ditch, etc.
contributing pollutants to the environment.
POLLUTANT — a contaminant introduced into a receiving water which
is subject to technology—based or water quality—based
effluent limitations in the permit.
POTW — Publicly Owned Treatment Works, usually consisting of
primary and secondary (biological) treatment.
PRIMARY INDUSTRY — an industry listed in the NRDC consent
agreement (also in Appendix A of 4OCFR
Part 122)
PRETREATMENT — the treatment of Wastewater by contributors to a
POTW before the wastewater reaches the POTW.
1-14

-------
PSES — Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
PSNS — Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
TOXIC POLLUTANT — Any of the 129 priority pollutants (organic
chemicals, metals, etc.) which are neither
conventional nor non—conventional.
TOXICITY TEST — A measure of the toxicity of a chemical or an
effluent using living organisms by determining
the response (survival, reproduction, growth,
etc.) of an exposed organism to the chemical or
effluent.
TSS — Total suspended solids; a pollutant commonly limited in
NPDES permits.
VARIANCE — A waiver establishing alternative limitations or time
extensions for a specific facility. Several different
variances and time extensions are available under the
CWA upon satisfaction of very specific criteria.
WATER QUALITY CRITERION — Elements of state water quality
standards, expressed as concentrations,
levels, or narrative statements
representing a quality of water that
supports a particular use (drinking,
contact recreation, cold water fishery,
etc.)
WATER QUALITY STANDARD — Provisions of State or Federal law
which consist of a designated use or
uses for the water of the United State
and water quality criteria for such
waters based upon such uses.
WATER OF THE U.S. — All waters which are used, were used, or may
be used in interstate or foreign commerce,
including all water subject to the ebb and
flow of the tide and wetlands.
1—15

-------
THE APPLICATION PROCESS

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Types of NPDES Application Forms
• EPA Application Form 2C
• Accuracy and Completeness
The NPDES process is initiated when a point source files
application forms requesting a permit.
NOTES:
2—1

-------
EPA APPLICATION FORMS FOR NPDES PERMITS
FORM
TITLE/APPLICABILITY
LAST
REVISED
REGULATION
CITE
1 General information 1980 122.21(f)
A New and existing major POTWs 1973* 122.21 (j)
reserved
A New and existing minor POTWs 1973 122.21(1)
SHORT reserved
2B New and existing animal feeding 1980 122.21(I)
operations and aquatic animal
production facilities
2C Existing manufacturing, commercial, 1984 122.21(g)
mining, and silvicultural discharges
2D New manufacturing, commercial, 1984 122.21(k)
mining, and silvicultural discharges
2E Manufacturing, commercial, mining, 1986 122.21(h)
and silvicultural facilities that
discharge only non-process wastewater
2F Stormwater discharges associated with 1990 122.26(c)
industrial activities
NONE Stormwater discharges from 122.26(d)
municipal separate storm sewers
serving a population of greater than
100,000
*Currently being revised
NOTES:
2-2

-------
KEY DEFINITIONS
• New Discharger - Any building, structure, facility, or installation:
- From which there is or may be a discharge of pollutants
- That did not commence discharge at the site prior to
August 13. 1979
- Which is not a “new source”
- Which has never received a finally-effective NPDES permit
• New Source - Any building, structure, facility, or installation from
which there is or may be a discharge of pollutants, the construction
of which commenced:
- After promulgation of effluent limitations guidelines and
standards applicable to such source, or
- After proposal of effluent limitations guidelines and
standards, but only if the standards are promulgated within
120 days of proposal
• Existing Source - Any building, structure, facility, or installation
from which there is a discharge of pollutants which is not a new
discharger or new source.
NOTES:
2-3

-------
MAJOR COMPONENTS OF FORM 2C
Outfall location
Flow, sources of pollution, treatment technologies
Production information (if applicable)
Improvements (if applicable)
Intake and effluent characteristics
Potential discharges not covered by analysis
Biological testing data
Contract analysis information
Certification/signature
I.
II.
In.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
Ix.
APPLICATION FORM: REVIEW FOR ACCURACY
Most
common mistakes:
Guideline production and flow rates
• Long term average, daily average, and daily maximum values
• Decimal point errors
• Wrong concentration units
• Reported values are below known detection limits
2-4

-------
APPLICATION FORM: REVIEW FOR COMPLETENESS
• Common omissions
- Map required in Form 1
- Flow diagram required in Form 2C
• Other omissions
- Required metals
- Required GC/MS fractions
- Expected toxics
- Production rates
NOTES:
2-5

-------
PIATRIX OF POUJJIWTF RRE KE IN IMJ(STRJAL
:
I!! {
.1

I

I
I I
I
a
8
a a
I
I
a
‘ I
I ’
hi
41
hi
.1
—
— —
— —
—
—
.
.
a
U
I
a
S
.
a. —
S
—
S
— —
— —
•
S
S
S
S •
S
S
S
—
.
——
—
S
S S
•
a
• S
S
•
S
S
S
S
S
• .
.
S
S
S
S •
•
•
a
S
S
•
a
. .
.
——
— —
a IhuSc a
—
— —
— —
S
S
.
a a
2
I
S
.
• .I 2-.tky$besyI lp SkaSatS
.
. iIusoSStbiS
—
— —
— —
—
IIIS.au.. .t .s .e
S
—
S
.
S
a
S
a
j
.
.
S S
S
,o.thunyIaSI aS = : = — — - — -
S
-s
S
S
S
pcliIOSO a c..aoI
tkIDInb a S&dN
:_
—— —— ——————- —

—— —
-
—
——
ca,b.aJIa. 1 1 1d
S S S S •
— —
,boaI .iiac IuuIII
! 1o1 515
—
—
— —
•
•
•
-
—
— —
S
S
S
C Io.o.tka..S.IkyS_ckIo,I. .I

-------
S.
a
•Ia SuIoSa
I
3
B
I
I
I
a
I
.
i
•
a
I
: ‘
I.1
R
i;
*
a
a j

- —- ____________ —
.
I
a.
a
U
. 4
I
S
a
I
I
a a
K
a
I
a.
a
I
.
U
I
a
a
D
a
.t aaa ckSo,t4a — — — — — — — . — — —
p —al - i__
. S
. 5
¶
a.
I.
at
4’
S
3
S
a
.
.
S
S
- -
-
-
a(lO ckIO.odIp aU1tdit tU10StkIIS
—
—
—
—
S
S
W? SU$cSISoIO S •L! t .Ic .IoiuSt aRSI
•s a-K. .tyl •hIhaIaIS _________________
Si s-o .irl Pb .SI .alaiS
• 51 .i ..ns l ,P.yI.iss bia.idSl
Si DSShSOSObSnSSS
I) Oic io.obS SSSS
S.. osc io,ob SaSas
icbIoiobS S bSak..
, s Sa.oJU Swoio th
I I D chlO .o•ikaSS
S J-DSchSoSoSi VSS
S S S
.
S
S
S S —
.
a
S S
•
.
a
S
a
S
S
4
S • S
S.’
I.. pi kIaIa SSSSa. • .Ia I2. -bi
.
a
•
a
a
S a
S
.
.
a
S
S
a
S
.
S .IOi. iOIa9SS.pS 5
——— ;_
Sialdila —
— S S S S S S

ihy kaSaSS______ - --
I .Da 5 Sp aOlI3. IIS S’° l$
-—- ——-—-—-———--—-
--

-------
I
I
I
I
I
a
t__s______.___. .I__
a
I
4
2
I
U
ItIyIa . J.b, td. IWSI
I
I
g
I
I
I
c o
0
(I
4
a
U
pt .chlui
0
U
a
.
I
4
U
a
pIachIOt 1! ! 0
..chlo,u I. I-b..iaJl. 4
U
p.’
a
C
I
tsSiyt. a.dIcSi toiIdS
——
lSaoi..II I.a• —
—
.2 —
.2
-
—
—
—
.
—
.
a
a
C
.
S
! !0b0 5

Ss..8to,O.I t a.
— —
— S —
— —
.
—
—
—
•i_
—
—
—
tS.1 -cdpytem. — — — — — — — ± — — — —
— — —- -
S.c8 atyI aIco uS
II 4. ul00•
—
—
—
—
••••
— —
—
a
.
.
a • S
tat kiss
.cNuI
i h o t 1 . —
U.thyl Ithyl S.iss .
.IhyI.sS thto,tdS
•S is.thpl•sbiSil_chSo o iiiI$S -St
.
S
S
.
S
S
S
a
S
a
a
S
S •
.
.
S
S
I NIs.sçesut
a
a
! ••
a
S
S
I
a
•Ic .S
•II4b ISSI 4S
—
--
S
S
S
.
.
S

-------
•1.
a


... ..a

l a
.s


..
I
tre..n.ct Inn... .. ..p.i — — —
.atn.Ic.B .. — — — —
.t at. .ifl i
I
.
,— .
I
n atnn.a. — —
-a
S
S S S
0
U
a
.
-
..
.1
0
D
a
;,
I
. 4
5 .
.
a
. 5
.1
a
u
a
is

is

I
u

S
I . ; )
S
S
S
a.
. a
S
S
.
a a a
S
a
S
1-
I S
.5
S
I e
S 5 S
S
.
S
I
S
I
I
S
Pi,a e
—
.
S
.
—
iildis.
-
•±_!
WSa I ..
___
s’..
S .t.l-TsIlp ihIoloSI S 4
•,I3T.$s chos It a s
? ,l(pckIpgo4trISn4IPS(chIp( aIhTIS
.I .e Iu( 5V 4OI

I’.
,lc Io ab . sIsSc
II .I?.SckSosSctkSSc
.S.2tuIc sSolUSI S 5S
5, c Ioto•I yIS 5S
? sIcSIScoIId S S
I.S.S-t,IcbIOI iVSSS0I
—
— —
!_
—
—
—
•
•
— —
— •
•
— —
—
• •
——
a
—
S
—
•
•
. •
— —
• — —
•
•
— —
—
—
S.
—
———
J
.
—-
—
—-
— S.
‘S .
—
——
—
—
.
L____
I
——
•
— —
.
—
— —
— —
S
— —
—
————
•.
—
-
a
I ;
a
n
U
a
S.
I.
&
.
S
I. - iIcaIs.oae..oI
.
S
?l$ckiOICSav Sf3PtcP 0 C Ld
,..y c$ i.,S4.4.bIol0SthV1SSc1
! .!!1Id SU0 1tihI4 5
—
a —

“Sc
S

-------
2-10

-------
PRACTICAL EXERCISE
Review of NPDES Permit Applications
GIVEN : NPDES Application Forms 1 and 2C from Luster Glass Inc.
REQUIREMENT : Review the permit applications from Luster Glass Inc. and
answer the questions below.
QUESTIONS :
(1) Is this facility a POTW or does it have a concentrated animal feeding
operat ion?
(2) Who is Mr. Ceccarelli? _____________________________________________
(3) What does Luster Class Inc. make? _________________________________
(4) Did the proper official sign the application form? __________________
How do you know? __________________________________________________________
(5) To what body of water does Luster Glass Inc. discharge its process water?
(6) How many outfalls are there at Luster Glass? _______________________
(7) Has the company collected any data on the toxicity of its wastewater?
(8) Does Luster Glass Inc. have its own analytical laboratory for the analysis
of priority pollutants? _________________________________________________
(9) Based on your cursory review of the application, which pollutants would
you limit in a permit for Luster Glass Inc.?
(10) Based on the water flow schematic included in the permit application, what
wastewaters are treated at Luster Glass Inc.? What is the total treated
wastewater flow? ______________________________________________________
(11) What is the wastewater flow after treatment shown on the water flow
schematic?
(12) Does wastewater flow into treatment equal wastewater flow out of treatment
on the water flow schematic?
2-11

-------
2—12

-------
Ph
Form A ored 0MB No 20400086 Apoto ’v.I .u es 7-3? -
INSTRUCTIONS: Complete A through J to detennrn. whither you need to sobmit any permit application form, to the EP& If you sn sr “yss to any
qusetlons, you muat submit this form end the supplemental form listed in di. parenthesis following the quastion. Mart ‘X in the box in the third column
if the supplemental form us attached. If you an sr “no” to such question, you need not uibmft any of these forms. You may sis er “no if your activity
Ia excluded from permit requlrumensi; Section C of the instructions. See also, Section 0 of the inso’uctions for definitions of held-faced terms.
SPECIFIC QUESTIONI
A Is this facility • piublisfy ownud Deutn it
whiCh retults in a d iargo to s of the U.S.?
(FORM 2A)
VS.
i r
SO
LX’
•O.
*flflCNUi
SPECIFIC QUESTiONs
B. DOSS or will this facility lefther ac ig orpg owrf i
mC I lidS e ankiwi fang cpar.tjon or
S uadc wilmel peodeedon facOity whlds results ma
we slowee of
‘ S.
AR
SO
:
V. A

I_
,
C. Is this a facility which currently retulti in
U.S.? (FORM 2B)
-
0. Is this s progoa.d facility (oth.’ that thow
to wetarl of di. U.S. Olhet than those dewib.d ‘fl j — In A or B tho ) wfiicls whO rssish m a dáth...,. to
AorBsbo ie?(FpRM2C) ‘U- , te’aOfth.U ,5 ,?(FORM2p ) .u. ii
F. Do you or will you mlsct St thit f.ølity Indu ,t,ial or
E Does or will this facility n-em, score, or dispose of
hezar ous wem? (FORM 3) municipul effluent below die lo inoat sttstum con.
testing, within on. quarter mU. of the well bore. X
— .1. uIbd. . und sou, of drinking teeter? (FORM 4) - -
IL “
C Do you or will you un ect at this tecuirty any produced
waler or Other fluidi which Sri .,_ H. Do you or Will you b1 ect at this facility fluids for sp..
In connection with conVentional oil or natural gsa pro’ c proc suds se mining of sulfur by the Fr.sch
duction. un ect fluidi used for enhanced recovery of pro,,..., soksdon mining of mhiarel ., in thu combos. I
tion of fosil fuel, or recovery of ..jlJ 1 ensvv? x
Oil or natural gas, or inject fluids for Storage of liquid — (FORM 4) — —
hydrocarbons? (FORM 4) I . ,, u.
T is this facility a proposed Itetlo, y sourse which is — J, Is this facility a pro,.,,.ed sta&. wiwis which us
on. of the 28 industj.al categories listed in the in. NOT one of the 25 lnduso ’Ii . 1 S ... —. listed m the
ttrtsctuofl s and which will potentially smut 100 tom In uctjOIi. end which will potem 1y emit 250 tons
per yser of any sir pollutant regulated under die pw’ y of any SW pollutant regulated under the Clean
Clean Air Act end may affect or be located in an — Ai r Act and mey effect or be loceted us an s .. X
— attauru wit arse? (FORMS) — .. .i — uve? (FORMS) . r
IILNAM E OF FA C,Ll-ry UI 1 11 11
.g,,J J I I I I I I
LUSTER GLASS INC.
IV. FACILITY CONTACT -
I. -t• is
A. NAME ê TiTLE (lse& ii,. ?. A title) - ‘ S PHONE (area cod.A
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (I I I I
- CECCARELLI IVO ENV. COORD. 312 834 4536
ii ii .. — . •5 II . I
- ...L...... .1 ii
V. FACILITY MAILING ADOREU . -.. I
A STUIETONPO fox
I p I I I I p p I
- P0 BOX 319
Is’ - a.
S. CITY OR TOWN C.STAYi 0 ZIP CODE
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I j I II I I I
4 - NQRRIS IL 60123
- - ‘ ‘ -
VI. FACILITY LOCATION
A aYutc’r. ROUTE NO OR OTHER SPECIFIC iDENTiFiER
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- .RIYER . RIDGE QRI ,VE
ii ’ .
I I I I I I I II I I I i
• COUNTY NAME
COQK
5• . 5•
C CITY OR TOWN upc I F COUNTY CODE 1
- MORRIS -Ji lL 60123
, , ,1 , I I I I I I I I I I (tf sbdtum0 1
I .’
EPA Form 3510.1 (Rar. 10.80)
CONTINUE ON REVERSE
I
PROTECTION SOENCY
GENERAL IN FORMATION
5ROI )diSSd tin/O
(Reed the •raj f -.
FACILITY
LOC AT ION
IISTIcS
If • pnsprlnt,d label Iset been provided, affix
it In the deelgnst .,d speca Revises the inform.
atlon ifully, If any of it us incorrect, a-ow
through it and inter die correct data in tile
spprop ,wh . fill—in ares below. Also, if any of
the piwirintad Gate Is absent (di. awi to
) ilt of di. I I sp II, di. ,nfu,rn.vo.,
di .t d’soJj ’ ) pleas. provide .1 in tile
proper fill—sn area g) b,l w If the label us
cornpleta and correct, you need not comolrte
ltarna I, III, V. and VI (&Ircspr VI-B NI
mint he cosip )eas tsperdI ) Complete sil
items if no label has been provided Refer to
di. Instructions for detailed rtsm dan,p-
dons and for the lagal authorizations un
which this data is collected.
2-13

-------
EOflI.A THE FRONT
—
vu. sic ou 4 -dpt m o .’ c1pviw* I
A PI SY • UCONO
£4 I I I/specify , 4 l I (jpec ifr)
7 .32J1 GLASS MANUFACTURING 1
I. I i I i sk ip . I .
C. THIRD 0 POUNTH
£4 I (speafy) I I I (specify)
- I
I i . iii ,iIi, — i i
VIII. OPERATOR INFORMATION
C ITATUE or OPERATOR (Enter the .pprop,tate Letter bite the asir,wr box. df “Omer”. ec (J)’)
C I I I I I I I
F • FEDERAL - PUBLIC (Other than federal ornate) ( s p / f y)
S — STATE 0 • OTHER (.peci ’y) A 312 834 4536
P—PRIVATE M II i• • H D•- ii I • U
I. ITRECT OR P0 lOX
I I I I Ii I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I II Ii
P0 BOX 319

7• - • 5
F CITY OR TOWN Q.$TAT H. ZIP COOEIX. INDIAN LAND
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
!j,. MORRIS — IL 6?13. .
usd l.f.cIiItyIo tldoflind1sn 1 1 1 ?
C YES ( NO
X. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS
-
A NPOCI (DLeCIIargeJ to Siarfx . Water)
e , I II I I II
9 N . ILoq65 3
I.
0. P$O (AL, Eml ciU fto.’i PPop $ ‘va )
C? • I I I I I I II I II I
9 P
IS IS 77 IS
.5 II I i
U. UIC (Underivuw,dIflI(CtWM of FluLdsJ
I I I I
I. OTHER ( E ’)
a. I I I I I I I I I I I I I
a . I I I I
9U ..
I. IS IT IS - II
9
IS Ii IT IS 5 •
Attach to this application • topographic map of the area extending at Islet Ofli mii i beyond xu ifty boundenes. The map must sho.
the outline of the facility, the location of each of ite existing and ropoied Inteks and discharge strucWres. sad of es hazardous waste
treatment, storage, or disposal facilities, and each well wher, i -i Injscte fluide undergrowld. Include all spdngs . rivers and other surface
water bodies in the map area. See inetructions for precise requirements. -______________________
AUTO TEMPERED AND AUTO LAMINATED GLASS MANUFACTURED
I rr,fy under penalty of law that! lies, peiwnally exam inwi aid an fanliW with dse i,fwmat i *i nIttwi in this p!icatiOn and all
attachments a id that, based on my inquirj of those psewi i,nm.dhafa !y , ovwibi. for obtakiAig dia Information onnta,ned in the
epplication, I beI,e that the information is true, acwrete aid conw f 1. I yp awe that dsare are ifflcwt penalties for su rnWflQ
false infosmanon, including the pouibiify of fine and impriwninent
A NAME or pIclAl. TITLE (type 0, pant)
VICE PRESIDENT
JOHN BAKER
COMMENTS FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
I U. SIGNATURE

I
I I
I
2/2/89
I I I I I I I I I I I
Cl
III IS £
I
I I I I
I S I I I I

I I I I
I I
I I
EPA Form 3510-1 (R.v. 10-801 R.ww
0
C S
overnsens Prin
1 0
ui ‘
. Ii dW awn. II,t.d fr
A NAME viii.a .i uw
I I I I 1 I I I I I I S I I I I I S I I I I I n.I7
LUSTER GLASS INC. YES NO
— I.
I.
II I i
C. RCRA (Hezaidout WdItU)
I. OTHER
(spec (fy)
2-14

-------
0 96 I GO
CH(KATIC OF
WAtER FLOW
LUSTER OLASS INC
1RRI5. INDIANA
4 813 UGO
(lIT WAlER
v i
4 I) UC,O
OUTFALL ••I
4 563 MGO
7 06 c(s
2 5 UGO
R(CYCL(O PROCESS
COOlING NATER
t
0 45 UGt) (BLOWDOWN)
0 2S MOP AIMOSF’IIERE

-------
Illinois River
001 DISCHARGE
LUSTER GLASS, INC.
Fjct1tj 5 Location
N,
LOCATION MAP
SCALE 1:24000

-------
I- - - -
- - . ‘ ‘ vt f *,I ’VAL P .J4I.fIlU C,
t ’T N PO PERMIT TO D D4A GE $T WATIRZ -
2 £kII1I,I bI’ACTUfiING. COMMERCIAL MINING * 1W $ILV1CULTtJ AL OPERATIONS

I. OU ’ff ALL LOCATION
For e.th outf&I, rat the latitude end lonituds of ItS location to the nearest 15 seconds and the name of the receiving water
A OUTFALL
NUMSUR
(lift
S LATITUDE
C LONGITUDE
0 RECEIVING WATER (heiR.,
I a..
a i.
i sic
I C i i
3 ‘ ,
I ,CC
001
42
36
98
30
ILLINOIS RIVER
A Attach a line drawing showing the water flow through the facility Indicate wurces of intake water, operations contributing wasiewnter to the elf luCAt
and treatment units labeled to correspond to the more detailed descriptions in Item B Construct a water balance on the line drawing by showing average
flows bet en intakes, operations, treatment units, end outfalls If a water balance cannot be determined (..g., for cres,n mining ctsvif,es/ provice a
pictorial deacnption of the nature and amount of any aourcea of water and any ccllection or treetm.nc m jrea.
B For each outfall, provide a description of (1) All ooeretiorts contributing wastewater to the effluent, including process waiteweter, sanitary wastewater,
cooling water, and storm water runoff. (21 The average flow contnbuted by each operation, and (3) The treatment received by the westewater Continue
on additional sheets if necessary
OPERATION(S) CONTRISUTINO PLOW
3 TREATMENT
b AVERAGE FLOW
OPERATION (list) (incj,,de Ia’ Iit,i
—
b LIST COOSS FROM
a DESCRIPTION TABLE ZC I
Lllç Ngif —
Oil/Water Senarator
Settling Basins
i-ti
B1owdo 0.45 MGD
MIXING WITh OTHER SThEA S
1-0
.
T
.
I
:
I

,
I
I
guid .linn iii b-ccteiones,
EPA Form 3510.2C (Rev 2-851
PAGE 1 OF 4
Lur’IIINUE ON REVERSE
Piseas pint or type fl the unshaded areas Only
4 c Oval •WIi•S 73? -88
2-17

-------
CONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
A Does an •?fiueflt gu.oeine ,.mitasion oromulgatec by EPA unaer Sector. 304 of the Clean Water Act apply to your tlCii,tV’
CS ICO.iPh’ti (torn Ill B too t o to Section (V i
B Are the Imitations in she applicadle effluent guideline espreased in terms of production (or o lir mm,,, of .fIr,pp) 1
YES co.npirte lien. 111 Ci too tie to Soc (ion I ’ ,)
C If you answered yes to Item 11.8 lust the uanhuty which represents art actual meesurernentof your level of production expressed in the terms ar’c units
used ri the applicable ef’huerut guideline, and indicate the effected oulfalls
— 2 4 P5CTC0
OUTFALLS
‘Iii: ‘3ot(O4 ‘iio I •7i
5 QW*fllfl •5* 0* ’ b WSt OP e(01001
AVERAGE DAILY PRODUCTION
C pl o ., 0000uc? *rSal*L. ( PC
igpecify)
40.000 Ft 2 /DAY
275.000 Ft 2 /DAY
AUTO TEMPERED GLASS
AUTO LAMINATED GLASS
A Aro rou ‘O.’ . reouroi.. o ederat Slate or local autho’ ‘v ‘ —tees any rnoiernentation schedule for the COrtS”uCtlOfl ungrac -:
: , -alOr ’ : , ‘.aste
aue ’ treatr,en eou,omen’ o’ practices or any oth ’ eriu,ror ’—en a orogrars wnicri may affect the aitchhrges oesc’bec ri n a:: ‘Co
: Tri s -:
Out 5 101 mISC to Oerm,i :onditions, adm.riistrat,ve or aror:er’ens 0 1c c-n enlo,cement compliance schedule ‘erers, sIpulat 0’S Co..’
:‘cers a’: ;rar t
or loan ConditIons —
— YES icornpI. ’ie rhe ‘o.l... . g roo.r, NO i,o to Ire,.. 4,
I iocPo -ri.ICATIOPI OF CONDITION ,I * AFFECTED OUI’FALL S
AGRECMCNT CrC • . so .ca . 3 •R 1EF DESCRIPTION or PROJECT
4 FiNAL COM
P S. JARCC OATF
I 00’ . ‘00’
OWISSO •Ct0
B OPTIONAL Y u may as,ac’, 400 11’C08l s”-els oesc 3 - ,. - c on ;enrre programs ‘or ems’ eneronmai, ’a :rO/ec’s - - . . - rec’
your 3lscnarpesl you rio nays un0!r ay or wncn ,‘o.i . ., ‘- -c Ca acn orogram •s no . urioerwav 0’ pailfleO - - 3’
olannec scneduies for Construction MARK K IF OCSCR 1PT1ON ORAl. CONTROL PROGRAMS 5 ATTACRCD
PACE 2 OF J CONTINUE C. aAGE
EPA Form 3510 2C (Rev 2-85)
‘ ‘E iiss for f n, . rvrsoff ‘TSsks. or Zla . WS 5 5W of ’ N ‘• ‘ us ) s fl. or B ; . tr
YES (co’—DI.ga rho lOilO i.i toW,) NO (to to Secego,. til l
2 OPERATIONI ’ 5 1
4 FLOw
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A /A vA
001
001
2-18

-------
A ,O ed
JEP* I 0 NUMSCR(COpY (‘am Item 1 of Fo,m , 0M8 Vs 7O4O. 86
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 2 I 2OD,O JIe,D,,eS 73? 88
V INTAKE AND EFFLUENT CNAAACTERISTICS
A, B, & C See instruction, bet ore poceeding — Complete one set Of table, for each outfall — Annotate the outfall number in the provided
NOTE Tables V-A, V.8. and V-C are included on separate sl eeu numbered V-t through V .9
0 Use the space below to l,n any of th. pollutants listed in Table 2c-3 of the instructions which you know or have reason tO believe is discharged or -flay be
discharged from any outfall For ry pollutant you list briefly describe the reasons you believe it to be present and report any analytical data n rout
possession
I POL i.UTANT 2 SOURCC POLLUTANt ’ 2 SOUPCC
N/A NIA N/A N/A
VI POTENTIAL DISCHARGES NOT COVERED BY ANALYSIS
Is any pollutant listed in Item V-Ca substancoor a component of a substance which you currently useor manufacture as an intermediate or final product or
byproduct?
YES (list Ii such pOllutants belowi NO ‘go to tism yr B?
ZINC
EPA Form 3510-2C (Rev 2-85) PAGE 3 OF 4 CONTINUE O EVER
2-19

-------
cONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
Whole Effluent Toxicity —
Acute and chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity tests were conducted to
satisfy an NPDES permit reguirement for biomonitoring. Initially,
in February 1988, a sample was analyzed for acute and chronic
toxicity using both Ceriodaphnia dubia and Pimephales promelas
(Fathead minnows). The results indicated that Fathead minnows were
the more sensitive of the two species and were used in subsequent
tests. Chronic toxicity to Fathead minnows varied from 1.2% to
3.5% Acute toxicity varies from 3 to 24.8%. A total of 12
monthly samples were analyzed for acute and chronic toxicity over
the course of one year. Results are presented in Table 3.
Icervify under penalty c i I . wthat this document and.!! attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with as esrem designed to
assure that quahfiedpersonnelprcperiy gather nd evaluate the information submitted Based onmysnquiry of the person or persons who manage the system or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information the information sisbmifl d,z. to the be at 0/rn ykno wiedge andbelief true accurate and complete
/ am aware thit there are significant penalties lot submitting false information, including the poznbil,t’y of Fin. and imprisonment for no wing notations
A NAME & OFFICIAL TITLE ii%p, On Dninr
JOHN BAKER. VICE PRESIDENT
B PHONE NO ‘urea
312-834-4536
C SIGNATUPE
4. L A
0 DATE SIGNED
-/ rn
Oo yo h or esesom fo that sy bIOIOgIad last for . cuse or cttr n Iosualy h bs s made on my of your 0’sct er es or on a
k , , your dI.dlar9 . esth,n ds. fast 3 yes’s?
v .a (Identify the teit iii and de,c’ibq thSIr purpO gf betawi “ ‘ NO (So to Section V I ! ! )
A NAME
Were eny of the analyse, reVorted in lten V perform ed by a contraci laboratory Or consUlting firm?
yes ‘list th . nwn,, addrui, and telephone numb., 01’, and pallutanta NO (to to Section IX)
analyz.d by, each such laboratory or firm b iow)
MEASUREMENT L.ABS
B ADDRESS
C TELEPHON
(arva cod. & no I
113 RIVER PARKWAY 312-684-2121
CHICAGO, IL
60020
•ULLUTANTS ANALYZED
U ’
129 PRIORITY POLLUTANTS
BOD, TOC, COD, TSS, ZN,
CU, PHOSPHORUS,
CADMIUM. LEAD
EPA Form 351O- C (Rev 2-85) PAGE 4 OF 4
2-20

-------
PLEASE I’HIN I i )li 1 ’s I’i IN 1(11 IINSIIAOL I.) AIIIAS ONLY Yl,, lil, il. iIiIui SiliiiL II ,,ll I I I
list illt(illil ,iiltill Iii SI khi ii, ,Iiei (list lilt Sd,Ilt? Io(iIl IjfJ iuisii’,il I II I ,liii Iiit iIIl’J hiLtS. ill Ji’S
SLE INSTI 1ULI IoNS
ONLJMOLN(lnIiIrIlllllIl ii I ,( 1;lll
1L0654321
I ,. , ,,. Aj , , , .!
() t?1J N. .‘l)41) ‘IdE s
/ ii
- OU1IALLP SO
V INTAKE AND C FF LIJINT ChARACTERISTiCS 1.’ ,i ,iiut ii Ill 1i ,q , Jul h ,, ,i2( ’)
PART A, YOu itiiiSl iiovuIv the IUSUIIS 01 at li-isi ibiii. _diidIySIt liii I VCIy iulluitiiit I II this Idlile Cuiiiijlele (she Idlife for racli outfall See Instructions for additional details
_________— 2 EFFLUENT 3 UNITS 4 INTAI% ( ipIiuthaI )
I POLLUTANT • MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE b I WEti ? VAt F fl ALU I /V If hI,nk )
I I _______ —. i i ANALY5L . TISATION II MA 5 (I I — “a ANALYSES
mg/i LBS
• ulocisemc .i
Oxygen Ds,nand
( IN)l)J
h i Ch. ,rsicsl
0. ygan Osnssnd
(Cot ’)
C Tilol Osgsnic
Carbon (IOC)
ii Total Sisilnsiil,l
SOlIds IS .5 ))
a Ai ’si ’iOi’la ( III 1. I
I Flow
g T.mpsrsiura
(lull Err)
s TsmpsraiuII
(auulmer)
I pH
40.0 590.0
50.0 199.7
65.0 221.1
50.0 429.3
<0.11 <0.44
V ALII 1-
4.591
V A LUL
—
VALUE
28
MINIMUM MAXIMUM
-
VAL LIL -
V ALUL
V ALUL
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
76
25.0
18.8
V A LIE
4.563
VALUE
237.0
290.9
VALUE
4
52
1
mg/i
mg/i
mg/i
mg/i
P 480
“C
LBS
LBS
- --
- --
- - -
LBS
- --
-. -
---
LBS
oc
STANDARD UNITS
VALUE
V A LU S.
52
V ALUL
PART 8 . Mark X in column 2 a for each pollutant YOU know o, have reason to believe is present Mark ‘X’ in column 2-b for each pollutant you betueve to be absent If you mark column 2a for any pollutant
which is limited eithe: diroclly.or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant For other pollutants for which you mait
column 2a. you must provide quantitative data or en explanation of their presence in your discharge Complete one table for each outfall See the instructions lot additional details and requirements
I POLLUT
ANT AND
CAS NO.
(I( LualIobIe)
2 MANNA
a.. b a,
•V . L ,.x
•..II xUIU
X
a Bromide
(24959679)
b Chiolin.,
Tot.l Residual
x
Coior
a
.1 F xc ii
(, ii ,In r. i I
x
a F 1,0 1 hi.
1169944881
5
I NI.. ..
NIu,II. (oa N)
PA Fu,m 3610 2C fRey 1 86)
“3
F
u— i

-------
ITEM V B CONTINUED FROM FRONT
(1) AIph. ,
Total
(21 Bits.
Total
I. POLLUT-
ANANO
(I1uuaaiable)
MApI A 3 EFFLUENT
t::., MAXIMUM OAILY VALUE b MA*I VALUE cLON Mft CLJ
.L T.
—
4
CONC N
TRATlO
UNITS

S INTAKE f .pIso,i.dI
ANAL
A L PA
Wt t ta
O NltrOOsn ,
Total Organic
(a N)
88

.
,
12
39
YSES
4
I. )
vals
It Oil and
Orsas .
I PhO ihOiui
(a. P), Total
(7723140)
x
22
19
4
ib/d
x
I Radioactivity
_____
(3) RadIum
Total
(4) Radium
226 Total
k Sulfate
1 ’. • )ii
I 14806 798)
I Suit I d.
(a. SI
m SulfIti
I . SOj )
11426545 3)
n Surtactant.
0 Aluminum,
Total
11429905)
p BarIum.
Total
(7440393)
8
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
K
A
A
A
K
A
q Boron,
Total
(7440 428)
, CObiR,
Total
(74.40484)
Iron, Total
(7430-896)
t Magnasium,
Total
(7439 954)
MOlybdanurn
Total
7439 98 7)
v Mangan.s. ,
Total
I 43U 96 bI
w tin Total
(744031 6)
I Ii I
I p440 .1? I I
A
A
A
A
PAGL V 2
F PA Fi utj 3h 10 ‘( ‘ (((fly 1 iIt)
( ON I iN liE tiN PA(,i V 3

-------
EPA I 0 NUMOER (copy from l1)-. , 1 of Form l)JOUTFALL NUMBER
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 3 OF FORM 2 C
110654321 j 001
PART C ti you are a primary industry and this outfall contains process wastewater refer to Table 2c 2 in the instructions todetermine which of the GC/MS fractions you must test for Mark X in column
2-a for all suth GC/MS fractions that apply to your industry and for ALL tosic metals cyanides and totaiphenols If you are not required to mark column 2 a (secondary ,ndust ,es. nonproc.sa 4
wassawate, out/ails and non equired GC/MS fractions), mork X in column 2 b for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present Mark X in column 2 c for each pollutant you
believe is absent If you mark column 281cr any polfutent. you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant If you mark column 2b for anypollutant you must provide the result.
of at feast one analysiS for that pollutant ii you know or have reason to believe it will be discharged In Concentrations of 10 ppb or greater If you mark column 2b for acrolern, acrylonutrife, 2 4
ditritrophanol or 2 methyl 4, 6 dinitrophenol, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for each of these pollutants which you know or have reason to believe that you discharge in
concentrations of lO0ppbor greater Othutwusa for polluiantsfor which you tnark column 2b. you must either submit at least one anafysisor briefly describe the reasons the pollutant is expected to
be discharged Note that there are 7 pages to this part, please review each Carefully Complete one table (all 7 pages) for each outfall See instruCtions for additional details end requirements —
I POLLUTANT’ 2 MANN 3 EFFLUENT
*il l U..Jc...tS MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE b M AEiM)/M39g AY_VALUE 140_T _VALUE dillooF
(Ii ai .uitabh) I ‘ I (.1 •t ’” i.t vses
4 UNITS
5 iNTAKE (upiiom.v17
a CONCEN
TRATiON
V, .T , 5
bNO*
YSSk
AVLKAc
1 ’t::: •
‘ ..
METALS CYANIDE, AND TOTAL PHENOLS
1M Antimony
Total 174403601
x
x
x
x
x
x

X
a

a

5
S
5
U 024
0.07
-
-
(J 018
‘
0 03
. I )
- - -
4
4
- -
mg/i
mg/I
---- -
-- ---

- -
3M A,sen,c Total
(74403821
3M B ir y l i i i. ,.
101.1 74404) /1
4M C,.i..o....
Toi. .l 11440 4J .11
‘it .1 Ciii u
ui l (144041 , ((
iM Co ipxi Tat*l
1440 5081
iN Laid total
li 398 2 II
9M M*rcory Total
(14399761
OM N(ck.i Total
(74400201
1OM Selaniusi
1016117182 49 21
tiM Sil ai 101*1
1/4402241
I 2M Ti .all
101*1 l 44O 2H 01
13M Ziiic lolai
ul44ouG&i
14M Cyniuu.Iu
loivI It.) 12 t .l
I 1 .M i’ho,,o
1 1 .1 1 . 1
--__
- - --
- - -
- -
——
- —-
— -
UIOXIN - - - -
liii I ‘ ‘ I . , . Iii’.i lilt,. iai ’ilII5
i . 1
I I , ,. ii , a
login Appived
()M8 No 1 (140 0086
A;ip,orali..pi,es / 37 88
EPA Fm,,i,s 3b10 Z(’ fIt.’., 2 H5
iA(.I V I
Ll)NllN(It ON HLVtlt L

-------
I POLLUTANTI - MAHI A
ANDCAS F’ ’ r -— --
NUM8ER J ”• A MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE
— IIIa t ’wlobt.t 1: .!:
GCIMS FRACTION — VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
1V Acroluin
(107 028)
_______________ *
2V Acrylonitrile
(107 13 I)
3V BInxsn.
(71 432)
— _______ A
4V 01. CIIICI- ,J
mclhyl) Ether
( 54288 l) __ -. A ___
5V 6,omoform
(15252)
6V Carbon
T.t,.chlo, do
( 66235) — - —
7V ChIorOb.ni.n.
11089071
x
8V Chtoroh
h rOn ,O, ,,Othan o
9V CItIoroellieto
115 0031
________ *
%OV 2 Chluro
athyloinyl E the,
(110 ! 5 8 ) —— x
liv ChIo,oIorn
(67 663)
__________________ x
12V Otchioro
bromOm.th.ne
( 76274 ) x
13V DichIoro-
d lfluoto,nsth.na
( 78 718 ) x
14V 1,1 DichIoro
.th.ns (76 34 3)
i SV 1,2 DichIoro
•than. (10706 2) A
16v II DichIoro
•thyl•I (16354)
17V 1.2 OrchIoro
p.ojan.(78875 1 — - — _____ - _______-
I SV I 3 0d4oro
Droo$.n. (542 76 5)
ID V I Ily Ito, eru
(100414)
J oy M iI.yI
I t n ,. to 114 U I J)
2 1v M. .I. I
I .. I I H I I
CONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
3 EFFLUENT
I , MI IMUM 39 PAY VALUE
( if .it-aiI , j9j j,, ,
,
C LONG Y*$M AVI1O VALUE
(U’ ,WeiInbk)
.1 NC Ut
AN AL
Y bL
4 UNITS
a CONCUr)
IRATION I. MASS
5 INTAKE_(,pIImol)
. )IONGTCRM
_A.IUIM VAI.UC ANA
_________ “I
1.1
‘Form 3510 2C (Rev 2 85)
PAGE V.4
C(WYINUE ON PAGE V)

-------
LPA I I N JMULH ( .(.) (n... . Ii . ,, . I ( Foro, I, [ WFALL NUMBER ] U /041) (X1 O
CONTINUED FROM PAGE V 4 II n ca i flfl l I
/ ‘
CLONGTMAVI4 VALUE
(sf oUUIlobU)
hi
1 NO 0 5
ANAL
V SLS
4 UNITS
CONC&N
I.. MASS
1 RATION
S INTAKE 1 ,pt o . . .d)
I POLLUTANTI 2 MARK
AND CAS h-r —i —
NUMBER I .: J ‘-“ a MAaIMUM DAILY VALUL
- ilo .u .IutI I : - [ : j • -- L’ [ ( ) .. .
GCIMS FRACTION — VOLATILE COMPOUNDS j ,oI 1)
22 J M.th Isna
Chin, Id. (75 09 2)
23V 1 1 2.2 Tetro
ehIOloeIh aflo
( 79345) —
24V TOt ,aCI1IU,O
•thyi.n . (127 18 4)
25V Toloene
(10888 3)
______ - .x __ - -
26V 1.2 Trans
D lchlo toethylene
6 ) x
21V 11.1 TIl
chIO,o e lh.ne
( 71556 )
28V 1,1 2 T’.
chioroethane
( 79006 )
29V TrichiorO
ethylet,e (7901 6)
30V TrichIoro
Iluorotneth ane
( 75694 ) - x
31V VIny)
Chiotide (7501 4)
C/MS FRACTION
A 2 Chioropheno
(557 8)
C LONG TERM
_A LL1iA . VALUL
: —:: _i.)
I. NO
A N ALl
VIE’
I EFFLUENT
1. MASISMUM 3Q p AV VALUE
U,
i i
— AC
0 COP
2A 2 4 OIch)oro
phanOl (120832)
x
POUt)
3A 2.4 Onnatityl
phenOl (1056791
OS
4A 4 6 D,n,s,o 0
Cram) (634521)
-&
V
5A 2,4 DIn,t,o
phenol (61 28 6)
6A 2 Nltrophenol
(88 75 5)
x
7A 4 N,trophenOl
(100027)
BA P CI,Ioto M
C,esul i59 50 7)
I ,., .,. 1,1
I II I ! III,
lI lA
I 1 11 )1 1)
ISA 141, I . .
.1.1 hu,,,,I
x
x
x
x

-------
CONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
I POLLUTANT
AND CAS- .
NUMBER
(if a a,?ubi. I
GCIMS FRACTION
lB AC•fl.phth.n.
(83 32 9)
2 MAO,. A
I,..
I
— BASE/NEUTRAl
x
28 Ac•nSphtyIen.
(208 968)
x
x
x
38 Aolhr .c.n.
(120127)
48 9 .nzIdln.
(92875)
SB B .nIo(o)
An hr.c.n.
(66863)
68 Bingo (a)
Pyr.na (60 328)
——
x
x
x
x
x


9
-

—
9
9
78 3.4 8anao
fluo,aii lh.n.
(205992) -
98 R.nzo (gin)
Pu Iu,ii
(19 )242) -.
96 U.o2o(ii )
F h.o,inih.n.
(207 - -
106 8’ . (2 ( .S ,(or,,
g (I, , , . y) Muthun.
111911)
lB 811(2 Chluru
ffiyi ) EtIisr
111444) -—
211 8.12 Chlwa.so
apy (Its., (102 601)
138 81.12 EffiyS
huzyI) PhthuIat.
111781 7)
148 4Bromo
ph.ny( PhsnyI
Eth. , ) 10 1653)
1GB Butyl 8 .nayl
Phthalat. (85 68 7
168 2Chloro -
naphth.I .ns
(91587)
118 4ChIorn
iifl.nyl Plienyl
Eth.r (700572 3)
I S O Ch,y.sn.
(218019)
190 OIL,.ngo (,, I.)
Aflhtiv . i.st,s
(53703)
20 )) I 2 D i , I i ), ,. ,,
I,a,sionu ( ( lb bO I)
9
9
9
9
eMAA,MUMOAILV VALIJC -
i cTTri
COMPOUNDS
I I I - I I.IJLNT
UMAXIMIIM 30 PAY VALUE
I I
4 (JNIIS
.5 P4 55 or
AvP : INATSON b MASS
CLONGTJ M . 4 ç VALU [
(It Ui 2iIU(I3• I ___________

S IN T A K L f. ‘ ‘Ih .‘wI
—— . i o,.r. icnu I. P50 0
-I. k... ANAL
I.) —s..
2Itj I 3 Olchloso
I.*ni..,,* )tS4l Ii I
A Form 3510 2C (Rev 2-85)
PAGE V-S

-------
CONTINUED FROM PAGE V 6
POLLUTANT I
AND CAS I— —r- -i-
NUMBER i:’i. -..
Iii rnjdijb), ) I I ‘. .V .
OC/MS FRACTION — BASE/NEUTRAt
226 1,4 Dichloro
b.nz.n. (106 467 x
236 3,3’ DichiorO
b.niid lnl
( 91941 ) X
246 DI. )hyl
PhIhala ls
( 84682 ) X
266 DImathyl
PhthsI.tI
( 131113 ) X —
266 DI N -6U 1y 1
Phihilat .
( 84742 ) - X - - -
276 2,4 Oinlt’o
toluena(12l 142) x
286 2.6 DinItlo
tOluefla (60620 2) x
299 Di N Octyl
Phth . Iate
( 117840 ) X -
308 1,2 Olpheoy )
hydrulns(a*AZo
benaene) (122 667
116 Ftuoranthefle
208-440) 1
328 F luorsns
88737) x
330 HWC bS n
( 11 87 ’- ” x
346 Nsa.
chIo,ObutSdIaflS
( 87 68 3 )
358 Hsa.chIOrO
cyc lop.ntad l .ns
( 77 47 4 )
36B HSx.ch(QfO-
•thsnl (67 72 1) x
37B Indino
(1.2,3 cdl Pyr .ni
( 193396 ) 1
388 l.oDhorone
(78691) x
396 NaphIheleflu
191203) X
4011 N lii UIi0 I, 010
i ONUbJ) I
Iii N ti.I...
‘ ‘ ‘ I , , . ,
47)) N NiI ,iod,
P1 I’,,,i, via ,.uIiii,
EPA I 0 NUMBER fcog’y (ro.r It.’,,, I of
I L0654]21
i Err. ULNI
SMA )IIMUM DAILY VALUL b M A Iifl M3 AY VALUE
!_i - - ‘S - -
COMPOUNDS (cunti,.ued’
/ i s , , ,,
ElM / i F .,, 11)4/) i/OAt,
/ ii 88

-------
CONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
POLLUTANT z MAHK s


FRACTION — BASE/NEUTRA
I EF L UCNT
C fi ± ANAL
— ..
I COMPOUNDS (c ,tuuu,d) - —
- - - - . - —_. —— -_ . .__
— - - -
- --
4 UFISTS
I MASS
S INTAKE i.’pt una:i

TRATION
.—
A
-
- —
Phsnanlhren.
-
-
- __
.
I) —
FRACTION - PESTICID
. _
ES
x
DOT
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
DDE
ODD
Endo suIf.,i
Endasut l.n
Endotullin —
1)
I I.IsCU, U I,
x
x
x
x
x
X
- -
Oj
I PA I ,.i.ii .Ih II . ) JC (IIo ., 2 (15)
IAL .L V U I
CUNflNUE ONPAGEV9

-------
lap
(834
PCB 1242
69 21 9)
IØP
(II
PCB 1264
09769 I)
20P
(Iii
PCB 1221
04282)
CONTINUED FHOM PACE V 8
I POLLUTANT i MAU A
AND CAS 1
NUMOER MAX! IO LY ±LUE
(.1 ,n. ,IohS. I •
_______ _LU
GCIMS FRACTION — PESTICIDES (co,iSinu t)
liP H.ptschlor
EpoAids
( 102457 3 (
23P PCO 1260
(11098825)
24P PCB 1018
(12674 11 2)
25P Toitiphiol
‘8001 35 2)
i EFILULNr
t MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE
- - - _W ’ P!cJ —— ——
I.,
PA I 0 NUMOER ( ,og , from II. .,s I of Iurm I) OUTEALL. NUMBLI
110654321 001
eLONG TI fIM l(pG VALUE
II ! ,, ,‘ ,,IIAL I..
1.1
I .., ,. .1
04 18 No I )4U (N)80
/ Ii 88
.1 M I) HI
A N Al.
v..ts
4 liNus
a CONLtN I MA
1 RATION
2 1P PC8 1232
(11141 166)
22P PCS 1748
(12672298)
x
*
x
x
x
X
*
x
S INTAKE
.- :,;;- . TERM I , NO 0
- .AYEUft I VALUE ANAL
(,) .... Y$t$
PAGE V9
...flh1 IIl... I $11.1

-------
STANDARD PERMIT CONDITIONS

-------
STANDARD CONDITIONS IN THE PERMIT
•
Standard conditions must appear in every NPDES permit.
•
Standard conditions may be placed in permits verbatim or
incorporating them by reference.( 122.41)
by
TYPES OF STANDARD CONDITIONS
•
Responsibilities of permittee
•
Testing procedures
•
Records retention
•
Reporting requirements
•
Penalties for noncompliance
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Role of “boilerplate”
• Methods for placing conditions in permits
• Type of conditions
NOTES:
3-1

-------
RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERMITTEE
• Duty to comply
• ProperO&M
• Duty to mitigate
• Need to halt or reduce activity not a defense
• Duty to allow inspections/entry
• Duty to reapply
• Duty to provide information
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
• More frequent monitoring
• 24 hour report of endangerment
• Changed circumstances
- Plant alteration/addition
- Changed pollutants/flow/production
- Sludge use/disposal method
• Anticipated noncompliance
• Signatory/certification
• Upset/bypass reports
• Provide information as needed
3-2

-------
OTHER STANDARD CONDITIONS
• Nontransferability
• Enforcement penalties
• Monitoring and records
• Bypass
• Upset
• Permit actions
• Property rights
NOTES:
3-3

-------
3-4

-------
PRACTICAL EXERCISE
DIRECTIONS :
Identifying Standard Conditions
Applicable to All NPDES Permits
Listed below are examples of standard conditions that apply to all NPDES permits.
Using the Code of Federal Regulations, look up each standard condition and
provide the proper regulatory citation and a brief description of the permittee’s
obligation. (Hint: All standard conditions may be found in 40 CFR S122.41.)
Group A
(1) Duty to Reapply ( S
)
2)
Bypass ( S
(3)
(4)
Permit Transfers ( S
Twenty—four Hour Reporting ( S )
(5)
Duty to Mitigate ( S
Group B
(1) Inspection and Entry ( S
(2)
(3)
Upset(S
Planned Changes ( S
3-5

-------
(4) Permit Actions ( S
)
(5) Need to Halt to Reduce Activity not a Defense ( S
Group C
(1) Duty to Comply ( S
)
(2)
Proper Operation and Maintenance ( S
(3)
(4)
Monitoring
Reports ( S
Signatory
Requirements C S
(5)
Monitoring and Records ( S
3-6

-------
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
GUIDELINES-BASED LIMITS

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• What an effluent guideline is
• How effluent guidelines are developed
• What the relationship is between:
- Effluent guidelines, SIC codes, industrial categories,
industrial subcategories, and CFR subparts
• How to calculate permit limits using an effluent guideline
DEVELOPMENT OF EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FOR NPDES PERMITS
Develop Technology-Based
Develop Water Quality-Based Limitations
Limitations • Effluent Guidelines
• Best Professional Judgment
Compare Limitations
Apply the Most Stringent
4-1

-------
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
Definition
- Effluent limitations guidelines are National standards
prescribing allowable discharges of pollutants from
industrial point source categories corresponding to
various levels of treatment or control technologies
(BPT, BCT, BAT, PSES, PSNS and NSPS).
• Scope
- Guidelines are established for most primary and some
secondary industries.
• CWA Section 304(m)
- Guidelines may be developed for new or additional
industries, such as:
- Solvent recyclers
- Barrel reclaimers
- Tank car/truck cleaners
- Industrial laundries
NOTES:
4-2

-------
EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
• Define industry
• Collect data
- 308 questionnaire
- Sampling and analysis program
• Major regulatory tasks
- Subcategorization
- Select pollutant parameters
- Assess representative treatment technologies
- Compute effluent limits
- Estimate compliance costs
- Select option for guidelines
• Produce development documents
• Perform economic and environmental impact analysis
- Assemble record
- Promulgate effluent guidelines
NOTES:
4-3

-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52.
No. 214 / Thursday. November 5. 1987 / Rules and R uLations 4235
including the 5”prioriiy’ toxic
pollutants and classes of pollutants.
Under the Act, the EPA is required to
establish several different kinds of
effluent limitations guidelines and
standards. They are summarized briefly
belowi
1. Best Practicable Control Techno gy
Currently Available (BPT )
BPT effluent limitations guidelines are
generally based on the average of the
best existing performance by plants of
various sizes. ages. end unit processes
within the category or subcategory for
control of familiar (i.e.. conventional)
pollutants.
in establishing BPT effluent
limitations guidelines, EPA considers
the total cost in relation to the effluent
reduction benefits, the age of equipment
and facilIties involved, the processes
employed, process changes required.
engineering aspects of the control
technologies. and non-water quality
environmental impacts (including energy
requirements). The Agency considers
the category-wide or subcategory-wide
cost of applying the technology in
relation to the effluent reduction
benefits. -
2. Best Available Technology
£ mically Achievable (B. I )
BAT effluent limitations guidelines. in
general. represent the best existing
performance in the category or
subcategory. The Act establishes BAT
as the principal national means of
controlling the direct discharge of toxic
and nonconventional pollutants to
navigable waters.
1 establishing BAT. the Agency
considers the age of equipment and
facilities involved, the processes
employed, the engineering aspects of the
control technologies, process changes.
the cost of achieving such effluent
reduction, and non-water quality
environmental impacts.
3. Best Conventional Pollutant Control
f chnology (OCT )
The 1977 Amendments to the Clean
Water Act added section 30t(bJ(2)(E),
establishing “best conventional
pollutant control technology” (BC!’) for
the discharge of conventional pollutants
from existing industrial point sources.
Section 304(a)(4) designated the
following as conventional pollutants:
BOD. TSS. fecal coliform. pH. and any
additional pollutants defined by the
Administrator as conventional. The
Administrator designated oil and grease
a conventional pollutant on July 30. 1979
(44 FR 44501).
BC!’ is not an additional Limitation but
replaces BAT for the r.ontrol of
conventIonal pollutants. BAT remain.s in
effect tor the toxic and nonconventional
pollutants. In addition to other factors
specified in section 304(bJ(4J(B). the Act
requires that the BCT effluent
imitations guidelines be assessed in
light of a two part “cost-
reasonableness’ test. American Paper
v. EPA. 680 F.2d 954 (4th CIr.
1981). The first test compares the cost
for pnvate industry to reduce its
discharge of conventional pollutants
with the cost to publicly owned
treotment works for similar levels of
reduction in their discharge of these
pollutant,. The second test examines the
cost-effectiveness of additional
industrial treatment beyond BPT. EPA
must find that limitations are
“reasonable” under both tests before
establishing them as BCT. In no case
may BCT be less stringent than BPT.
EPA has promulgated a methodology
for establishing BCT effluent limitations
guidelines (51 FR 24974. July 8. 1986).
4 N w Source Performance Standards
( L
NSPS are based on the performance of
the best available demonstrated
technology. New plants have the
opportunity to install the best and most
efficient production processes and
wastewater treatment technologies. As
a result, NSPS should represent the mast
stringent numerical values attainable
through the application of best eva ila tile
demonstrated control technology for all
pollutants (toxic. conventional and
nonconventional).
5. Pretreatment Standards for E’cisting
PSES are designed to prevent the
discharge of pollutants that pass
through. interfere with, or are otherwise
incompatible with the operation of
publicly owned treatment works
(POTWs). The Clean Water Act requires
pretreatment standards for pollutants
that pass through POTWs or interfere
with POTWs’ treatment processes or
sludge disposal methods. The legislative
history of the 1977 Act indicates that
pretreatment standards are to be
technology-based and analogous to the
BAT effluent limitations gwdehnes for
removal of toxic pollutants. For the
purpose of determining whether to
promulgate national category-wide
pretreatment standards. EPA generally
determines that there is pass through of
a pollutant and thus a need for
categorical standards if the nation-wide
average percentage of a pollutant
removed by well-operated P01W.
achieving secondary treatment is less
than the percent removed by the BAT
model treatment system. The General
Pretreatment Regulations. which s t
forth the framework for categorical
pretreatment standard,, are found at .1 )
CFR Part 403. (Those regulations contnil
a definition of pass through that
addresses localized rather than nati jnj1
instances of pass through and does nct
use the percent removal comparison ‘est
described above. See 32 FR l 86.
January 14. 1987.)
6 Pre!reatme’it Standards for N w
c i
Lake PSES. PSNS are designed to
prevent the discharge of pollutants that
pass through. interfere with, or are
otherwis, incompatible with the
operation of a POTW. PSNS are to be
issued at the same time as NSPS. New
indirect dischargers. like new direct
dischargers. have the opportunity to
incorporate in their plant the best
available demonstrated technologies
The Agency considers the same fac:ors
iii promulgating PSNS as it considers in
promulgating NSPS.
B. Overview of the !ndusrr-,’
The OCPSF industry is large and
diverse, and many plants in the iridu’ y
are highly complex. This industry
manufactures over 23.000 d:fferent
organic chemical,. plastics. and
synthetic fibers. However, less than h.
of these products are produced in e c .s
of 1.000 pounds per year. The industr
includes approximately 750 facilities
whose principal or primary production
activities are covered under the OCPSF
SIC groups. There are approximatel ,‘ r
other plants which are secondary
producers of OCPSF products. i a.,
OCPSF prodi c:ion is ancillary to th ’r
primary production aLtivltie3. (As
discussed aoove in this preamble. !‘ms
regulation covers OCPSF discha. ’ es
from secondary producers. with cer diri
exceptions.) This the total number of
plants to be regulated totally or in part
by the OCPSF industry regulation is
approximately 1.000. Secondary OCPSF
plants may be part of other chemical
producing industries such as the
petroleum refining, inorganic chemicals.
pharmaceuticals. and pesticides
industries as well as chemical
formulation industries such as the
adhesives and sealants, the paint ar d
ink, and the plastics molding and
forming industries.
Some plants produce chemicals in
large volumes while others produce only
small volumes of “specialty” chemicals.
Large volume production tends to use
continuous processes. Continuous
processes are generally more effic :e”.t
than batch processes in minirnizin
4-4

-------
GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Promulgation
of Final
Regulations
Internal
Rev e v
Proposed
Regulations
I
Public
Cornment
Technical Data
Development
LI ’
7
• U
• S
I U
• U
I S
• I
I S
• S
Environmental
Impact Assessment
[
] Final
Development Review
Document
L ‘

-------
CONSIDERATIONS INVOLVED IN USE OF EFFLUENT
GUIDELINES
• Determination of proper category and subcategory
• Proper use of applicable guidelines to the category or subcategory
• Classification of plants which fall under more than one subcategory
• Determination of appropriate measures of production or flow
• Use of alternative limits
• Application of mass vs. concentration limitations
NOTES:
4-6

-------
Page No. 1
03/26/91
1972/
1977 1987
SIC SIC
Code Code
211 211 BEEF CATTLE FEEDLOTS
212 212 BEEF CATTLE, EXCEPT FEEDLOTS
213 213 HOGS
213 213 HOGS
214 214 SHEEP AND GOATS
214 214 SHEEP AND GOATS
219 219 GENERAL LIVESTOCK, NEC
241 241 DAIRY FARMS
241 DAIRY FARMS
251 251 BROILER, FRYER AND ROASTER
CHICKENS
252 252 CHICKEN EGGS
253 253 TURKEY AND TURKEY EGGS
254 254 POULTRY HATCHERIES
259 259 POULTRY AND EGGS, NEC
259 259 POULTRY AND EGGS, NEC
271 271 FUR-BEARING ANIMALS AND
RABBITS
272 272 HORSES AND OTHER EQUINES
279 273 ANIMAL AQUACULTURE
279 279 ANIMAL SPECIALTIES, NEC
291 291 GENERAL FARMS, PRIMARILY
LIVESTOCK
721 721 CROP PLANTING & PROTECTION
72 T21 CROP PLANTING & PROTECTION
291 291 GENERAL FARMS, PRIMARILY
LIVESTOCK
921 921 FISH HATCHERIES AND PRESERVES
SIC Code Cross Reference
and Coaparison of New
Toxicity Nuthers with Old VaLues
CFR EGO Sub-title
Part Code
ALL Feedlots Except Ducks
Beef Cattle not in Feedtots
All Feedlots Except Ducks
Hogs not in FeedLots
All Feedlots except Ducks
Sheep and Goats not in
Feedlots
GeneraL Livestock Farms
All Feedlots Except Ducks
DAIRY CATTLE NOT CONFINED
ALL FeedLots Except Ducks
ALL Feedlots Except Ducks
All Feedlots Except Ducks
Hatcheries Without Poultry
Feeding
Ducks
Other Poultry Farms
Crop Dusting & Spraying
Crop PLanting/Cultivation
4-7
1987
Title
Old
Tox. No.
(converted)
412 A
NR
412 A
MR
412 A
MR
MR
412 A
MR
412 A
412 A
412 A
HR
412 8
MR
MR
MR
NR
MR
MR
MR
MR
MR
MR
New Toxicity
Toxicity No. Murter
Reference
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
6 2
1 2
1 2
1 2

-------
Page No. 2
03/ 26/91
1972/
1977 1987
SIC SIC
Code Code
1011 IRON ORES
1021 COPPER ORES
1031 LEAD AND ZINC ORES
1041 GOLD ORES
1041 GOLD ORES
1041. SILVER ORES
1099 METAL ORES, NEC
1061 FERROALLOY ORES, EXCEPT
VANADIUM
1061 FERROALLOY ORES, EXCEPT
VANADIUM
1061 FERROALLOY ORES, EXCEPT
VANADIUM
1061 FERROALLOY ORES, EXCEPT
VANAD IUM
1081 METAL MINING SERVICES
1099 METAL ORES, NEC
1094 URANIUM-RADIUM-VANADIUM ORES
1094 URANIUM-RADIUM-VANADIUM ORES
1099 METAL ORES. NEC
1099 METAL ORES, NEC
1099 METAL ORES, NEC
1099 METAL ORES, NEC
1231 ANTHRACITE MINING
1231 ANTHRACITE MINING
1231 ANTHRACITE MINING
1231 ANTHRACITE MINING
SIC Code Cross Reference
and Corparison of New
Toxicity Ni.s±ers with OLd VaLues
CFR EGD Sth-tit(e
Part Code
440 A Iron Ore
440 J Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Au, Mo Ores
440 J Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Au, Mo Ores
440 J Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Au, Ho Ores
440 M GoLd Placer Mines
440 J Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Au, Mo Ores
440 B Aluninun Ore
440 F Tungsten Ore
440 G Nickel Ores
4.40 J Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Au, No Ores
NR FerroaLLoy Ores, NEC
HR Explorat ion/DeveLo nent
440 D Mercury Ores
440 C Uraniun-Radiun-Vanadiun Ores
440 H Variadiun Ore
440 E Titaniun Ores
440 I Antimony Ore
440 K Ptatinun Ores
HR Metal Ore, NEC
434 B CoaL Preparation Plants
434 C Acid or Ferruginous Mine
Drainage
434 D AlkaLine Mine Drainage
434 E Post Mining Areas
I A
‘+ 0
1987
Title
OLd
Tax. No.
(converted)
1011
1021
1031
1041
1041
1044
1051
1061
1061
1061
1061
1081
092
094
094
099
099
099
099
111
111
111
111
New Toxicity
Toxicity No. Nuther
Reference
7 1
10 1
10 1
10 1
5 7
10 1
10 1
6 1
8 2
7 1
8 2
8 2
8 2
9 1
8 2
4 1
8 2
8 2
8 2
6 2
5 2
5 2
5 2

-------
42 I Federal Register I Vol. 52.
No. 214 I Thursday. November 5. 1987 I Rules and Regulations
X I I I. Vai4an s and Modificatiocs
Once the OCPSP regulation is in
effect. the numerical effi limitations
for the appropriate subcata ry must be
applied in all Federal and Stata NPDES
permits thereafter assuad to O SF
direct thschargers. The preuletm,nt
standard, are directly applicable to
indirect discharger. and become
effective a. discuued in 414.12 of the
regulation.
For the BPT effluent linutations. the
only exception to the Limitations
contained in the regulation is EPA,
“fundamentally different factors”
variance. See £ 1. duPont di Nemours
and Co. v. Train. 430 LI S. 112 (1977):
Weyethoeuur Co. v Cost/a. supm. This
variance recogiuzes factors concernings
particular discharger that are
fundamentally different from the factors
considered in this nilemeking. However.
the economic ability of the individual
operator to meet the complianc, cost foe
BPT standards is not a consideration for
granting, variance. See Nottonoi
Crvshed Stone Association v. £PA. 449
U.S. 86 (1980). Although this variance
clause wu ori naUy set forth In EPA’s
1973—1975 categorical industry
regulation... It is now included in the
general NPDFS regulations and will not
be included in the OC SF or other
specific industry regulations. See 40 CFR
Part 125. Subpart D.
The BAT limitations in this regulation
also are subject to EPA’s
“fundamentally different factors”
variance. However. section 305 of the
Water Quality Act of 198? added a new
section 301(n) to the Act which
somewhat limits the availability of FDF
variances from BAT effluent limitation.
guidelines. An FDF application must be
based solely on information end
supporting data submitted to EPA during
the rulemakuig establishing the
limitations that discussed the
fundamentally different factors. or oft
information and supporting data that the
applicant did not have a reuonabl.
opportunity to submit during the
rulemaking. The alternative requirement
must be no less stringent than justified
by the fundamental difference and must
not result in markedly more advers.
rion.water quality environmental
impact. than those considered by EPA
in establishing the guideline.
Indirect dischargen subiect to PSES
are also eligible for the “fundamentally
different factors” variance. See 40 CFR
403.13. They are subject to essentially
the same new statutory provisions for
FDF vanance as discussed above for
BAT.
Readers should note that EPA has not
yet amended its FDF variance regulation
to conform to the provisions of the
Water Quality Act of 1987. The
regulation promulgated today refers to
the existing regulatory secuona.
However. EPA reco uzes that the new
section 301(n) of the Act overrides the
e’cisti.ng FDF regulation to the extent of
any inconsistency, and EPA does intend
to modify the FDF regulation to conform
to the new statutory requirements.
Indirect dischargers subject to PSES
and PSNS are eligible for credit. for
toxic pollutants removed by a POTW.
See section 307(b) of the CWA and 40
CFR 403.7. The removal credits
regulation was remanded to EPA LU
.Vatw’nl Resources Defense Council v.
EPA. 790 F 2d 289(3rd C It. 1986). The
court held that some of the means by
which EPA considered local POTW
removal efficiencies were not
sufficiently stringent and that credits far
POTW removals may not be authorized
until comprehensive regulation.. for the
use and disposal of sludge are
promulga ted under section 405(d) of the
CWA. However, it should be noted that
pretreatment standards for the OCPSP
industry, like other categorical
preneaunent standards. have been
promulgated based upon the
assumptions that indirect discharger,
will be required to comply with the
standards without removal credits, and
thus that they are subject to the full
costs of complying with PSES.
XIV. Implementation of Iãmiiadoas and
Standards
A. Flow Basis
The limitation., promulgated today are
concentrauon .based and thus do not
regulate flow. The permit writer must
use a reasonabl, estimate of process
wastewater flows and the concentration
limitations to develop mau limitations
for the NPDES permit. Process
wastewater discharge is defined in the
regulation (40 CFR 401.11) to include
wastewaters resulting from manufacture
of OCPSF products that come in direct
contact with raw materials, intermediate
products. or fin.eJ products. and surface
runoff from the imniediate process area
that has the potential to become
contaminated. Noncontact cooling
waters, utility wastewaters, general site
surface runoff. ground waters, and other
nonprocess waters generated on site are
specifically excluded from the definition
of process wastewater discharges. In
cases where the process wastewater
flow claimed by industry may be
excessive, the permit writer may
develop a more appropriate process
wastewater flow for use in computing
the mass effluent or internal plant
limitations The following items should
be considered in developing the more
appropriate process wastewe tet flow
1. A review of the component flows to
insure that the claimed flows are. in
fact. process wastewater flows as
defined by the regu1ation
2. A review of plant operations to
insure that sound water conservation
practices are being followed. Examples
are: minimization of process water uses.
cascading or countercurrent washes or
rinses, where possible: reuse or recycle
of intermediate process waters or
treated wastewaters at the process area
and in wastewater treatment operations
(pump seals, equipment and area
washdowns. etc.).
3. A review of barometric condenser
uss at the process leveL Often.
barometric condensers will generate
relatively Large volumes of waler
con’.”r’-.ted at low levels.
Replacement of barometric condensers
with surface condensers can reduce
wastewater volumes siguificantly and
result in collection of condensates that
may be returned to the process.
The final NPDES permit limitations
will be the sum of the mass effluent
limitations derived as described above
and any mass effluent l i mitations
developed on a case-by.case basis using
best professional jud ent by the
permit writer to take into account
nonprocess wastewater discharges.
B. Relationship to NPDES Permits
The BPT and BAT limitations and
NSPS in this regulation will be applied
to individual OCPSF plants through
NPDES permits issued by EPA or
approved state agencies under section
402 of the Act. As discussed in the
preceding section of this preamble. these
irnutations must be applied in all new.
modifIed and reissued Federal and State
PDES permits except to the extent that
variances are expressly authorized.
Other aspects of the interaction between
these limitations and NPDES permits are
discussed below.
One subject that has received
different judicial rulings is the scope of
NPDES permit proceedings when
effluent limitations and standards do not
exist. Under cw’rent EPA regulations.
States and EPA regions that issue
NPDES permits before regulations are
promulgated must establish effluent
limitations on a case.by.case basis This
regulation provides a technical arid legal
base for new or modified or reissued
permits.
One issue that warrants consideration
is the effect of this regulation on the
powers of NPDES permit issuing
authorities. EPA has developed the
limitations and standards in this
4-9

-------
4-10

-------
FeduaJ Register I VoL 50, No. 183 / Friday. September 20, 1985 / Rules and Regulation . 38345
421.302 Effluent Ilmiladon. gwdeliztes
represernirig the degre . of effluent
reduction attainable by the application of
the best practi cable control technology
currently available.
421.303 Em . ent ( Imitation. guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the application of
the best available technology
economically achievable.
431.304 Standards of performance for new
eoutc•&
421.301 Pretreatment sd_aids for existing
sources.
421 5 Pretreetmues standards for new
urcos.
421.3W IReservedi.
350.
421.310 Appllcabilhty- ds.alptlon of the
— ninguen end cobalt
subentegury.
421.3fl Specialized dofinltloes.
421.312 Effluent linutatlon. guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the appllcatlonjf
the best practicable control technology
nTontly available.
421 . 313 Effluent limitations guidelines
Ua.utiog the degre. of affluent
reduction attaInabl, by the appbcadou of
the bees available technology
l! lW fllCafly achievable.
421.314 Stand_aid, of puformanc, far new
421.315 Pveu’utmens standards for existing
sources.
421.316 Preosatment standards for new
421.317 LReserv.d
3.0.
421.330 App4Icablhlty desaiptien of the
secondaiy uranium eubcate .
431 .331 $py i.iI.s dsflnftloms.
“ '-331 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the application of
the best precticabi. omtrol technology
currently available.
421.331 Llfluent limitation. guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainabl, by the application of
the best available technology
economically achievable.
421.324 Standards of performance for new
sources.
431.325 (ReservedI.
421. Pretreatment standard_a for new
ecureas.
421.W lRessrvedl,
Subpart AE-Prlm.ry 31rcon lum and
3.0.-
421.330 Appllcabiliiy deia ptfon of the
primary urconium and hafnium
subcategory.
421.331 Specialized definitions.
421.332 Effluent limitations guideline,
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainabl, by the appbcation of
the best practicable control technology
currently available.
421.333 Effluent llmitaUo a gwdellnes
representing the degre, of effluent
reduction attainable by the apphcauon of
the bu, available technology
economically achievabje.
4.31.334 Standards of performance for new
sources.
421.335 (Ra.erv ,4
421.336 Pretreatment standards for new
Sources..
421 . 337 uswe4
1421.140 ta lI t1tQflO$thS
— wml
The provision. of this subpart are
applicable to discharges resulting from
the production of antimony at pronasy
antimony facilities.
f 421.141 SpIi zsd defligUona _ .
For the purpoee of thi. subpart the
general definitions, abbreviations, and
method. of analysis set forth In 40 C ’R
401 shall apply to this subpart.
f 431.143 £fl jsnt tit&liona guidelines
roptewlb g lbs degree of sfmisnt
roduc on afla& .ble by lbs s i..U- fien of
lb. best pracliewle oiiUaI tactinuto 1 , 7
Except as provided in 40 R 125.30
through 125.32. any existing point source
subject to this subpart shall achiev, the
following effluent limitation.
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the application
of the best practicable control
technolvgy currently available
(a) Sodium Antimonat. Autoclave
Wutswi
BPT LIMITATiONs FOR TWI PRIMARY ANTIMONY
Su . reooey
Rcue
u.
“iesm
0 WTWy
ls5 m
— esnes
,d
44sa some
—
xi.me 14 530
on
Ton a_ , .j onm_
•
en isa
aaoeoo n leo
• U I Ii, nigs 75 N 00 g eS.
(b) Fouled anolyte.
BPT .i&4ITATiOeis FOR ma PRIM* y ANT
SUSCAT SQO RY
aes*a weosp
mgi q ttue on
on inI
mon soncso 0!
- I
.sioj soon
iesso 4330
3
I
Ton
iser
640400 304 700
•I
-H
(cJ Cathode Antimony Wash Water.
apr LIMITATIONS FOR TWE PRIMARY ANTIP.IONY
e Doles
M$ i I
, .Q .
i q ones on
onesi
0
.-
Anu
H
—I
es eso 40000
e5. io
‘-
Moni
Ton .mveia an

—I
I
20.050
7.012 3125
‘.ini on
Vt
1421.143 Iffluent beWtetle gindith
rep -Iu ,.U.9 the degra , of .lmi.m
rsducttou, lUaL.dita by the application of
lbs but avelimis tadinology SCOflomlOully
Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30
through 125.32. any existing point source
subject to this subpart shall achieve the
following effluent limitations
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the application
of the best available technology
economically achievable:
(a) Sodium Anttmo t. Autoclave
Wastswats,.
BAT Ul iTATi ,s on ma P iauay Asliwosy
SUSCATnGORY
Doles
sonjii i ij m-, i
AVIsub._.
M.o#,
‘ ‘
!sl g waies on
ion i con
I a, . 0 bail
nb. Ro
.. I 301504 ,3 4 i 0
I 217201 9687
(b) Fouled Anolyte.
4-31

-------
8348 - Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 183 / Friday, September 20, 1985 I Rules arid Regulations
or 0oA lI oroo?p
“ ,WSr

(c) Cathode Antimoay Wash Water
BAT LIMITATORS FOR THE PRIMARY ANTIMONy
Sua GoRY
so#
-
one
‘Uiii ,ma!I ,
, , =
g s 19 I Il
—
61 d
,J I,

.I—.-—--.v
90310 29.570
429 19.370
1557 1.57 ,
S4s ,
421.144 Slanda.ds of psr omon o for
new esuros
Any new source subject to this
subpart shall achieve the following new
source performance standards:
(a) Sodtnrn Antimonate Autoclave
Wasteweter.
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY A rru 1 IoNv
SUaCATEGORY
Pe 8 or orops y -, I
—
—— ‘ — ‘V
6 1
— .
30150 13440
*nuruc
I 1 tp
21720
2.344
29S.
9117
0.907
197.511
TaIM ....J.J s
H
( ‘)
(1)
w v 75 too e m .
(b) Fouled Anolyte.
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ANTIMONY
SUOCATEGORY
or 1
-.
W I
1 9w
..

‘
M oire w
0
“M61 o 19 D
.,.—--.‘I
M vaIp —- — 30150 13,440
21 720 9557
2341 0937
ToI 1 , ..4udm.....__ 234400 1575190
0.• ’---- - ( ‘I ( ‘ I
NSP$ FOR THE PRiMARY ANTIMONY
SUSCATIGORY
or 990 M O20WU
PVU
- I
61
iC
‘w
“ ‘ W I. W
0
I’11 orco.d re
— I 43.430 15.370
n
§421.145 (Ruarvsdl.
o 421.144 PisUsalmant standarls for new
Except as provided In 40 CFR 4032,
any new source subject to this subpart
which Introduces pollutants Into a
publicly owned treatment works must
comply with 40 CFR Part 403 and
achieve the following pretreatment
standards for new sources. The mass of
wastewater pollutants In primary
antimony process wastewater
Introduced into a POTW shall not
exceed the following values:
(a) Sodium Antimonete Autoclave
Wastewater.
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ANTIMONY
Suecareoonv
or oroo.’v
MIm?u Il
II61
M
“ ‘ WIg (port
0
ms61
4
30190 13,110
21720 9117
2.344 OW
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ANTIMONY
SUSCATEGORY
PcA i or P100 p
Msmvig, , lor Mi ‘or

lg/Ig (Pois o “
0
mu ’. cl0 d b
MU
..
50310 25570
-—
43430 ‘9370
M.u’,
4517 1575
§421.147 (Ru.r Isd3.
Subpart 0—Primary Beryllium
f 421.150 $‘cab’ ty description of the
— —.
The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to discharges resulting from
the production of beryllium by primary
beryllium facilities processing beryllium
ore concentrates or beryllium hydroxide
raw materials.
§ 421.151 SpecIalized defInItions.
For the purpose of this subpart the
general definitions, abbreviations and
methods of analysis set forth in 40 CFR
401 shall apply to this subpart.
* 421.152 £flkisnt limitations guidelines
rsplsunung the dsgrss of effluent
reduction attain ls by thi application of
the best pracUcai)Is COUtrIIPI technology
cS.irwntiy avslibis.
Except as provided In 40 CFR 125.30
through 125.32. any existing point source
subject to this subpart shall achieve the
following effluent limitations
representing the degree of effluent
_______ reduction attainable by the applicatioii
of the best practicable technology
9117 currently availabte
° (a) Solvent Extraction Raffinate from
Bertrandlte Ore.
BPT UMrTATONS FOR me PRIMARY
BanYLIJUM SUCATEGORY
or pvp.e ’
Msor’u ” ‘or

.
90 14MM 0 bsrt rI CN
o m
or. bi’i .
I- ”
2.753000 ‘.235000
959200 401 300
4.257000 2249000
Cv s 00’.I 65’ 300 258 300
259400000 131900000
——__________ 78510000 44700000
To ’ . ....J..J . — 92.090 000 4 , 3 800 000
• 1 - I , II
BAT IMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ANTIMONY
SUSCATE000Y
“ ‘WI. ow
0 5ll61 ., mu’.
Or —
20180
21720
2.344
till S
9.7
0007
iw 0 75 M 10u’ 10
s,l IM
or x 5 01C90Rp 96 ”r ’ nMlWOr
M W
8 ’ WIg poriMS ow
0 wr . ,
I’ M*lI .
— 9103lS
I
61150
21730
2 . 341
(b) Fouled Anolyte.
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY AN11MONY
SIJICATEOCRY
u’el..u”qs07SM I00 .d
(c) Cathode Antimony Wash Water.
(c) Cathode Antimony Washwater.
, mu.w ’ .0 75 b $00 M 10
(b) Solvent Extraction Raffinate from
Beryl Ore.
4-12

-------
TECHNOLOGY-BASED REQUIREMENTS
OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT
POLLUTANT LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE
CATEGORY TREATMENT DEADLINE
Conventional BPT July 1, 1977
Conventional BCT March 31, 1989
Non-conventional BPT July 1, 1977
Non-conventional BAT March 31, 1989
Toxic BPT July 1, 1977
Toxic BAT March 31, 1989
NOTES:
4-13

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISiON
TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS
AVAILABILITY
REPORT
JANUARY 1991
w w w w
1_ -U
11T:. _
- - - .... - I - S - . I. _
• - — — -- v- — -. - _________________
-

-------
T(CHNICAL PUBLICATIONS AVAILABILITY IIEPORT
National Industrial Effluent Guidelines. Limitations, and Standards
Issued by
IP )US1RIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
Office of Water and RegulatiOns Standards
Office of Water
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
U ’
JANUARY 1991

-------
ABSTRACT
Directed by legislative and judicial mandates, EPA continues to ensure protection of the environment by abating
and controlling pollution. The Industrial Technology Division’s (a.k.a. Effluent Guidelines Division) role is
to provide technical expertise and assistance In the development and Implementation of national standards designe’
to eliminate pollutants being discharged from Industry and municipalities. This Includes establishing uniform
national technology based regulations applicable to all facilities within a given industry, and maintaining
current data bases for achieving industrial pollution control. Overall, these technology-based regulations are
established to achieve effluent pollutant reduction attainable by waste treatment technologies actually employed
within an industrial point source category.
This report provides information about the technical publications currently available which support the Agency’s
rulemaking activities for developing national Industrial point source effluent guideline;, limitations, and
standards. The documents and studies listed provide additional background to specific industrial point source
regulations codified in the U.S Code of Federal Regulations . Title 40, Parts 400 to 699. For your convienence,
the categorical regulations in effect are listed In Attachment A.

-------
I NSTRIJCT IONS
This report provides a list of the technical publications and studies applicable to the national Industrial
effluent discharge rulemaking activities which are currently available to review and distribution as follows:
All publications are made available for review and Inspection at the following:
1. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Public Information Center
Waterside Mall, S.E., Garage Level
401 H. St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. J46O
Phone Number: 646-6410 (local), or 800-828-4445 (toll free)
2. Any (PA Regional Office library (Attachment C)
0 Publications can be purchased by subi,itting your request to the following:
NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORNATION SERVICE (NTIS)
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Order Desk Phone Nwither: (703) 487—4650
Note: NTIS Accession Number Is required when ordering
Additionally, theIndustrial Technology Division projects and contacts for technc lal assistance ‘re listed on
Attachment B. Requests for further program assistance, questions concerning the availablity of publications,
or Inquiries about the status of rulemaking activities, may be directed to:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Industrial Technology Division (101 552)
Attn: Distribution Section
401 N. St., S.W.
Washington, D.C.
Phone Number: (21)2) 382-7113

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
C AT EG OR Y
CFR SUBCATEGORY
PART
NUMBER ______________
EPA
PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
ALCOHOL FOR
FUEL
(SY N FUELS)
472
• Multimedia Technical
Support Document for
Etha noI fur Fuel
Industry
EPA 440/1-861093
P 1386/177557/AS
• Low BTU Gasifier
• Battery Manufacturing
(Proposed)
• Battery Manufacturing
(Final)
EPA 440/1-84/067
Vol I
Vol II
P886/2454 38/AS
NTIS
ACCESSION
NUMBER
GPO
STOCK
NUMBER
BATTERY
MANUFACTURING
ALUMINUM
FORMING
467
•
Aluminum Forming
(Final)
EPA 440/1-84/073
Vol I
Vol II
PBS4-244425
PBR4-244433
----

ASBESTOS
MANUFACTURING
427
•
Building, Construction
and Paper (Final)
EPA 440/1-74/017-a
PB238320 16
5501-00827
•
Textile, Fnction
Matenals & Sealing
Devices (Final)
EPA 440/1-74/035-a
EPA 440/1-82/067-b
PB240860/7
PBS3 . 197921
.
----
461
P885- 121507
P1385-121515

-------
BUILDERS PAPER
& BOARD MILLS
• Builders Paper &
Roofing
• Board & Builders’
Paper & Board Mills
(Proposed)
EPA 440/I -80/025-b
PB8 I-20 1535
• Pulp, Paper & P.ipcr-
Board and Builders’
Paper & Board Mills
(Final)
EPA 440/1-82/025
PB83- 163949
I - .
CANNED &
PRESERVED 407
• Apple.
Citrus & Potato EPA 44 0/I-741027-a PB23864918 5501-00790
FRUITS &
Pnxessing
VEGETABLES
431
430
EPA 44 0/I- 7 4/026-a
PB238076/45 5501-00909

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGy DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
.1;-
1’.,
0
INDUSTRIL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
CFR
PART
NUMBER
EPA
PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
SURCATEGORY
NTIS
ACCESSION
NUMBER
GPO
STOCK
NUMBER
ALCOHOL FOR
472
• Multimedia Technical
FUEL
Support Document for
440/1-86/093
PB B6/I77557 1AS
----
(SYNFUELS)
Ethanol for Fuel
Industry
•
Low BTU Gasitier
Wastewat r (1986)
PB86/245438/AS
-
ALUMINUM
467
•
Aluminum Forming
FORMING
(Final)
440/1-84/073
ASBESTOS
427
•
Building, Construction
I
Volume II
EPA 44 O/l-74/0 17-a
PRX4-24442 5
PB84-244433
MANUFACTURING
and Paper (Final)
PB238320/6
5501-00827
S
Textile, Fnction
Materials & Sealing
Devices (Final)
EPA 44 O/l- 7 4/035-a
PB24086017
----
BArFEKY
461
5
Battery Manufacturing
EPA 440/l-82/067-h
PB83-I9792l
MANUFACTURING
(Proposed)
- - -.
S
Battery Manufacturing
(Final)
EPA 440/l-84/067
Volume I
Volume II
PB85-I2 1501
PBS5- 12 15 15
..--
-•--

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
CFR
PART
NUMBFR SUBCATFGORY
• Catfish, Crab, Shrimp
(Final)
• Fishineal, Salmon, Bottom
Fish. Sardine, Herring,
Clam, Oyster. Scallop, &
Abalone (Final)
• Report to Congress,
Se iioii 74 Sealootl
Processing Executive
Summary (Volumes I-Ill)
Processing Executive
EPA 440/1-80/020
Volume I
EPA 44011-80102Gb
Volume II
EPA 44 O/l-801020c
Volume Ill
P881- 182354
PB8I- 182370
P88 1-182388
ACCESSION
S COCK
BUILDERS PAPER
& BOARD MILLS
431
430
•
Builders Paper &
Roofing
EPA 440 / 1- 7 4 1 026-a
P8238076/4
5501-00909
‘
Board & Builders’
Paper & Board Mills
(Proposed)
EPA 440/ 1-80/025-h
P881-201535
----
•
Pulp. Paper & Paper-
Board and Builders’
Paper & Board Mills
(Final)
EPA 440/1-82/025
P883-163949
----
CANNED & PRESERVED
FRUITS & VEGETABLES
407
•
Apple, Citrus & Potato
Processing
EPA 44 OIl- 7 4 1 027-a
P8238649/8
5501-00790
408
CANNED &
PRESERVED SEAFOOD
PROCESSING
EPA 44 O/I- 7 5/041-a
P 82 56 840/0

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SUBCATEGORY
• Cement Manufaciunng
(Final)
• Coal Mining (Proposed)
• Coal Mining (Final)
• Co)l Coating. Phase I
(Final)
• Coil Coaling, Phase II-
Canmaking (Proposal)
• Coil Coating. Phase II-
Canmaking (Final)
• Best Technology Available
for the Location Design
Construction & Capacity
of Cooling Waler Intake
Structures for Minimizing
Adverse Environmental
Impact (Final)
• Copper (Final)
• Dairy Products Processing
(Final)
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
CEMENT
MANUFACTURING
COAL MINING
CFR
PART
NUMBER
411
434
I ’- )
COIL COATING 465
EPA
PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
EPA 44 O/I-741005-a
EPA 440/1-81/057-b
EPA 440/1-82/057
EPA 440/1-82 107 1
EPA 440/1-83/071
EPA 440/1-83/071
EPA 44 O/I-ló/OIS-a
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
NTIS GPO
ACCESSION STOCK
NUMBER NUMBER
P13238610/0 5501-00866
P1381-229296
P1383/180422
P1383 -205542
PB83- 198598
P1384-198647
PB-253573,0
COOLING WATER 402
INTAKE STRUCTURES
-h
COPPER
468
FORM INC
DAIRY PRODUCTS
405
PROCESSING
EPA 440/1-84/074
PB84- 192459 ---- —

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL CFR EPA NTIS GPO
POINT SOURCE PART PUBLICATION ACCESSION STOCK
CATEGORY NUMBER SURCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER
DOMESTIC SEWAGE
----
•
Report to Congress on
EPA 530•SW-86-004
PB861 1840 171AS
STUDY -
the Discharge of
hazardous Wastes
Hazardous Wastes to
PubhLly Owned Treatment
Works (Final)
DRUM RECONDITIONING
----
•
Drum Reconditioning
EPA 440/ 1 -89/10 1
----
INDUSTRY
ELECTRICAL
469
•
Ekct,ical & Electronic
EPA 440/1-82/075-h
PB82-249673
& ELECTRONIC
Phase I ( Proposed)
COM PONENTS
•
Ekctri aI & Electronic
Components Phase II
(Proposed)
EPA 440/1-83/015-b
PB83- 199208

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL CFR EPA NTIS GPO
POINT SOURCE PART PUBLICATION ACCESSION STOCK
CATEGORY NUMBER SURCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER
ELECTROPLATING 413 • Copper, Nickel, Chrome EPA 440/I-74/003-a P11238834/AS 5501-00816
& METAL FINISHING & 433 & Zinc (Final)
• Eleciroptating- EPA 440/1-79/003 P 1 180-I964 8 8
Pretreatment (Final)
• MeldI Finishing EPA 440/ 1-82/09 1-h P1183- 102004
(Proposed)
S Metal Finishing EPA 440/1-83/091 P1184-I 15989
(Final)
• Guidance Manual for EPA 440/I-84/09 1g
Electroplating and Metal
Finishing Pretreatment
Standards (February 1984)
• Guidance Manual br
Implementing Total
Toaic Organic (TTO)
Pretreatment Standards
(September 1985)
FEEDLOTS
412
•
Feedlots (Final)
EPA 440/1-74/004-a
P1123851/AS
5501-00842
FERROALLOY
424
•
Smelting&
Slag
EPA 440/1-74/008-a
P11238650/AS
55OI-’J’ 78o
MANUFACTURING

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
FERTILIZER
MANUFACTURING
EPA
PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
CFR
PA RI
NUMBER
418
CLASS
426
•
MANUFACTURING
.
.
GRAIN
MILLS
406
S
SUI3CATEGORY
• Basic Fertilizer
Chemicals (Final)
• Formulated
Fertilizer (Final)
Pressed & Blown
Glass (Final)
lfl,Ul at ion
Fiberglass (Final)
Flat Glass (Final)
Grain Processing
(Final)
Animal Feed,
Break last Cereal
& Wheat (Final)
Ilu7lIrdnhis Waste Treatment
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
NTIS GPO
ACCESSION STOCK
NUMBER NUMBER
PB23 8652/AS 5501-00969
PB240863/AS 5501-01006
PB2S6854/l 5501-01036
PB238078/0 550 1-00781
P1 3238-907/0 5501-00814
PB2383 16/4 5501-00844
PB24086 1/5 5501-01007
EPA 440/l-74/OlI-a
EPA 44 O/l. 7 S/ 0 42-a
EPA 440/I - 7 5 1 034-a
EPA 440/1-74/001-b
EPA 4 40/l-74/OOI-c
EPA 44 O/I-74/028-a
EPA 440/I -74/039-a
•
---
EPA 440/1-89/100
llA/LAKI)OIJS WAS II.
1 REATMENT
INDUSTRY
1-IOSPITALS
---- •
Hospitals
EPA 440/1-89/060-N
----
IND(JS1 RIAI
---- •
Industrial
Laundries
EPA 440/1-89/103
----
LAUNDRII S

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGy DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL CFR EPA NTIS GPO
POINT SOURCE, PART PUBLICATION ACCESSION STOCK
CATEGORY NUMBER SUBCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NIJMBER NUMBER
INORGANIC 415 • Major Inorganic EPA 44 O 1 I-?4/0O7-a P8238611/B 5502-00121
CHEMICALS Chemical Products
MANUFACTURING (Final)
• Inorganic EPA 440 11-80/007-b P881-122632
Chemicals Manufac-
turing Phase II
(Proposed)
0 ’ • Inorganic EPA 440/1-801103
Chemicals (Treat-
ability Study)
• Inorganic EPA 440/1-82/007 P882-2656,2
Chemicals Phase I
(Final)
• Inorganic EPA 440/1-84/007 PBSS-l56446/XAH
Chemicals Phase II
(Final)

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL CFR EPA NTIS GPO
POINT SOURCE PART PUBLICATION ACCESSION STOCK
CATEGORY NUMBER SUBCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER
IRON & STEEL 420 • Steel Making EPA 440 /I- 741 024-a P8238837/9 5501-00906
MANUFACTURING
• Iron & Steel EPA 440/1-80/024-b *pflgl. 184384
(Proposed)
Volume I P881-184392
Volume II PB8I- 184400
Volume III PB8I- 1844 18
Volume IV P881-184426
Volume V P881-184434
Volume VI P881-184442
(*Set of Volumes I thru VI)
• Iron & Steel (Final) EPA 440/1-82/024
Volume I PB82-240425-a
Volume II P882-240433-h
Volume III P882-240441-c
Volume IV P882-240458-ti
Volume V PB82-240466-e
Volume VI P882-240474-f
• Guidance Manual f r
Iron and Steel
Pretreatment Standards,
September 1985
LEAThER TANNING 425 • Leather Tanning & EPA 4 4 0/I-74/0l6-a P8238079/8 5501-00818
Finishing (Final)
• Leather Tanning (Final) EPA 440/1-82/016 P883-172593

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
EPA
PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
METAL MOLDING
& CASTING
(FOUNDRIES)
CFR
PART
NUMBER
SURCATEGORY
I ’ . ,
NTIS
ACCESSION
NUMBER
GPO
STOCK
NIJ M HER
MACHINERY
MANUFACTURING
AND REBUILDING
INDUSTRY
---
S Machinery Manufacturing
EPA 440/1-89/106
.-.
MEAT PRODUCTS
AND RENDERING
432
• Red Me ii Processing
(Final)
EPA 44 O/I- 7 4/O 12-a
PB238836/As
5501-00843
METAL FINISHING
433
Renderer
(Final)
SEE ELECTROPLATING
FOR
LISTING
EPA 440/I-74/03 1-d
PH253572/2
---.
• Metal Molding &
Casting Volumes
I & II (Proposed)
• Metal Molding & EPA 440/1-85/070
Casting (Final)
PB86- 16 1452/XAB

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL CFR EPA NTIS GPO
POINT SOURCE PART PUBLICATION ACCESSION STOCK
CATEGORY NUMBER SUBCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER
MINERAL MINING
& PROCESSING
436
•
Minerals for the
Construction Industry
EPA 440/1-75/059
P0274593/3
----
•
Miner.d Mining (F,n I)
EPA 440/I-76/059h
P1380110299
----
•
Report to Congress
The Etk .t of
Di harges from
Limestone Qudrrtes
on W4te1 Quality and
Aqu4tlc Biota (Final)
EPA 440/1-82/059
P1382242207
----
NONFERROUS
METALS FORMINJO
471
•
Nonferrous Metdls
Forming (Final)
EPA 440/1-84/0 19-b
Volume I
Volume II
Volume III
---•
PB83/228296
P083/228304
P883/228312
----
NONFERROUS
METALS
MANUFACTURING
421
•
Bauxite Refining-
Aluminum Segmeiit
(Fin iI)
EPA 4 40/I-74/019-c
P0238463/4
5501-001 16
•
Primary Aluminum
Smelting - Aluminum
Segment (Final)
EPA 440/l-74/0 19-d
P13240859/9
5501-00817
•
Secondary Aluminum
Sincli ing — Aluminum
Seguiient (Final)
EPA 44 O/I- 7 4 1019-e
P13238464/2
5501-00819

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SURCATEGORY
• Onshore (Final)
Includes Offshore
• Oil & Gas Extraction
(Proposed)
• A’,sessmcnt
ot Environmental
Fate & Effects of
Discharge from Offshore
Oil and Gas Operations
• Oil Reclamation
• Ore Mining and Dressing
Volume I (Proposed)
• Ore Mining and Dressing
Volume II (Proposed)
• Ore Mining & Dressing
(Proposed)
• Ore Miniiig& Dressing
(Final)
• Gold Placer Mining
Subcategory (Proposed)
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
NTIS GPO
ACCESSION STOCK
NUMBER NUMBER
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
CFR
PART
NUMBER
435
OIL & GAS
EXTRACTION
EPA
PUBLICATION
IDOCUMENT NUMBER
0
EPA 440/1-76/055-a
-•--
----
EPA
440/1-89/055
PB86- 1 14949/XAB
--•-
EPA
440/4-85/002
PB8o/I
OIL
RECLAMATION
----
ORE
MINING
440
AND
DRESSING
PB2865201AS
PB28652 I/AS
PB82 -250952
EPA 440/1-89/014
EPA 440/I-78/06l-d
EPA 440/l-78/06l-e
EPA 440/1-82/061-h
EPA 440/1-82/061
EPA 440/ 1-85/061-b

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL CFR EPA NTIS GPO
POINT SOURCE PART PUBLICATION ACCESSION STOCK
CATEGORY NUMBER SUBCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER
ORGANIC CHEMICALS, 414 • Major Organic Products EPA 440/1-74/009-a P824 1905/9 5001-008812
PLASTICS. AND &4I6 (Final)
SYNTHETIC FIBERS
MANUFACTURING • Organic Chemicals & EPA 440/ 1-83/009-h PB 3-205625 ’
Plastics & Synthetic Volume I P1183-205633
Fibers (Proposed) Volume II PB83-205633
Volume III P1183-205658
(‘Set ol Vol’s I thru III)
• Synthetic Resins EPA 440/1-741010 PB2-3924 1/3 5501-00815
• Synthetic Polymers EPA 440/1-74/036 PB240862/3 550 1-01012
• Selected Summary of
Information in Support
of Organic Chemicals,
Plastic & Synthetic
Fibers. July 1985
PAINT FORMULATING ---- • Paint Formulating EPA 440/1-89/050

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGy DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF
AYh LABILITY
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
CFR
PART
NUMBER
PHOSPhATE
MANUFACTURING
Phosphorus Denved
Chemicals (Final)
• Other Nan-Fertilizer
Chemicsls (Final)
EPA 440/1-751043
SURCATECORY
EPA NTIS
GPO
PUBLICATION ACCESSION
DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER
STOCK
PESTICIDES
455
S
Pesticides (Final)
EPA 44 O/l- 7 8/060-e PB285480/0
S
Pesticides (Proposed)
EPA 44 O/l-89/060-e PB83- 153 17I
•
Test Methods for Non-
Conventional Pesticides
Chemical Analysis of
Industrial & Municipal
W sew at r
EPA 440/ 1-82/079-c PB83- 176636
•
Pcsiiude . (Final)
NOTE FINAL REGULATION
EPA 440/1-85/079 PB86-l5 0 042/XAB
WAS WITHDRAWN 1986 -- a resiudy h s been initiated by the Agcn y
PETROLEUM
REFINING
419
S
Peiiokum Refining
(Final)
EPA 44 O/l- 7 4/0 14-a P82386 1216 5SOI-Oo )l2
•
Petroleum Refining
(Proposed)
EPA 440/1-79/014-b P881-118413
PIIARMACE(JTICAI S
MANUFACTURING
439
•
5
Petroleum Refining
(Fi,ial)
Pliurinai.etitiial (Final)
EPA 440/1-82/014 P883-172569
EPA 440/1-83/084 PB84- 180066
422
5
EPA 440/1-74/006-a PB24 10 18/I 5503-00078

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABIliTY
INDUSTRIAL CFR EPA NTIS GPO
POINT SOURCE PART PUBLICATION ACCESSION STOCK
CATEGORY NUMBER SUBCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMUER NUMBER
PHOTOGRAPHIC
459
0
Guidance Document for
EPA 440/1-81/082
PB82- 177643
----
I ROCESSING
the Control of Water
Pollution in the
Photographic Processing
Industry
PORCELAIN
466
•
Porcelain Enameling
EPA 440/l-8I/072-h
PB8I-20 1527
----
LNAMELING
(Propo.ed)
0
Porcelain Enameling
(Final)
EPA 440/1-82/072
----
----
PUBLICLY OWNED
•
Fate of Priority
EPA 440/1-82/303
TREATMENT WORKS
Pollutants in Publicly
Owned Treatment Works
(Volumes I & II)
Volume I
Volume II
PB83/ 122788
PB83- 122796
----
----

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL CFR EPA NTIS GPO
POINT SOURCE PART PUBLICATION ACCESSION STOCK
CATEGORY NUMBER SURCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER
PULP. PAPER 430 • Unhleached Kraft and EPA 4 40/I-741025-a PB238833/AS
AND PAPERBOARD Semi-chemical Pulp
(Final)
• Pulp. Paper & Paper- EPA 440/1-801025-b PB8I-20l535
Board and Builders’
Paper & Board Milk
(Proposed)
• Pulp. Paper & Paper- EPA 440/1-89/025 PB83- 163949
hoard and Builders’
Paper & Board Mills
(Final)
• Development Document EPA 440/1-86/025 P887-172243/AS
for Best Conventional
Pollutant Control
Tethiiology Pulp. Paper,
and Paperhoard
RUBBER
PROCESSING
428
•
Tire & Synthetic
(Final)
EPA 44 O/l- 7 4/0 13-a
P8238609/2
5501-00885
•
Fabricated & Reclaimed
Rubber (Final)
EPA 440/1-74/030-a
P8241916/6
5501-01016
SOAPS &
1)1 - rLR ;LNI FS
417
•
Soaps & Detergents
(I iiinl)
EPA 440/1-74/018-a
PB23X613/4
s5ol- x 7

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
SOLV ENT
RECYCLING
IN U STR V
STEAM ELECTRIC
POWER PLANTS
EPA
PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
NTIS GPO
ACCESSION STOCK
NUMBER NUMBER
CFR
PART
NUMBER
SUBCATEGORY
•Solvent Recycling
L i i
EPA 440/1-89/102
423
•
•
Steam EIe4Jrlc Power
Generating (Final)
Steam EIotrmL
(Proposed)
EPA 44Ofl-74/029-a
EPA 440/1-80/029-h
P8240853/2
P881-I 19075
5501-01001
----
SUGAR
PROCESSING
409
•
•
Beei Sugar (Final)
Cane Sugar Refining
(Final)
EPA 440/1-74/002-b
EPA 440/I-74/002-.
P8238462/6
PB238 147/3
5501-00117
5501-00826
TEXTILE MILLS
MANUFACTURING
410
•
Textile Mills
(Final)
EPA 440/1-74/022-a
P8238832/AS
5501-00903
•
Textile Mills
(Final)
EPA 440/1-82/022
P 883-I 16871
----
TIMBER PRODUCTS
PROCESSING
429
•
Wood Furniture
and Fixtures (Final)
EPA 440/1-74/033-a
----
----
•
Timber Products
Processing
(Proposed)
EPA 440/1-79/023-b
----
----
•
I iiiilitj PioduLts
ProLe sing (Final)
EPA 440/1-81/023
PUHI-227282
----

-------
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGy DIVISION
PUBLICATIONS
SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL CFR EPA NTIS GPO
POINT SOURCE PART PUBLICATION ACCESSION STOCK
CATEGORY NUMBER SURCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER
TRANSPORTATION
• Transportation EPA 440/1-89/104
EQUIPMENT
Equipment
CLEANING
Cleaning
INDUSTRY
C .’

-------
—, unus ’i uiv
.. FA I ,wI NIN u—41 i __ U fli —

S•in S..M ..I
- — n.n.,,.. _ -, — - __ .. . _ _ ae.nns ___ t __ * __ -...-a— --r
g, . *,sSu d IM
W Ss . NS S o. S
r i - — l ____ — - ss
I_ a—w
I d U a
• I,
IW dsI T L I ISdsS
PUBLICATIONS AVAILML( FROM TIlE INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
(ANALYTICAL ItTIlOOS $ REFERENCES)
‘ 1
Nst od 1 113a ?.trs- Thro. Oot- 1ocI stsd Dtozt . . o1 tt1. orsato by 1sQ%iayis DIL stjosi
tot 1.ct DILst1o . 1JC/. sv1 Lo. . . .m aszs 1vo1.t1i. y.ALo O 4J 3 by
*.U SMI. t.nt Dtliitlo. , j
m t o IllS I Oriao-b .L*dS N.tt0t . &1 1 . tnw*r . SasfotT flsIal• r.r.l.
. P .—’ .rp-.c1d Uss toIs. by U1 S r taaMxe. * 1 -w. —i•
esyllisry G . tOgZ j 1tb M1.otIv. 11 5 5
Ostoctots. J 1y 155 5.
____ LLst.t L$st./& to155 ot £s lptau s t ls S• Off Los
N.tMd 11351 t1S by 1 LIVS1y C 1.d 51o Atoslo . . . .ysIst1... oss
iaa1os $psatr.oso py aM Itosis Moorpitos spsctzusoopy iso..
1 stt), S.pt .r 155*.
5a 1 1., P oos zo. aM Protoosi. toe t . es ’$aosl
liMp. S rroy. — —i t I S I S.
Note: Questions concerning the above reference .atertals should be
addressed to:
Willie. A. Telliard
Industrial Technology Division (wH- b2)
USEPA 401 N St. SW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 382-7131

-------
OWRJITD Preliminary Data SuTnmaries——1989
EPA 440/1-89/014—-Pr.liminary Data Summary for the Vied oil
R.clamatiOn and Re-Refining Industry
EPA 440/1-89/060n—-Pr.liminarY Data Summary for ths Hospitals Point
Source Category
EPA 440/l—89/060a-—Preliminary Data Summary for th. Pesticide
Chemicals Point Source Category
EPA 440/1-89/025—-Preliminary Data Summary for the Pulp, Paper and
Paperboard Point Source Category
EPA 440/1-89/050—-Preliminary Data Summary for the Paint
Formulating Paint Source Category
EPA 440/1-89/084——Preliminary Data Summary for the Pharmaceutical
Manufacturing Point Source Cat.gory
EPA 440/1-89/100——Preliminary Data Summary for the Hazardous Waite
Treatment Industry
EPA 440/1-89/101--preliminary Data S ary for the Drum
Reconditioning Industry
EPA 440/1-89/102--preliminary Data Summpry for the Solvent
Recycling Industry
EPA 440/1-89/1 03——Pr.liminary Data Summary for the Industrial
Laundries
EPA 440/1—89/104——Preliminary Data Summary for the Transportation
Equipment Cleaning Industry
EPA 440/1-89/105--Preliminary Data Summary for the Coastal, Onshore
and Stripper Subcategories of the Oil Gas
Extraction Point Source Category
EPA 440/1089/106-—Preliminary Data Si ary for the Machinery
xanufacturing and Rebuilding Industry
4-38

-------
INDUSTP2AL CATT.GOP. .tES SUBJECT TO NATIONAL EYTLUZ?rr LIMITATIONs AND STAJJ AJ S
Z1IDUS RIAL II Q £ I M3ER
A1umirn Terming 467
Asbestos Manufacturing 427
Battery Manufacturing 461
Builder’s Paper 431
Carbon Black Manufacturing 458
Cement Manufacturing 411
Coal Mining 434
Coil Coating (Phase I and II) 465
Copper Forming 468
Dairy Products Processing 405
Electroplating 413’
Electrical and Electronic Components (Phases I and II) 469
Explosives Manufacturing 457
Peedlots 412
Ferrealloy Manufacturing 424
Fertilizer Manufacturing 418
Fruits and Vegetables Processing Manufacturing 407
Glass Manufacturing 426
Grain Mills Manufacturing 406
Ot and Wood Chemicals 454
Bospitals 460
mu Formulating 447
Inorganic Chemicals (Phases I and I l) 415
Iron and Steel Manufacturing 420
Leather Tanning and Finishing 425
Meat Processing 432
Metal Finishing 433”
Metal Molding and Casting 464
Mineral Mining 436
Nonferrous Metals Forming 471
Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing (Phases I and II) 421
Oil and Gas Extraction 435
Organic Chemicals and Plutics and Synthetic Fibers 414”
Paint Formulating 446
Paving and Rooting (Tars and Asphalt) 443
Pesticides 455
Pstrole Refining 419
Pharmaceuticals 439
Phosphate Manufacturing 422
Photographic 459
Plastics Molding and Forming 463”
Porcelain ling 466
Pulp and Paper 430
Rubber Processing 42$
Seafood Processing Manufacturing 40$
Soaps and Detugents Manufacturing 417
Steam Electric 423
Sugar Processing Manufacturing 409
Timber Exoducts Manufacturing 429
Textiles 410”
Cross reference to Metal Finishing, Part 433
“Cress referenc: to Electroplating, Part 413.
““O’aai. Chemicals and Manufacturing” (40 CFR Part 414) had been
combined with the Plastics and Synthetics” point source category
(40 C l i Part 416): pretreatment standards for new sources are st li .n
effect as previously identified under 40 Cli Part 414, Subpart 1.
“Category is regulated only by the general pretreatment standards found
in 40 CTR Part 403.
4-39

-------
RUERENCU POR WA$TEWAIIR PCWITANT PVO UATION
-‘40 CP 401.15 T c PoII f1u L 66 p i *s d. .d pini ri to
O n V ir d $i 1 307 i)(1)
40 R 401.16 Cwrd1oe J Po . : L 5 ooiwW poIi 1s dSv op.d
piww to VA 304 a)(4).
40 R Pail 423, Pdodly Po ’ s dsr from 66 To P &aarts; 1 t i.
Appsrd A O 4 a: Odgir&y o W d 1 pdbWls; i 17,40 and 50
ban d. .)
Ni ndor P iW kduds. tw p &awts n uIU’1iI.d
— oor *i dc idodt 1 p ,u.
OTHER EFFLUENT OUIDEUNES CONTACTS
a w i S port U T id. Sin I4w ak.r
( QIarnIG& T M hods)
C R.rnIi*ç isry P sUnss U T.I*sd
— Do u
1i_ Jo. Vk

Eeonor* *, U N Pg AED)
u 1 G
Gu sn
(CWA 304m Pun)
Fud Si Td td
Fo s £ kwsrago.-M c. Don Mdsraon
H Gsorg. J
L ITU GaaX gIon Si TdI d
k w
P.’ ’ At ys r Hiiuy I m ( AED )

$içsrfwd B*s Did*rgss ody Foul
Watsr & Øy Don kdsruon
4-40

-------
OFFICE OF WATER REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS
INDUSTRIAL TE INOLOGY DIVISION
DECVIBER 1990
OFFICE OP TEN DIRE OR
O ‘Farrell, Thomas
Luttner, Mark
Brooks, 7san
Coughlin Harold
Strassler, Eric
Svann, Carol
Thoapson, Marion
AIALTTI AL ILWTEODB
IThPP
Telliard, Wi1lia
Honak.r, Ben
382—7120
382—7120
382—7120
382—7192
382—7150
382—7120
382—7117
382—7131
382—2272
911C ET
913k ET
911 Bay ET
9l3D ET
911k ET
911 Bay ET
9113 ET
909B ET
9073 ET
Anderson, Donald
Dunnigan, Th.1 a
Heath, G.orge
Hund, Frank
Smith, Wendy
williaRs, Richard
382—7137
382—7137
381—73.65
382—7182
382—7184
382—7186
915k ET
915 Bay ET
9113 ET
909k ET
9llD ET
917k ET
c ZgIcALB B kNCI
Elvood Forsht
DiCianna, Debra
Jett, George
382—7190
382—7141
382—7151
9015 ET
913C ‘r
905k ET
ENERGY BRAJICI
Rubin, Marvin
Fielding, Tho aa
Goodwin, Janet
Jordan, Ronald
Kirby, Ronald
Stallard, Linda
Vitalis, Joseph
Wise, Hugh
382—7124
382—7156
382—7152
382—7115
382—7168
382—7124
382—7172
382—7177
901C ET
917B ET
913E ET
913C ET
913B ET
901 Bay ET
908 ET
913B ET
XZTALB URICI
Hall, Ernst
Jarrett, B. Matthew
Lee, Barbara
Rajvanshi, Sabita
382—7126
382—7164
382—7126
382—7153
905C ET
907k ET
905 B Y ET
905B ET
4-41

-------
4-42

-------
PRACTICAL EXERCISE
Calculating Daily Maximum and Monthly Average Permit Limits
Using Effluent Guidelines
SITUATION
You are the permit writer responsible for drafting the permit for Luster Glass,
Inc., a glass manufacturer in Morris, Illinois (1L0654321). After reviewing the
application formB 1. and 2C and the effluent limitations guidelines and standards
for the Glass Manufacturing point source category (40 CFR Part 426) you begin to
develop the effluent limitations for the process wastewatere, to be included in
the permit.
DETERMINE :
The daily maximum and monthly average effluent limitations for Oil and Grease,
TSS, Phosphorus, and pH for the process wastewater contribution to Outfall 001
at Luster Glass. Show all calculations and assumptions.
4-43

-------
4-44

-------
Part 426
TABLE OF STUDENTS t VALUES AT THE 99
PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
N svtsr of reptc$tss
Degrees
.
(n_I)
99)
7. .
.
9 .
10 ... .
11.... ..
16 . . . ._....
21...
26.. .. .
31
SI ..
6
7
8
9
10
15
20
25
30
80
3143
2996
2896
2821
2764
2.602
2.528
2485
2457
2390
2 326
(53 FR 9188, Mar. 21. 1988]
PART 426—GLASS MANUFACTURING
POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
Subpart A—lnsulatlan Fiberglass Subcat.g.ry
8e
426.10 ApplicabilIty; description of the In-
8U]atlon fIberglaBs subcategory.
426.11 Special definitions.
426.12 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available.
426.13 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best available technology economically
achievable.
426.14 (Reserved)
426.15 Standards of performance for new
sources.
42616 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
428.17 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degreee of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional poliutant control
technology (BCT).
Sub zvt I—Sh..t Glass Monufoctw4ng
Subuit.go y
426.20 ApplicabilIty; description of the
8heet glass manufacturing subcategory.
426.21 Specialized definitions.
426.22 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available.
Sec.
40 CFI C l i. I (7-1-19 EdItIon)
426.23 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent redUC
tion attain&ble by the application of the
best available technology economically
achievable.
426.24 Pretreatment .ndards for existing
sources.
426.25 Standards of performance for ne
sources.
426.26 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
426.27 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional pollutant control tech-
nology.
Subpart C—IoII.d Glass Manufactw4ng
Sub .gory
426.30 Applicabllity description of the
rolled glass manufacturing subcategory.
426.31 SpecIalized definitions.
426.32 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available.
426.33 Efflucnt limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attaInable by the application of the
best avail tble technology economically
achlevablt
426.34 Pretrtatment standards for existing
sources.
426.35 Standards of performance for new
sources.
426.36 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
426.37 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional pollutant control tech-
nology.
Subpait D—Pl.t. Glass Manvf.ctu k g
426.40 ApplicabilIty; description of the
plate glass manufacturing subcat.egory
426.41 SpecialIzed definitions.
426.42 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur.
rently available.
426.43 (Reserved)
426.44 Pretreatment standards for existtn.g
sources.
426.45 Standards of performance for new
sources.
426.48 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
S
4-45

-------
Envlronm.ntal Protctlon Ag.ncy
Pas1 426
Sec.
42647 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degreee of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional pollutant control
technology (BCT).
Subpart E—Float Glass Manufadwing
Subcat.gory
426.50 ApplicabilIty: description of the
float glass manufacturing subcategory.
426.51 Specia.li.zed definitions.
426.52 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available.
426.53 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best available technology economically
achievable.
426.54 (ReservedJ
428.55 Standards of performance for new
sources.
426.58 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
426.57 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional pollutant control
technology.
Subpart F—Automotlv. Glass T.mp.ring
Subcat.gory
426.60 Applicability: description of the
automotive glass tempering subcategory.
426 61 SpecialIzed definitions.
426.62 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available.
426.63 (Reserved]
428.64 Pretreatment standards for existing
sources.
428.65 Standards of performance for new
sources.
426.68 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
426.67 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional pollutant control
technology.
Subpart G—Automotiv. Glass LamInating
Subcatsgary
426.70 Applicability; description of the
automotive glass laminating subcatego-
ry.
426.11 Specialized definitions.
Sec.
426.72 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available.
426.73 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best available tecPinology economically
achievable.
428.74 (Reservcd
426.75 Standards of performance for new
sources.
426.76 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
426.77 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional pollutant control
technology.
Subpart H—Glass Contaln.r Manufacturing
Subcat.gory
426.80 Applicability: description of the
glass container manufacturing subcate-
gory.
428.81 SpecialIzed definitions.
426.82 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available.
426.83—426.84 (Reserved]
426.85 Standards of performance for new
sources.
426.88 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
426.87 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of eifluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional poUutant control tech-
nology.
Subpart I—Mackin. Pracsd and blown Glass
Manufacturing Subcat.gory t.s.rv.dI
Subpart i—Glass Tubing (Dann. )
Manufacturing Subcat.gory
426.100 Applicability: description of the
glass tubing (Danner) manufacturing
subcategory.
428.101 Specialized definitions.
426.102 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available.
426.103—426.104 (Reserved]
426.105 Standards for performance for new
sources.
426.106 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
4-46

-------
§ 426.10
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-89 Edition)
Sec.
428.107 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional pollutant control
technology.
Subpart K—T.i.vlslon Picture Tub. Env.lop.
Manufacturing Subcat.gory
426.110 Applicability: description of the
television picture tube envelope manu-
facturing subcategory.
426.111 SpecialIzed definitions.
426.112 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rentLy available.
426.113 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best available technology economically
achievable.
426.114 (Reserved]
426.115 Standards of performance for new
sources.
426.116 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
426.117 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional pollutant control
technology.
Subpart L—Incond..c.n$ Lamp Env.Iop.
Manufacturing Subca$.g.ry
426.120 Applicability; description of the In-
candescent lamp envelope manufactur-
ing subcategoi-y.
428.12 1 Specialized definitions.
426.122 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
2-ently available.
426.123 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best available technology economically
achievable.
426.124 (Reserved]
426.125 Stand -ds of performance for new
sources.
428.126 Pretreatment stanciai-d.s for new
Sources.
428.127 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best conventional pollu t control
technology.
Sec.
Subpart M—Nond Prssud and hewn GlOSS
Manufacturing Subcat.gory
428130 ApplicabilIty; description of the
hand pressed and blown glass manufac.
turing SUbcategory.
426.131 Specialized definitions.
426.132 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available.
428.133 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best available technology economically
achievable.
426.134 (Reserved)
426.135 Standai-ds of performance for new
sources.
426.136 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
426.137 (Reserved]
Av ’rltoRrry: Sees. 301. 304 (b) and (C), 306
(b) and (C), 307(c), and 3 16(b) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, as amended;
33 U.S.C. 1251, 1311. 1314. 1316 (b) and (C).
1317(b); 86 Stat. 816 et seq.. Pub. L 92-500.
91 Stat. 1587, Pub. L. 95-217.
SOuRcZ 39 FR 2585. Jan. 22, 1974. unless
otherwise noted.
Subpart A—Insulation Fiberglass
Subcat.gory
§ 426.10 ApplicabilIty; description of the
insulation fiberglass subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to discharges resulting from
the production of insulation fiberglass
in which molten glass Is either directly
or indirectly made, continuously fiber-
Ized and chemically bonded into a
wool-like material.
§ 426.11 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) Except as provided below, the
general definitions, abbreviations arid
methods of analysis set forth in 40
CFR Part 401 shaii apply to this sub-
part.
(b) The term “cullet water” shall
mean that water which is exclusively
and directly applied to molten glass in
order to solidify the glass.
(C) The term “advanced air emission
control devices” shall mean air pollu-
tion control equipment, such as elec-
trostatic precipitatox-s and high energy
4-47

-------
ii Prot.ction Ag.ncy
§ 426.62
licly owned treatment works (and
which would be a new source subject
to sectIon 306 of the Act, If it were to
discharge pollutants to the navigable
waters), shall be the standard set
forth in 40 CFR Part 128. except that.
for the purpose of this section. 40 CFR
128.133 shall be amended to read as
follows:
In addition to the prohibitions set forth in
40 CFR 128.131. the pretreatment standard
for incompatible pollutants introduced Into
a publicly owned treatment works shall be
the standard of performance for new
sources specified in 40 CFR 426.55 provIded
that, if the publicly owned treatment works
which receives the pollutants Is committed.
in Its NPDES permit, to remove a specified
percentage of any Incompatible pollutant.
the pretreatment standard applicable to
users of such treatment works shall, except
in the case of standards providing for no dis-
charge of pollutants, be correspondingly re-
duced in stringency for that pollutant.
§ 426.57 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best conventional pollutant control
technology.
Except as provided in H 125.30
through 125.32, any existing point
source subject to this subpart shall
achieve the following effluent limita-
tions representing the degree of efflu-
ent reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best conventional pollut-
ant control technology (BCT): The
limitations shall be the same as those
specified for conventional pollutants
(which are defined in § 401.16) in
* 426.52 of this subpart for the best
practicable control technology cur-
rently available (BPT).
(51 FR 25000, July 9. 1986]
Subpart F—Automotive Glass
Temp.ring Subcategory
Sornicx 39 FR 5714. Feb. 14, 1974. unless
otherwise noted.
§ 426.60 Applicability; description of the
automotive glass tempering subcatego-
ry.
The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to discharges of pollutants
resulting from the processes in which
glass is cut and then passed through a
series of processes that grind and
polish the edges, bend the glass, and
then temper the glass to produce side
and back windows for automobiles.
§ 426.61 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) Except as provided below, the
general definitions, abbreviations and
methods of analysis set forth in 40
CFR Part 401 shall apply to this sub-
part.
(b) The term “tempering” shall
mean the process whereby glass is
heated near the melting point and
then rapidly cooled to increase its me-
chanical and thermal endurance.
§ 426.62 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best practicable control technology
currently available.
(a) In establishing the limitation set
forth in this section, EPA took into ac-
count all Information it was able to
collect, develop and solicit with re-
spect to factors (such as age and size
of plant, raw materials, manufacturing
processes, products produced, treat-
ment technology available, energy re-
quirements and costs) which can
affect the industry subcategorization
and effluent levels established. It Is,
however, possible that data which
would affect these limitations have
not been available and, as a result,
these limitations should be adjusted
for certain plants in this industry. An
individual discharger or other interest-
ed person may submit evidence to the
Regional Administrator (Or to the
State, if the State has the authority to
issue NPDES permits) that factors re-
lating to the equipment or facilities in-
volved, the process applied, or other
such factors related to such discharger
are fundamentallY different from the
factors considered in the establish-
ment of the guidelines. On the basis of
such evidence or other available infor-
mation, the Regional Administrator
(or the State) will make a written find-
ing that such factors are or are not
fundamentally different for tha facil-
Ity compared to those specified in the
Development Document. If such fun-
darnentally different factors are found
to exist, the Regional Administrator
4-48

-------
§ 426.64
40 CM Ch. I (7-149 EdItion)
or the State shall establish for the dis-
charger effluent limitations in the
NPDES permit either more or less
stringent than the limitations estab-
lished herein, to the extent dictated
by such fundamentally different fac-
tors. Such limitations must be ap-
proved by the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
The Administrator may approve or
disapprove such liniltations, specify
other limitations, or Initiate proceed-
ings to revise these regulations.
(b) The following limitations estab-
lish the quantity or quality of pollut-
ants or pollutant properties, con-
trolled by this section, which may be
discharged by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart after ap-
plication of the best practicable con-
trol technology currently available:
Effluent characteristic
Effluent limitations
Average of daily
Ma,amum values for 30
for any 1 nsicutive days
day shall not
exceed—
1 5$
Metric m (qIaQ m of
product)
195 1.22
Cd.. .
064 64
pH
(9 (I)
English units (ron.o6o eq ft of
155
product)
040 025
Cd
013 13
p11
(9 (‘)
&W(d.In the range 60 to 90
§ 426.63 (Reserved]
§ 426.64 Pretreatment standards for exist-
ing sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307th) of the Act for a source
within the automotive glass tempering
subcategory which is a user of a pub-
licly owned treatment works and a
major contributing industry as defined
in 40 CFR Part 128 (and which would
be an existing point source subject to
section 301 of the Act, if it were to dis-
charge pollutants to the navigable
waters), shall be the standard set
forth in 40 CFR Part 128. except that,
for the purpose of this sectIon. 40 CFR
128.121, 128.122. 128.132. and 128.133
shall not apply. The following pre-
treatment standard establishes the
quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties controlled by this
section whIch may be discharged to a
publicly owned treatment works by a
point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart.
Pollutant or pollutant proQerty
Pretreatment standarO
p 1 1
Cd
1 5 $. .
No limitation
Do
Do
(40 FR 8444. Feb. 11. 1975)
§ 426.65 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following standards of perform-
ance establish the quantity or quality
of pollutants or pollutant properties.
controlled by this section, which may
be discharged by a new source subject
to the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent hmitaDons
Average of d&y
Effluent characteristic
Maximum values for 30
for any 1 consecutive days
day shall not
exceed—
155
Metric unitS (q/sq m of
product)
024 024
Cd
049 ‘9
p 1 1
(9 I)
English uruts (lb/I 000 sq ft
ISS
product)
005 005
C d
010
pH
(9 9
‘Within the range 60to90
§ 426.66 Pretreatment
sources.
standards for new
The pretreatment standards under
section 307(c) of the Act for a source
within the aut(motive glass tempering
subcategory, which is a user of a pub-
licly owned treatment works (and
which would be a new source subject
to section 306 of the Act, if It were to
discharge pollutants to the navigable
waters), shall be the standard set
forth in 40 CFR Part 128. except that,
for the purpose of this section. 40 CFR
4-49

-------
§ 426.72
nvli
ProtctIon Ag.ncy
128.133 shall be amended to read as
follows:
In addition to the prohibitions set forth in
40 CFR 128.131. the pretreatment standard
for incompatible pollutants introduced into
a publicly owned treatment works shall be
the standard of performance for new
sources specified In 40 CFR, 428.85: provided
that, if the publicly owned treatment works
which receives the pollutants is committed.
in Its N’PDES permit, to remove a specified
percentage of any incompatible pollutant.
the pretreatment standard applicable to
users of such treatment works shall, except
in the case of standards providing for no dis-
charge of pollutants, be correspondingly re
duced In stringency for that poUutant.
§ 426.67 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best conventional pollutant control
technology.
Except as provided in H 125.30
through 125.32, any existing point
source subject to this subpart shall
achieve the following effluent Ilinita-
tions representing the degree of efflu-
ent reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best conventional pollut-
ant control technology (BCT): The
limitations shall be the same as those
specified for conventional pollutants
(which are defined in § 401.16) In
426.62 of this subpart for the best
practicable control technology cur•
rently available (BPT).
(51 FR 25000, July 9, 1988]
Subpart G—Automotlv. Glass
Laminating Subcat.gory
SouRca: 39 FR 5714, Feb. 14, 1974, unless
otherwise noted.
6426.70 Applicability; description of the
automotive glass Laminating subcatego-
ry.
The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to discharges of poUutants
resulting from the processes which
laminate a plastic sheet between two
layers of glass, and which prepare the
glass for lamination such as cutting,
bending and washing, to produce auto-
mobile windshields.
§ 426.71 SpecIalized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) Except as provided below, the
general definitions, abbreviations and
methods of analysis set forth in 40
CFR Part 401 shall apply to this sub-
part.
§ 426.72 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best practicable control technology
currently available.
In establishing the limitations set
forth In this section, EPA took into ac-
count all information it was able to
collect, develop and solicit with re-
spect to factors (such as age and size
of plant, raw materials, manufacturing
processes, products produced, treat-
ment technology available, energy re-
quirements and costs) which can
affect the industry subcategorlzation
and effluent levels established. It Is,
however, possible that data which
would affect these limitations have
not been available and, as a result,
these limitations should be adjusted
for certain plants in this industry. An
Individual discharger or other interest-
ed person may submit evIdence to the
Regional Administrator (or to the
State, if the State has the authority to
Issue NPDES permits) that factors re-
lating to the equipment or facilities in-
volved, the process applied, or other
such factors related to such discharger
are fundamentally different from the
factors considered in the establlsh
ment of the guidelines. On the basis of
such evidence or other available infor-
mation, the Regional Administrator
(or the State) will make a written find-
trig that such factors are r are not
fundamentally different for that facil-
ity compared to those specified in the
Development Document. U such fun-
damentally different factors are found
to exist, the Regional Administrator
or the State shall establish for the dis-
charger effluent limitations in the
NPDES permit either more or less
stringent than the limitations estab-
lished herein, to the extent dictated
by such fundamentally different fac-
tors. Such limitations must be ap-
proved by the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
The Administrator may approve or
disapprove such limitations, specify
4-50

-------
§ 426.73
other limitations, or initiate proceed.
IngE to revise these regulations.
The following limitations establish the
quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties, controlled by this
section, which may be discharged by a
point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart after appllcation of the
best practicable control technology
currently available:
Effluent cI’iaraclensbc
Effluent Imitat ions
Average of daly
Ma omum values for 30
for any 1 conse ye days
day shaH riot
m-
TSS.. ..
01.
Phoe horus ...
oil . .
.rss
0 1
Phosphorus
pH
Mevic ur ts (q/sq m of
—)
440 440
176 176
1 07 1.07
(‘) (‘)
EnØish units (bIl.000 sq ft of
—
090 090
036 .38
0.22 .22
( I ) ( I)
Within the range 60 to o
* 426.73 Emuent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best available technology economi-
cally achievable.
The following limitations establish
the quantity or quality of pollutants
or pollutant properties, controlled by
this section, which may be discharged
by a point source subject to the provi-
sions of this subpart after application
of the best available technology eco-
flomically achievable:
Effluent lvwtabons
Effli A o y
tOt $rP ’ conseojtivo days
day
“ ‘ts (Q/sq m of
030
40 CFR Ch.. I (7 - -e9 Edition)
Effluent Charectenstic
Effluent UrTVt* On5
Average of daly
Maximum values for 30
t any I oonesaitrvo days
day sni Sn o t
exceed—
Phoephorus
Enghsii ixwtl (lb/I .000 sq ft of
product)
006 06
(39 FR 5714, Feb. 14, 1974, as amended at 44
FR 50746, Aug. 29. 1979]
§ 426.74 [ Reserved]
§ 426.75 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following standards of perform-
ance establish the quantity or quality
of pollutants or pollutant properties,
controlled by this section, which may
be discharged by a new point source
subject to the provisions of this sub-
part:
Effluent characteristic
Effluent tinvtabons
Average of daily
Ma amunI values for 30
for arty I consecutwe days
day shall not
exceed—
Medic units (q/sq m of
TSS.. . . .
product)
088 088
Oil
178 178
Phosphorus
030 30
pH
(9 (9
English units (lb/I,000 lb of
TSS . .
—)
018 018
Oil
036 36
Phosphorus
006 06
pH
(9 (I)
i Within the range 60 to 90
§ 426.76 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307(c) of the Act for a source
within the automotive glass laminat-
ing aubcategory, which is a user of a
publicly owned treatment works (and
which would be a new source subject
to section 306 of the Act, If It were to
discharge pollutants to the navigable
Waters), shall be the standard set
forth In 40 CFR p yt 128, except that,
4-51

-------
Environmintal Prot.ctlon Ag.ncy
§ 426.82
for the purpose of thLs section, 40 CFR
128.133 shall be amended to read as
follows:
In addition to the prohibitions set forth In
40 CFR 128.131. the pretreatment standard
for Incompatible pollutants Introduced into
a publicly owned treatment works shall be
the standard of performance for new
sources specified in 40 CPR 428.75. provided
that. if the publicly owned treatment works
which receives the pollutants is committed.
in Its NPDES permit, to remove a specified
percentage of any Incompatible pollutant.
the pretreatment standard applicable to
users of such treatment works shall, except
in the case of standards providing for no dis-
charge of pollutants, be correspondingly re-
duced in stringency for that pollutant.
§ 426.77 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best conventional pollutant control
technology.
Except as provided In H 125.30
through 125.32, any existing point
source subject to this subpart shall
achieve the following effluent limita-
tions representing the degree of efflu-
ent reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best conventional pollut-
ant control technology (BCT): The
limitations shall be the same as those
specified for conventional pollutants
(which are defined In * 401.16) In
§ 426.72 of this subpart for the best
practicable control technology cur-
rently available (BPT).
(51 FR 25000. July 9, 1988)
Subpart H—Glass Contalnsr
Manufaduring Subcategory
Sowicz 40 FR 2956, Jan. 16, 1975, unless
otherwise noted.
6 426.80 Applicability; description of the
glass container manufacturing subcate-
gory.
The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to discharges resulting from
the process by which raw materials
are melted in a furnace and mechani-
cally processed Into glass containers.
§ 426.81 SpecialIzed definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) Except as provided below, the
general definitions, abbreviations and
methods of analysis set forth In Part
401 of this chapter shall apply to this
subpart.
(b) The term “furnace pull” shall
mean that amount of glass drawn
from the glass furnace or furnaces.
(C) The term “oil” shall mean those
components of a waste water amena-
ble to measurement by the technique
or techniques described in the most
recent addition of ‘Standard Meth-
ods” for the analysis of grease in pol-
luted waters, waste waters, arid ef-
fluents, such as “Standard Methods.”
13th Edition, 2nd PrintIng, page 407.
§ 426.82 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best practicable control technology
currently available.
In establishing the limitations set
forth in this section, EPA took into ac-
count all information it was able to
collect, develop and solicit with re-
spect to factors (such as age and size
of plant, raw materials, manufacturing
processes, products produced, treat-
ment technology available, energy re-
quirements and costs) which can
affect the industry subcategorizatton
and effluent levels established. It is,
however, possible that data which
would affect these limitations have
not been available and, as a result,
these limitations should be adjusted
for certain plants in this industry. An
individual discharger or other interest-
ed person may subrmt evidence to the
Regional Administrator (or to the
State, If the State has the authority to
issue NPDES permits) that factors re-
lating to the equipment or facilities in-
volved, the process applied, or other
such factors related to such discharger
are fundamentally different from the
factors considered in the establish-
ment of the guidelines. On the basis of
such evidence or other available in.for-
mation, the Regional Administrator
(or the State) will make a written find-
ing that such factors are or are not
fundamentally different for that facil-
ity compared to those specified in the
Development Document. If such fun-
damentally different factors are fou.nd
to exist, the Regional AdmirnstratOr
or the State shall establish for the dis-
charger effluent limitations in the
4 -52

-------
OVERVIEW OF VARIANCES TO
EFFLUENT GUIDELINES

-------
VARIANCE LEARNING OBJECTIVES
•
Role of variances
•
Types of variancesResponsibilities of permittee
•
Basic process to grant/deny
TECHNOLOGY-BASED VARIANCES
•
Limited relief from effluent limits and compliance deadlines
•
Address exceptional circumstances
•
Ensure fairness of NPDES program
•
Only granted on rare occasions
•
Some may be granted by States, others require EPA approval
NOTES:
5—1

-------
VARIANCES ARE FOR EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
APPROVAL
CWA CITE TYPE 40 CFR CITE AUTHORITY
301 (c) Economic Part 125, Subpart E EPA - HQ
[ Reserved]
301 (g) Water Quality Part 125, Subpart F EPA - Region
[ Reserved]
301(h) Secondary Treatment Part 125, Subpart G EPA - HQ
Waiver- Ocean Discharge ( 125.56. 125.67)
(POTW)
301(i) Extension of Secondary Part 125, Subpart J NPDES State*
Treatment Deadline ( 125.90 -125.97)
(POTW)
301(k) Innovative Part 125, Subpart C NPDES State*
Technology ( 125.20 - 125.27)
301(n) Fundamentally Different Part 125, Subpart D EPA - Regions
Factors (FDFs) ( 125.30 - 125.32)
316(a) Thermal Discharges Part 125, Subpart H NPDES State*
( 125.70 - 125.73)
-- Intake - Discharge §122.45(g) NPDES State*
Net Basis (Net/Gross)
*EPA Region in absence of approved State NPDES program.
NOTES:
5-2

-------
BEST PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT-BASED LIMITS

-------
- -
Compare Limitations
Apply the Most Stringent
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Define Best Professional Judgment (BPJ)
• Authority for BPJ
• BPJ tools
• Economic achievability protocol
DEVELOPMENT OF EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FOR NPDES PERMITS
Develop Technology-Based
Develop Water Quality-Based Limitations
Limitations • Effluent Guidelines
• Best Professional Judgment
6-1

-------
BPJ CANDIDATES
• Combined sewer overflows
• Hazardous waste treaters
• Equipment manufacturers
• Waste oil reclaimers
• Industrial laundries
• Paint and ink facilities
• Pharmaceuticals
• Barrel reclaimers
• Transportation facilities
• Mining operations
• Water treatment plants
• Petroleum industry
NOTES:
6-2

-------
BPJ IS THE PERMIT WRITER’S OPINION
• Technically based NPDES permit conditions, developed using all
reasonable available and relevant data, examined and evaluated
using a multidisciplined approach.
• The multidisciplined approach includes perspectives of an
engineer, economist, statistician, chemist, biologist, and
attorney.
BPJ FACTORS - DEFINITIONS
• Age of equipment and facilities : age of the plant including
manufacturing lines, sewer lines, and wastewater treatment
system
• Process employed ; the manufacturing process(es) used, andlor
the wastewater treatment process employed
• Engineering aspects of the application of various types of control
techniques : the design, construction, cost, performance, reliability,
etc. of the wastewater treatment processes
• Process changes : the feasible manufacturing process changes such
as raw material substitution or in-process design (i.e., chemical
synthesis)
• Cost of achievin2 the effluent reduction : the capital and operating
cost of attaining a specified effluent quality
• Non-water quality environmental impacts : the trade-offs associated
with achieving a specified effluent quality including energy
requirement, air pollution, hazardous waste generation, solid waste
disposal, etc.
• Other factors the Administrator deems appropriate : any other
factor determined to be relevant to the facility’s ability to achieve
a specified level of effluent quality
6-3

-------
BEST PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT
DEFENSIBILITY
• Defensibility depends on reasonableness
• Reasonableness demonstrated by documentation
• Documentation should include:
- What is being imposed?
- Why is it being imposed?
- How it was developed?
NOTES:
6-4

-------
BPJ PERMITTING TOOLS
• Abstracts of industrial NPDES permits
• Treatability manual
• NPDES best management practices guidance document
• Technical support document for the development of water
quality-based permit limitations for toxic pollutants
• Economic achievability protocol
• Report on specific facilities
• Office of Research and Development
- National Enforcement Investigations Center
• Effluent guidelines data
- Section 308 questionnaires
- Screening and verification data
- Development documents
- Contractors reports
- Proposed regulations
• Other sources of information
• Discharge monitoring reports
- Compliance inspection reports
- Industry teams/national experts
NOTES:
6-5

-------
PERMIT ABSTRACTS
Primary purpose:
- To assist permit writers by providing rapid access
to information in approximately 500 industrial NPDES
permits in a standardized, cross-referenced and easy-to-read
format.
• Other purposes:
- To answer inquiries from, and provide information to
industry, academia, consultants and the public.
NOTES:
6-6

-------
NUMBER OF ABSTRACTED PERMITS
EFFLUENT GUIDELINES
Ms fl
None DssIqnot.d
Psb’o1sur R.fb k’ q
and Pop Board
Plastic . & S vth.t1cs
Textile wm.
an and
Industry Category
6-7
‘I
E
I. .
V
a.
0
V
E
z
100 ’
80’
60 ’
40
20
0
Region
60
50
40
5
I
20
10
0

-------
PERMITS WITH BMP PLANS
25
20
a,
E
Ii
L.
I,
a. 15
_• _ __
0 k __ ____
I I I UI IV V I IX X
Region
6-8

-------
ECONOMIC ACHIEVABILITY PROTOCOL
Definition
- “Economically achievable” for the purpose of this protocol
means that the cost of the pollution control device will not
cause the plant to shut down
• Purpose
- To determine if a particular pollution control device is
economically achievable
• Scope
- Applicable to “best professional judgments” about BAT
- Typically requires use of “economic specialist”
NOTES:
6-9

-------
6-10

-------
PRACTICAL EXERCISE
Best Professional Judgement (BPJ)
GIVEN : (a) NPDES Application Forms 1 and 2C from Luster Glass, Inc.
(b) 40 CFR Part 426 — Glass Manufacturing Point Source Category
(C) 40 CFR Part 423 — Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source
Category
(d) Selected NPDES permit abstracts
REQUIREMENT : Set a technology-based limit for zinc which is present in the
cooling tower blowdown using your BPJ.
QUESTIONS :
(1) Does 40 CFR Part 426 — Glass Manufacturing Point Source Category
regulations set an effluent limitation for zinc? ______________________
(2) Looking for reference limits for zinc in cooling tower blowdown, does 40
CFR Part 423 - Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category
effluent guidelines, contain effluent limitations for zinc? _________
If 80, what are they?
(3) Looking for reference limits for zinc in cooling tower blowdown, do other
NPDES permits contain effluent limitations for zinc? (HINT: Use the
Keyword Index in the EPA NPDES Industrial Permit Abstracts; only refer to
facilities in Illinois (i.e., permit numbers beginning with IL)
discharging cooling water blowdown)____________________________________
If so, which permit(s) and what limit(s) are used? __________________
(4) What other resources could be considered in setting a BPJ effluent
limitation?
(5) Using the information you have been given, what effluent limitation could
be used as a basis for setting a limitation for zinc using BPJ?_________
(6) Should you establish concentration or mass limits for zinc at Outfall 001?
Why?
(7) At what alternative location(s) could zinc limits be applied in the
permit?
6-11

-------
6—12

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§ 423.10
(Metnc units (Kg/kkg 01 product). English units (lb/I 000 lb
of product))
Effluent chatactenstic
Effluent limitations
Maximum
for any 1
day
Average of daily
values for 30
consecutive days
shall not
exceed—
Total phos horus(asP)
Ftuondo(asF) .
056
21
028
11
(44 FR 50744, Aug. 29. 1979]
8422.64 [ Reserved]
§ 422.65 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following limitations establish
the quantity or quality of pollutants
or pollutant properties, controlled by
this section, which may be discharged
by a point source subject to the prom
sloris of this subpart after application
of the standards of performance for
new sources:
[ Me8 c units (kgIkkg of product). English units (tb/1.000 lb
of product)]
Effluent charactensbc
Effluent limitations
Maiamunt
for any 1
day
Average of daily
values for 30
consecutive days
shaJi not
exceed—
ISS .
To taiphospflorus(asP) .
Fluonde(asF)
pH..
0.35
56
21
(I)
018
28
11
(I)
* Wittsn ti’e range 8.0 to 9.5
§ 422.66 [ Reserved]
§ 422.67 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best conventional pollutant control
technology.
Except as provided In H 125.30
through 125.32, the following lim.ita-
tions establish the quantity or quality
of pollutants or pollutant properties.
controlled by this section, which may
be discharged by a point source sub-
ject to the provisions of this subpart
after application of the best conven-
tional pollutant control technology:
(Metric units (kglkkg of product). English unitS (lb/i 000 lb
of product)]
Effluent cfwactonsbc
Effluent limitations
Average of
daily values
Maximum for for 30
any I day conseculnie
days sitail riot
exceed—
TSS
pH
035) 018
( I) ( I)
I
Within trio range 60 to 9 5
(51 FR 25000, July 9. 1986]
PART 423—STEAM ELECTRIC POWER
GENERATING POINT SOURCE CAT-
EGORY
Sec.
423.10 ApplicabilIty.
423.11 Specialized definitions.
423.12 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available (BFr).
423.13 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the
best available technology economically
achievable (BAT).
423.14 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the appl catlon of the
best conventional pollutant control
technology (BCT). (Reserved]
423.15 New source performance standards
(NSPS).
423.16 Pretreatment standards for existing
sources (PSES).
423.17 Pretreatment standards for new
sources (PSNS).
Aimnnx A—126 Pnxoarn’ Pou.umirrs
AumoRirr Sees. 301; 304(b). (C), (e). and
(g); 306(b) and (c); 307(b) and (C): and 501.
Clean Water Act (Federal Water Poliution
Control Act Amendments of 1972, as amend-
ed by Clean Water Act of 1977) (the ‘Act”;
33 U.S.C. 1311; 1314(b). (C), (e). and (g):
1316(b) and (C); 1317(b) and (C); and 1361. 86
Stat. 816, Pub. L. 92-500; 91 Stat. 1567, Pub.
L. 95-217).
SovRct 47 FR 52304. Nov. 19, 1982, unless
otherwise noted.
§ 423.10 Applicability.
The provisions of this part are appli-
cable to discharges resulting from the
operation of a generating unit by an
40-149 O—90——24
6-13

-------
§ 423.11
40 CFR C l i. I (7-1-90 Edition)
establishment primarily engaged In
the generation of electricity for distri-
bution and sale which results primari-
ly from a process utilizing fossil-type
fuel (coal, oil, or gas) or nuclear fuel in
conjunction with a thermal cycle em-
ploying the steam water system as the
thermodynamic medium.
§ 423.11 Specialized definitions.
In addition to the definitions set
forth In 40 CFR Part 401. the follow-
ing definitions apply to this part:
(a) The term “total residual chlo-
rine” (or total residual oxidants for
intake water with bromides) means
the value obtained using the ampero-
metric method for total residual chlo-
rine described In 40 CFR Part 138.
(b) The term “low volume waste
sources” means, taken collectively as if
from one source, wastewater from all
sources except those for which specific
limitations are otherwise established
in this part. Low volume wastes
sources Include, but are not limited to:
wastewaters from wet scrubber air pol-
lution control systems, ion exchange
water treatment system, water treat-
ment evaporator blowdown, laboratory
and sampling streams, boiler blow-
down, floor drains, cooling tower basin
cleaning wastes, and recirculating
house service water systems. Sanitary
and air conditioning wastes are not In-
cluded.
(C) The term “chemical metal clean.
Ing waste” means any wastewater re-
sulting from the cleaning of any metal
process equipment with chemical com-
pounds, Including, but not limited to,
boiler tube cleaning.
Cd) The term “metal cleaning waste”
means any wastewater resulting from
cleaning (with or without chemical
cleaning compounds] any metal proc-
ess equipment Including, but not limit-
ed to, boiler tube cleaning, boiler fire-
side cleaning, and air preheater clean-
ing.
(e) The term “fly ash” means the
ash that Is carried out of the furnace
by the gas stream and collected by me-
chanical precipitators, electrostatic
precipitators, and/or fabric filters.
Economizer ash Is included when it Is
collected with fly ash.
(f) The term “bottom ash” means
the ash that drops out of the furnace
gas stream In the furnace and In the
economizer sections. EconomIzer ash is
Included when It Is collected with
bottom ash.
(g) The term “once through cooling
water” means water passed through
the mR.Iri cooling condensers in one or
two passes for the purpose of remov-
ing waste heat.
(h) The term “recirculated cooling
water” means water which is passed
through the main condensers for the
purpose of removing waste heat,
passed through a cooling device for
the purpose of removing such heat
from the water and then passed again,
except for blowdown, through the
msI condenser.
(I) The term “10 year, 24/hour rain-
fall event” means a rainfall event with
a probable recurrence interval of once
In ten years as defined by the National
Weather Service In Technical Paper
No. 40. “RaInfall Frequency Atlas of
the United States,” May 1961 or equiv-
alent regional rainfall probability In-
formation developed therefrom.
(j) The term “blowdown” means the
minimum discharge of recirculating
water for the purpose of discharging
materials contained in the water, the
further buildup of which would cause
concentration In amounts exceeding
limits established by best engineering
practices.
(k) The term “average concentra-
tion” as it relates to chlorine discharge
means the average of analyses made
over a single period of chlorine release
which does not exceed two hours.
(1) The term “free available chlo-
rine” shall mean the value obtained
using the amperometric titration
method for free available chlorine de-
scribed In “Standard Methods for the
Ex .niination of Water and
Wastewater,” page 112 (13th edItion)-
(m) The term “coal pile runoff”
means the rainfall runoff from or
through any coal storage pile.
§ 423.12 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best practicable control technology
currently available (BPT).
(a) In establishing the 1lxnltatiOI
set forth in this section, EPA took Int o
6-14

-------
ii Protection Agency
§ 423.12
account all Information it was able to
collect, develop and solicit with re-
spect to factors (such as age and size
of plant, utilization of facilities, raw
materials, manufacturing processes,
non-water quality environmental im-
pacts, control and treatment technolo-
gy available, energy requirements and
costs) which can affect the industry
subcategorization and effluent levels
established. It Is, however, possible
that data which would affect these
limitations have not been available
and, as a result, these limitations
should be adjusted for certain plants
In this Industry. An Individual dis-
charger or other Interested person
may submit evidence to the Regional
Administrator (or to the State, if the
State has the authority to Issue
NPDES permits) that factors relating
to the equipment or facilities Involved,
the process applied, or other such fac-
tors related to such discharger are
fundamentally different from the fac-
tors considered in the establishment
of the guidelines. On the basis of such
evidence or other available in.forma-
tion, the Regional Administrator (or
the State) will make a written finding
that such factors are or are not funda-
mentally different for that facility
compared to those specified In the De-
velopment Document. If such funda-
mentally different factors are found to
exist, the Regional Administrator or
the State shall establish for the dis-
charger effluent limitations in the
NPDES Permit either more or less
stringent than the limitations estab-
lished herein, to the extent dictated
by such fundamentally different fac-
tors. Such limitations must be ap-
proved by the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
The Administrator may approve or
disapprove such limitations, specify
other limitations, or initiate proceed-
ings to revise these regulations. The
phrase “other such factors” appearing
above may include significant cost dif-
ferentials. In no event may a discharg-
er’s Impact on receiving water quality
be considered as a factor under this
paragraph.
(b) Any existing point source subject
to this subpart must achieve the fol-
lowing effluent limitations represent-
ing the degree of effluent reduction by
the application of the best practicable
control technology currently available
(1) The pH of all discharges, except
once through cooling water, shall be
within the range of 6.0-9.0.
(2) There shall be no discharge of
polychlorlnated biphenyl compoun
such as those commonly used for
transformer fluid.
(3) The quantity of pollutants dis-
charged from low volume wa.ste
sources shall not exceed the quantity
determined by multiplying the flow of
low volume waste sources times the
concentration Used in the following
table:
Pollutant or pollutant property
9p effluent hm4abona
M&cmum
for any I
day (mg/I)
Average of
vabee
for 30
COnSeCUbvO
da i theft
not exceed
(mg/I)
TSS
Oil and greaae
1000
200
300
150
(4) The quantity of pollutants dis-
charged in fly ash and bottom ash
transport water shall not exceed the
quantity determined by multiplying
the flow of fly ash and bottom ash
transport water times the concentra-
tion listed in the following table:
Pollutant or pollutant property
BPT effluent bmnabons
Max3rnum
for any I
day (mg/I)
Average of
daly values
tor 30
cor eCuVve
days shall
not exceed
(mg/I)
rss . .. .

1000
200
300
150
(5) The quantity of pollutants d.is-
charged In metal cleaning wastes shall
not exceed the quantity determined by
multiplying the flow of metal cleaning
6-15

-------
§423.12
40 CFR Ch. I (7.1-90 EditIon)
wastes times the concentration listed
In the following table:
Pollutant or pollutant property
BPT effluent limitations
Maximum
for any I
day (mg/I)
Average of
daily vabee
for 30
consecutive
days shail
not exceed
(mg/I)
TSS .... ....
Oil and grease
Copger.totai
Iron,tcta l
100.0
20.0
10
10
30.0
150
10
1.0
(6) The quantity of pollutants dis-
charged In once through cooling water
shall not exceed the quantity deter-
mined by multiplying the flow of once
through cooling water sources times
the concentation listed in the follow-
Ing table:
Pollutant or pollutant property
BP effluent limitations
Maximum
conce
hon (mg/I)
Average
concen
hon (mg/I)
Free available chlorine
0.5
0.2
(7) The quantity
charged in cooling tower blowdown
shall not exceed the quantity deter-
mined by multiplying the flow of cool-
ing tower blowdown sources times the
concentration listed in the following
table:
Pollutant or pollutant property
9p effluent limitations
Maximum Average
cor’ ntia. concenua-
ban (mg/I) hon (mg/f)
Free available chlorine
- 05 0.2
(8) Neither free available chlorine
nor total residual chlorine may be dis-
charged from any unit for more than
two hours In any one day and not
more than one unit in any plant may
discharge free available or total resid-
of pollutants dis-
ual chlorine at any one time unless
the utility can demonstrate to the Re-
gional Administrator or State, If the
State has NPDES permit issuing au-
thority, that the unIts In a particular
location cannot operate at or below
this level or chlorination.
(9) Subject to the provisions of para-
graph (b)(10) of this section, the fol-
lowing effluent limitations shall apply
to the point source discharges of coal
pile runoff:
Pollutant or pollutant progeny
BPT effluent limitations
MB OI1UI coUabOfl
for any time (mg/I)
TSS. ..-...-.
so
(10) Any untreated overflow from fa-
cilities designed, constructed, and op-
erated to treat the volume of coal pile
runoff which Is associated with a 10
year, 24 hour rainfall event shall not
be subject to the limitations In para-
graph (b)(9) of this section.
(11) At the permitting authority’s
discretion, the quantity of pollutant
allowed to be discharged may be ex-
pressed as a concentration limitation
instead of the mass based limitations
specified in paragraphs (b)(3) through
(7) of this section. Concentration limi-
tations shall be those concentrations
specified In this section.
(12) In the event that waste streams
from various sources are combined for
treatment or discharge, the quantity
of each pollutant or pollutant proper-
ty controlled in paragraphs (b)(1)
through (11) of this section attributa-
ble to each controlled waste source
shall not exceed the specified limita-
tions for that waste source.
(The Information coUection requirements
contained In paragraph (a) were approved
by the Office of Management and Budget
under control number 2000-0194)
(47 FR 52304. Nov. 19. 1982. as amended at
48 FR 31404. July 8, 1983]
6-16

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
§ 423.13
§ 423.13 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best available technology economi-
cally achievable (BAT).
Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30
through 125.32, any existing point
source subject to this part must
achieve the following effluent limita-
tions representing the degree of efflu-
ent reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best available technology
economically achievable (BAT).
(a) There shall be no discharge of
polychlorlnated biphenyl compounds
such as those commonly used for
transformer fluid.
(b)(1) For any plant with a total
rated electric generating capacity of 25
or more megawatts, the quantity of
pollutants discharged In once through
cooling water from each discharge
point shall not exceed the quantity de-
termined by multiplying the flow of
once through cooling water from each
discharge point times the concentra-
tion listed in the following table:
Poo )utant or poUtstaffl p 0pefty
BAT Effluent LnTutations
(mg/I)
Total residual chtonne
020
(2) Total residual chlorine may not
be discharged from any single generat-
ing unit for more than two hours per
day unless the discharger demon-
strates to the permitting authority
that discharge for more than two
hours Is required for macroinverte-
brate control. Simultaneous multi-unit
chlorination Is permitted.
(c)(1) For any plant with a total
rated generating capacity of less than
25 megawatts, the quantity of pollut-
ants discharged in once through cool-
ing water shall not exceed the quanti-
ty determined by multiplying the flow
of once through cooling water sources
tImes the concentration lIsted in the
following table:
BAT e Jsnt wtabona
Poilutant or pollutant progeny Ma amuii Average
concon concon
Uon (mg/I) oon (mg/fl
Free available chionne 05
02
(2) Neither free available chlorine
nor total residual chlorine may be dis.
charged from any unit for more than
two hours In any one day and not
more than one unit in any plant may
discharge free available or total resid-
ual chlorine at any one time unless
the utility can demonstrate to the Re-
gional Administrator or State. if the
State has NPDES permit issuing au-
thority, that the units in a particular
location cannot operate at or below
this level of chlorination.
(d)(1) The quantity of pollutants dis-
charged in cooling tower blowdown
shall not exceed the quantity deter-
mined by multiplying the flow of cool-
ing tower blowdown times the concen-
tration listed below:
BAT effluent hmrtabora
Pollutant or pollutant progeny Maximum Average
concon a• concenSi-
on (mg/I) ben (mg/I)
Free available chlonne
05
02
Pollutant c i - pollutant progeny
Maximum
any I /
; g
I
Average ol


days aftal
flQf exceed
=(mgI I)
The 126 pnonty polkstanb (Ag.
pendix A) contained CtIerT)-
cats added for coot.ng W
m a intenance
O ronwm. total
Zlnc.t otaI
(I)
02
10
(I)
02
tO
‘No detectable jngiait
(2) Neither free available chlorine
nor total residual chlorine may be dis-
charged from any unit for more than
two hours in any one day and not
more than one unit In any plant may
discharge free available or total resid-
6-17

-------
§ 423.14
ual chlorine at any one time unless
the utility can demonstrate to the Re-
gional AdniInb trator or State, if the
State has NPDES permit issuing au-
thority, that the units In a particular
location cannot operate at or below
this level of chlorination.
(3) At the permitting authority’s dis-
cretion, Instead of the monitoring
specified In 40 CFR 122.11(b) cornpll-
ance with the limitations for the 126
priority pollutants In paragraph (d)(1)
of this section may be determined by
engineering calculations which demon-
strate that the regulated pollutants
are not detectable In the final dis-
charge by the analytical methods in 40
CFR Part 136.
(e) The quantity of pollutants dis-
charged in chemical metal cleaning
wastes shall not exceed the quantity
determined by multiplying the flow of
chemical metal cleaning wastes times
the concentration listed In the follow-
ing table:
Pollutant or pollutant property
BAT effluent hmitaDons
Malamunl
for amy 1
day (mg/I)
Averege of
d y values
for 30
COnsecutive
days shall
not exceed
-(mg/I)
Cooper.
total ..
Iron.to t aj
10
10
10
10
(f) [ Reserved—Nonchemjcaj Metal
Cleaning Wastes].
(g) At the permitting authority’s dis-
cretion, the quantity of pollutant al-
lowed to be discharged may be ex-
pressed as a concentration limitation
Instead of the mass based limitations
specified In paragraphs (b) through (e)
of this section. Concentration limita-
tions shall be those concentrations
specified In this section.
(h) In the event that waste streams
from various sources are combined for
treatment or discharge, the quantity
of each poUutant or pollutant proper-
ty controlled In paragraphs (a)
through (g) of this section attributa-
ble to each controlled waste source
40 CM Ch. I (7-1-90 Edition)
shall not exceed the specified limita-
tion for that waste source.
(The information coUection requ1rement
contained in paragraphs (c)(2) and (d)(2)
were approved by the Office of Manage-
ment and Budget under control number
2040-0040. The Information collection re-
quirements contained in paragraph (d)(3
were approved under control number 2040-
0033.)
(47 FR 52304. Nov. 19. 1982. as amended at
48 FR 31404. July 8. 1983)
§ 423.14 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the application of
the best conventional pollutant control
technology (BCT). (Reserved]
8 423.15 New source performance stand-
ards (NSPS).
Any new source subject to this sub-
part must achieve the following new
source performance standards:
(a) The pH of all discharges, except
once through cooling water, shall be
within the range of 6.0-9.0.
(b) There shall be no discharge of
polychiorinated biphenyl compounds
such as those commonly used for
transformer fluid.
(C) The quantity of pollutant.s dis-
charged from low volume waste
sources shall not exceed the quantity
determined by multiplying the flow of
low volume waste sources tImes the
concentration listed in the following
table:
Average o
da va eS
Pollutant or pollutant
property
Maxnm un
for any 1
for 30
consecu
day (mg/I)
days shal l
not exceed
(mg/I)
TSS - ....
..
.
..... ...
1000
200
300
150
(d) The quantity of pollutants dls•
charged In chemical metal cleaning
wastes shaU not exceed the quantity
determined by multiplying the flow of
chemical metal cleaning wastes times
6-18

-------
Envlronm.ntal Prot.ctlon Ag.ncy
the concenxration listed in the follow-
ing table:
Pollutant or pollutant property
NSPS effluent kmfta1 ons
Ma,atnum
for any 1
day (mg/I)
Average of
daily values
for 30
coneecutrve
days ahd
not exceed
(mg/I)
TSS... . ..
OMand ea_io
Co ppw.totai...
. . . ... ..
1000
20.0
1.0
10
300
150
10
I C
(e) (Reserved—Nonchem.lcal Metal
Cleaning Wastes].
(f) The quantity of pollutants dis-
charged in bottom ash transport water
shall not exceed the quantity deter-
mined by multiplying the flow of the
bottom ash transport water times the
concentration listed In the following
table:
Pollutant or pollutant property
NSPS effluent ita oee
Ma,amwn
for any 1
day (mg/I)
Average of
daily velues
for 30
coneecueve
days shall
not exceed
(mg/I)
TSS..... .. . .
OUand eas....
1000
200
300
150
(g) There shall be no discharge of
wastewater pollutants from fly ash
transport water.
(h)(1) For any plant with a total
rated electric generating capacity of 25
or more megawatts, the quantity of
pollutants discharged in once through
cooling water from each discharge
point shall not exceed the quantity de-
termined by multiplying the flow of
once through cooling water from each
discharge point times the concentra-
tion listed in the following table:
§ 423.15
Pol jtari1 or pollutant properly
NSPS
ne
—_..

(mg/ f )
Total reai iaJ chlonne . ..
020
(2) Total residual chlorine may not
be discharged from any single generat-
ing unit for more than two hours per
day unless the discharger demon-
strates to the permitting authority
that discharge for more than two
hours Is required for macroinverte-
brate control. Simultaneous multi-unit
chlorination is permitted.
(1)(1) For any plant with a total
rated generating capacity of less than
25 megawatts, the quantity of pollut-
ants discharged in once through cool-
ing water shall not exceed the quanti-
ty determined by multiplying the flow
of once through cooling water sources
times the concentration listed In the
following table:
Pollutant of pollutant property
NSPS eM vtasone
Maionir
flu
ben (mg/f)
Average

ben (mg/f)
Frosa lethlorUbe... . ... ..
05
02
(2) Neither free available chlorine
nor total residual chlorine may be dis-
charged from any unit for more than
two hours in any one day and not
more than one unit in any plant may
discharge free available or total resid-
ual chlorine at any one time unless
the utility can demonstrate to the Re-
gional Administrator or State, if the
State has NPDES permit issuing au-
thority, that the units In a particular
location cannot operate at or below
this level of chlorination.
(J)(l) The quantity of pollutants dis-
charged In cooling tower blowdown
shall not exceed the quantity deter-
mined by multiplying the flow of cool-
ing tower blowdown times the concen-
tration listed below:
6-19

-------
§423.16
Pollutant or pollutant 100541y
NSPS effluent linetabons
Ma nwn
concen a-
bon (mg/I)
Average
conceflea-
son (mg/I)
Free available chlorine .
0.5
02
PolMarti or pollutant property
Maximum
for arty 1
day (mg/I)
Average of
deify v uos
for 30
conaeaJbve
days ehafl
not exced
-(mg/fl
The 126 prIority pollutanta (Ap-
peridot A) contained in cherru-
cals added Icr cooling tower
meinlenance. except
chromium, totai
Zinc.totai.._
(l )
0.2
10
( )
0.2
10
t No detectable 6mOuflt
(2) Neither free available chlorine
nor total residual chlorine may be dis-
charged from any unit for more than
two hours in any one day and not
more than one unit In any plant may
discharge free available or total resid-
ual chlorine at any one time unless
the utility can demonstrate to the Re-
gional Administrator or State, If the
State has NPDES permit Issuing au-
thority, that the units in a particular
location cannot operate at or below
this level of chlorination.
(3) At the permitting authority’s dis-
cretion, Instead of the monitoring In
40 CFR 122.11(b), compliance with the
limitations for the 126 priority pollut-
ants in paragraph (j)(1) of this section
may be determined by engineering cal-
culation.s which demonstrate that the
regulated pollutants are not detectable
In the final discharge by the analytical
methods in 40 CFR Part 136.
(k) Subject to the provisions of
§ 423.15(1), the quantity or quality of
pollutants or pollutant parameters dis-
charged in coal pile runoff shall not
exceed the limitations specified below:
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-90 Edition)
(1) Any untreated overflow from fa.
duties designed. constructed, and op-
erated to treat the coal pile runoff
which results from a 10 year. 24 hour
rainfall event shall not be subject to
the limitations in § 423.15(k).
(m) At the permitting authority’s
discretion, the quantity of poUutant
allowed to be discharged may be ex-
pressed as a concentration limitation
instead of the mass based limitation
specified in paragraphs (c) through (j)
of this section. Concentration limits
shall be based on the concentrations
specified in this section.
(n) In the event that waste streams
from various sources are combined for
treatment or discharge, the quantity
of each pollutant or pollutant proper-
ty controlled In paragraphs (a)
through (m) of this section attributa-
ble to each controlled waste source
shall not exceed the specified limita-
tion for that waste source.
(The Information collection requirements
contained In paragraphs (h)(2). (I)(2). and
(j)(2) were approved by the Office of Man-
agement and Budget under control number
2040—0040. The information collection re-
quirements contained In paragraph ( )(3)
were approved under control number 2040-
0033.)
(47 FR 52304. Nov. 19. 1982. as amended at
48 FR 31404. July 8, 1983)
§ 423.16 Pretreatment standards for exist-
ing sources (PSES).
Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7
and 403.13. any existing source subject
to this subpart which introduces pol-
lutants into a publicly owned treat-
ment works must comply with 40 CFR
Part 403 and achieve the following
pretreatment standards for existing
sources (PSES) by July 1, 1984:
(a) There shall be no discharge of
polychlortnated biphenol compounds
such as those used for transformer
fluid.
(b) The pollutants discharged in
chemical metal cleaning wastes shall
not exceed the concentration listed In
the following table:
6-20

-------
Environm.ntal Prot.ctiori Agency
Part 423, App. A
Pollutant or pollutant property
PSES pratment
standards
Maximum f r I day
(mg/I)
Copper, total
10
(C) (Reserved—Nonchemical Metal
Cleaning Wastes].
(d)(1) The pollutants discharged in
cooling tower blowdown shall not
exceed the concentration listed in the
following table:
Pollutant cc pollutant property
PSES pretreatment
standards
Ma3antum for any time
(mg/I)
The 126 pnonty pollutants (Ap-
pendix A) contained in chemi-
cals added for cooling tower
maintenance, except
Chromium, total
Zlnc,totai
(‘)
02
10
‘No detectable amount
(2) At the permitting authority’s dis-
cretion. instead of the monitoring in
40 CFR 122.11(b). compliance with the
limitations for the 126 priority pollut-
ants in paragraph (d)(1) of this section
may be determined by engineering cal-
culations which demonstrate that the
regulated pollutants are not detectable
in the final discharge by the analytical
methods in 40 CFR Part 136.
§ 423.17 Pretreatment standards for new
sources (PSNS).
Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7,
any new source subject to this subpart
part which introduces pollutants into
a publicly owned treatment works
must comply with 40 CFR Part 403
and the following pretreatment stand-
ards for new sources (PSNS).
(a) There shall be no discharge of
polychlorlnated biphenyl compounds
such as those used for transformer
fluid.
(b) The pollutants discharged in
chemical metal cleaning wastes shall
not exceed the concentration listed in
the following table:
Pollutant or Pollutant property
PSNS pretreatment
standards
(mg/I)
Maximum for 1 day
Copper lotal
t 0
(C) (Reserved—Nonchemical Metal
Cleaning Wastes].
(d)(1) The pollutants discharged in
cooling tower blowdown shall not
exceed the concentration listed in the
following table:
Pollutant or pollutant property
PSNS pretreatment
standards
Maximum for any time
(mg/I)
The 126 pnonty pollutants (Ap-
pendix A) contained in chemi-
cals added for cooling tower
maintenance, except
Chromium, total
Zir ic.total . .
02
10
(2) At the permitting authority’s dis-
cretion, instead of the monitoring in
40 CFR 122.11(b), complIance with the
limitations for the 126 priority pollut-
ants In paragraph (d)(1) of this section
may be determined by engineering cal-
culations which demonstrate that the
regulated pollutants are not detectable
in the final discharge by the analytical
methods In 40 CFR Part 136.
(e) There shall be no discharge of
wastewater poilutants from fly ash
transport water.
Ajp ix A—126 PRIORITY
PoLL n i Ts
001 Acenaphthene
002 Acroletn
003 Acrylonltrtle
004 Benzene
005 Benzldine
006 Carbon tetrachioride
methane)
007 Chlorobenzene
008 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
009 Hexachlorobenzerie
010 1,2-dlchioroethane
011 1.1.1-trlchioreothane
012 Hexachloroethane
013 1.1-d.tchloroetha.ne
014 1.1,2-trichloroethane
015 1.1.2.2 -tetrach.loroethane
( JQyØ.
6-21

-------
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-90 Edition)
Part 423, App. A
(BHC-hexachioro-
016 Chioroethane
018 Bls(2-chloroethyl) ether
019 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether (mixed)
020 2.chloronaphthalene
021 2.4. 6.trlchlorophenol
022 Paracb.lorometa cresol
023 Chloroform (trichioromethane)
024 2-cbiorophenol
025 l,2-dlchlorobenzene
026 l,3-dichlorobenzene
027 1,4-dlchlorobenzene
028 3 ,3..dlchlorobenzldlne
029 1.1-dlchioroethylene
030 1,2-trans . .dlchloroethylene
031 24-dlchiorophenol
032 1,2-dlchioropropane
033 1,2 .dlchloropropylene (1,3-dichioropro-
pene)
034 2,4-dlmethyiphenol
035 2,4-dlnitrotoluene
036 2,6 .dlnltrotoluene
037 1,2-dlphenythydrazlne
038 Ethylbenzene
039 Fluoranthene
040 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
041 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
042 Bls(2-chlorot3opropyl) ether
043 Bts(2 .chloroethoxy) methane
044 Methylene chloride (dlchloromethane)
045 Methyl chloride (dlchloromethane)
046 Methyl bromide (bromomethane)
047 Bromoform (trlbromomethane)
048 Dlchlorobromomethane
051 Chlorodlbromomethane
052 Hexachiorobutadlene
053 Hexachloromyciopentadlene
054 Isophorone
055 Na.phthalene
056 Nltrobenzene
057 2-nltrophenol
058 4-nitrophenol
059 2,4-dlnitrophenol
060 4,6-dlnltro-o-cresol
061 N.n1trosod1methyl .rn1ne
062 N-nltrosod1pheny1 n’tne
063 N-nltrosodl-n-propylamln
064 Pentachiorophenol
065 Phenol
066 Bls(2 .ethylhexyl) phthalate
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
068 DI-N-Butyl Phthalate
069 Dl-n-octyl phthalate
010 DIethyl Phthalate
071 Dlmethyl phthalate
072 1,2.benzanthracene (benzoa) a.nthra-
cene
013 Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-benzo-pyrene)
074 3,4-Benzofluoranthene (benzo(b) fluo-
ranthene)
015 11,12-benzofluoranthene (benzo(b) flu-
oranthene)
076 Chrysene
077 Acen&;hthylene
078 Anthracene
079 1,12-benzoperylene (benzo(ghl) pery-
lene)
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
082 1 .2,5,6-d.lbenzanthracene (dlbenzo(.h)
anthracene)
083 I.ndeno (.1.2,3-cd) pyrene (2.3-o-pheyn•
ylene pyrene)
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
086 Toluene
087 Trlchioroethylene
088 VInyl chloride (ch.loroethylene)
089 AIdrin
090 Dleldrln
091 Chiordane (technical mixture and me-
tabolites)
092 4.4-DDT
093 4,4-DDE (p,p-DDX)
094 4.4-DDD (p ,p-TDE)
095 Alpha-endosulian
096 Beta-endosulf an
097 Endosulfan sulfate
098 Endrln
099 Endrln aldehyde
100 Heptachior
101 Heptachior epoxide
cyclohexane)
102 Alpha-BHC
103 Beta-BHC
104 G*mma.BHC (lindane)
105 Delta-BHC (PCB-polychlorlnated bi-
phenyls)
106 PCB—1242 (Arochlor 1242)
107 PCB—1254 (Arochior 1254)
108 PCB—1221 (ArochIor 1221)
109 PCB—1232 (Arochior 1232)
110 PCB—1248 (Arochior 1248)
111 PCB-1260 (Arochior 1260)
112 PCB—1016 (Arochior 1016)
113 Toxaphene
114 Antimony
115 ArsenIc
118 Asbestos
117 BeryllIum
118 Cadmium
119 ChromIum
120 Copper
121 CyanIde, Total
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 NIckel
125 SelenIum
126 SIlver
127 Thallium
126 Silver
128 ZInc
129 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-dlbenZO-P-dlOXlfl
(TCDD)
6-22

-------
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
AND MODELING

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Water quality standards
• Beneficial uses
• Water quality criteria
• Antidegradation policy
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
A water quality standard defines the water quality goals of
a water body, or portion thereof, by designating the use or uses to be
made of the water and by setting criteria necessary to protect the uses.
(40 CFR Part 131)
NOTES:
7—1

-------
ESTABLISHMENT OF
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
• All “waters of the U.S.” have water quality standards
• Water quality standards are adopted for each waterbody in a State
- Segments of waterbodies
• States are responsible for establishing water quality standards
- Revised every 3 years
- EPA has oversight
BENEFICIAL USES
• Common uses
- Public water supply
- Fish and wildlife propagation
- Recreation
- Primary
- Secondary
• Agricultural
- Industrial
• Navigation
• Outstanding national resources water
- National and State parks
- Wildlife refuge
- Ecologically unique water that need additional protection
or are of special significance (i.e., swamps, hotsprings, etc.)
NOTES:
7-2

-------
EPA WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
• Scientifically derived ambient limits that are developed by EPA
for various pollutants of concern
1968 Green
1973 Blue
1976 Red
1980 Toxics
1986 Gold
• EPA develops 304(a) criteria goldbook
STATE WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
• Numeric criteria
- Concentrations of chemicals
• Narrative criteria
- “Freefrom...”
NOTES:
7—3

-------
ANTIDEGRADATION PLANS
• Ensures that once a use is achieved it will be maintained
• Each State is required to adopt an antidegradation policy and
method of implementation
• EPA reviews State antidegradation plans
• Antidegradation plans are designed to minimize adverse
effects on economic growth and development
COMPONENTS OF THE ANTIDEGRADATION POLICY
• Level of quality necessary to protect the existing uses of a
water segment
• Protection of actual water quality where water quality exceeds
levels necessary to protect fish and wildlife propagation and
recreation on and in the water
• Special protection of waters designated as outstanding natural
resource waters
NOTES:
7-4

-------
BASIC CONCEPT
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) = Dilution x Criteria
Waste Load Allocation (WLA) = Fraction of TMDL
COMPONENTS OF TMDL
NOTES:
7-5

-------
GENERAL MASS BALANCE FORMULA
QdCd + QsCs = QrCr
Qs, Cs Upstream Qd, Cd Discharge Qr, Cr Downstream
Qd = Waste discharge flow (mgd or cfs)
Cd = Pollutant concentration in waste discharge (mg/I)
Qs = Stream flow (mgd or cfs) above discharge point
Cs = Background instream pollutant concentration (mg/I)
Qr = Stream flow after discharge (mgd or cfs) = Qd + Qs
Cr = Instream pollutant concentration (mg/i) after complete mixing
To determine pollutant concentration in the stream:
Cr = QdCd + OsCs
Qr
NOTES:
7-6

-------
DILUTION FACTOR
• Mass balance
QrCr QdCd + QsCs
(Receiving Stream) (Discharge) (Upstream)
• Solve for Cr:
Cr = QdCd + QsCs
Qr
• IfCs=O,then:
Cr = QdCd
Qr
• Define Dilution Factor (DF) as Qr/Qd
• Therefore: Cr = Cd/DF
NOTES:
7—7

-------
EXAMPLE
ABC, Inc. discharges treated wastewater from a zinc plating
process. The only pollutant found in measurable amounts is zinc. What
is the downstream receiving water concentration assuming zinc in the total
form, complete mixing, and no settling or biological uptake?
Cjnc.
I I I I
Qs = Upstream river flow = 1.2 cfs
Qd = Discharge flow = 0.31 cfs
Cs = Upstream river conc. = 0.8 mg/i
Cd = Discharge concentration= 1.75 mg/i
Cr = CdOd + CsOs
Qr
Cr — ( l.75)(031) + (O.8)(1 21
— (0.31+1.2)
Cr= 1.0mg/I
NOTES:
7-8

-------
SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS IN THE WATER
QUALITY MODELING PROCESS
• Conservative pollutants
- Mitigated by natural stream dilution
- Heavy metals
• Non-conservative pollutants
- Mitigated by natural stream dilution and biodegradation
in the receiving stream
- BOD 5 , ammonia, bacteria
EXAMPLE MODEL INPUTS
• Stream flow
• Wastewater flow
• Upstream concentration
• Effluent concentration
• Reaction rates
• Mixing zones
NOTES:
7-9

-------
DETERMINING THE NEED FOR AND
DERIVATION OF WATER QUALITY.
BASED LIMITS

-------
--
Compare Limitations
*,
Apply the Most Stringent
LEARNING OBJECTIVE
• Determining when water quality-based limits are needed
• Calculating water quality-based permit limits
DEVELOPMENT OF EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FOR NPDES PERMITS
Develop Technology-Based
Develop Water Quality-Based Limitations
Limitations • Effluent Guidelines
• Best Professional Judgment
NOTES:
6-1

-------
PROTECTING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
• Getting data to make a decision
- Permit application
- Ask (308 authority)
- Previous permit
• Deciding to set limits
- Follow 40 CFR § 122.44(d)
- Options: 1) Set limit
2) Monitor and reopener
3) Monitor
• Setting limits
NOTES:
8-2

-------
USE OF WATER QUALITY-BASED LIMITS
Water quality-based limitations are used when it has been
determined that more stringent limits than technology-based effluent
guidelines must be applied to a discharge in order to protect “designated
use” of the receiving waters. (40 CFR §122.44(d)(1))
WATER QUALITY-BASED LIMITS
Limitations must control all pollutants which will cause have the
reasonable potential to cause , or contribute to an excursion above any
State water quality standard. (40 CFR §122.44(d)(1)(i))
NOTES:
8-3

-------
WATER QUALITY-BASED LIMITS
Limits must consider (40 CFR §122.44(d)(ii)):
• Effluent variability
• Existing controls on point and non point sources
• The sensitivity of species to toxicity testing
• Where appropriate, the dilution of the effluent
WATER QUALITY-BASED LIMITS
NUMERIC CRITERIA
If it is determined that a discharge causes, has the reasonable
potential to cause, or contributes to an in-stream excursion above the
allowable ambient concentration of a State numeric criteria within a
State water quality standard for:
• An individual pollutant, then the permit must contain
effluent limits for that pollutant.
(40 CFR 122.44(d)(1)(iii))
• Whole effluent toxicity, then the permit must contain effluent
limits for whole effluent toxicity.
(40 CFR §122.44(d)(1)(iv))
NOTES:
8-4

-------
WATER QUALITY-BASED LIMITS
NARRATIVE CRITERIA
If it is determined that a discharge causes, has the
reasonable potential to cause, or contributes to an in-stream
excursion above a narrative criterion, the permit must contain
effluent limits for whole effluent toxicity. (40 CFR §122.44(d)(1)(v))
WATER QUALITY-BASED LIMITS
NARRATIVE CRITERIA
• Where a State has not established a water quality criterion
for a specific pollutant
- Use numeric water quality criterion derived from proposed
State criterion or State policy or regulations, supplemented
as appropriate
- Use EPA’s water quality criteria published under
Section 307(a) of the CWA, supplemented as appropriate
- Use an indicator parameter for the pollutant of concern
(40 CFR §122.44(d)(1)(vi))
NOTES:
8-5

-------
EXAMPLE
ABC, Inc. discharges treated wastewater from a zinc plating
process. The only pollutant found in measurable amounts is zinc. What
is the maximum allowable concentration in the effluent assuming zinc
in the total form, complete mixing, and no settling or biological uptake.
4
ABC, Inc.
Qs = Upstream river flow
Qd = Discharge flow
Cs = Upstream river conc.
Cr = Water quality standard
=1.2cfs
= 0.31 cfs
= 0.8 mg/I
=1.0mg/I
NOTES:
Cd= Cr(Od+Os)-CsOs
Cd=
Cd=
Qd
( 10)(0.31 + 1,2) - (0.8)(1.21
0.31
1.75 mg/I
I I I I
I I
8-6

-------
EPA TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT FOR WATER
QUALITY-BASED TOXICS CONTROL
• Provides the most current procedural recommendations and
guidance for identifying, analyzing, and controlling adverse water
quality impacts caused by toxic discharges.
• Provides support to States and Regions for supplementing their
existing procedures.
WHAT YOU MUST DO
• Protect acute and chronic water quality standards ( and wasteload
allocations)
NOTES:
• Write maximum daily and monthly average permit limits
8-7

-------
8-8

-------
PRACTICAL EXERCISE
DIRECTIONS :
Determining the Need for Chemical—Specific
Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations
You are a permit writer and have received a permit renewal application
from a glass manufacturer, Luster Glass Inc. The previous permit was
issued using effluent limits derived from technology—based effluent
limitation guidelines and best professional judgement (BPJ). Since that
time, the State has revised its water quality standards to ensure aquatic
life protection. Therefore, you must determine whether water quality—
based limits are needed.
GIVEN :
Cr = (Cd)(Qd) + (Cs)(Qs)
(Qd + Qs)
where Cr = the
Cd = the
Qd the
Cs = the
Qe = the
receiving water concentration,
effluent concentration,
effluent flow,
receiving water background concentration, and
appropriate receiving water flow.
Pollutant
Lead
Zinc
Effluent
Concentration (Cd)*
(mg / 1
0.38
0.21
Receiving Water
Background
Concentration (Cs)
(mg/i)
0
0.07
* — Maximum daily concentration as reported in the application Form 2C
The State water quality regulations require that water quality standards
be achieved under the following critical receiving water flow conditions:
Chronic water quality standards:
7 day, 10 year return frequency flow (7QlO)
Acute water quality standards:
One—third (1/3) of the 7Q10 flow
The 1Q10 for the Illinois River is 70.9 cubic feet per second (cfs)
Qd = 7.06 cfs
(1) Calculate the following receiving water concentrations (Cr) using the
equation and data supplied above.
(a) Zinc (acute)
(b) Zinc (chronic) ________
(c) Lead (acute)
(d) Lead (chronic) ________
8-9

-------
(2) Compare each receiving water concentration calculated in question (1) with
the State Water Quality Standard for aquatic life protection given in the
table below. Which one is larger? What does this mean? For which
pollutant(s) do you need to set a water quality-based limit?___________
STATE WATER QUALITY
STANDARDS*
Pollutant
Acute
Protection
(up/i)
Chronic
Protection
(uo/ i
Lead
82
3.2
Zinc
120
110
* — All State
standards are applied as
“not to exceed” concentrations.
(3) What effect would a stream flow (Qs) of 0 cfs have on the receiving water
concentration? What about a stream flow of 500 cfs? __________________
(4) Are there other pollutants that are discharged that should be evaluated
for chemical—specific water quality—based effluent limitations? _______
If yes, then list the pollutants and briefly explain why below:_________
8-10

-------
PRACTICAL EXERCISE
DIRECTIONS :
Calculating Chemical Specific Water Quality-Based Limits
Assuming there
l .mitations for
calculate the
procedure.
is a need
lead and
end—of -pi.pe
water
Luster
using
= waste load allocation,
applicable water quality standard,
effluent flow = 7.06 cfs,
appropriate receiving water flow, and
receiving water background concentration.
Pollutant
Lead
Zinc
Cr = Acute State Water
Quality Standard
0.082 mg/i
0.12 mg/i
Cs = Upstream
Concentration
0 mg/i
0.07 mg/i
Cr = Chronic State Water
Pollutant Quality Standard ___________________
Qs 70.9 cfs (for chronic protection)
Qs 23.6 cfs (for acute protection)
(1) Calculate the waste load allocations for lead using the equation and data
supplied above.
(a) Lead (acute) __________
(b) Lead (chronic) __________
for chemi.cal specific
zinc discharges from
ef fluent limitations
GIVEN :
quality-based
Glass, Inc.,
the following
The following equation is used to calculate the effluent
concentration (which is commonly referred to as the waste load
allocation (WLA)J that will ensure protection of the water quality
standard.
Cd = WLA = Cr (Qd + Qe) — (Cs)(Qs)
where
Qd
Cd WLA
Cr = the
Qd = the
Qs = the
Ce = the
Lead
Zinc
0.0032 mg/i
0.1]. mg/i
Cs = Upstream
Concentration
0 mg/i
0.07 mg/i
8-li

-------
(2) Calculate the waste load allocations for zinc usl.ng the equation and data
supplied above.
(a) Zinc (acute) __________
(b) Zinc (chronic) __________
(3) Given that all State water quality standards are expressed as never to be
exceeded (i.e., water quality—based limits must be protective of the most
stringent waste load allocation), calculate a maximum daily limitation
(MDL) and an average monthly limitation (AML) for lead and zinc using the
waste load allocations calculated above. (Notes Assume a ratio of daily
maximum to monthly average of 1.6 for lead and 1.0 for zinc based upon
effluent guideline for BAT.]
(4) Compare the chemical specific water quality—based limits calculated above
with the technology—based effluent limLtations gi.ven below for Outfall
001. In which case(s) is (are) the water qual .ty based limit(s) less
stringent?
Technology-Based Effluent Limitations
Pollutant Maximum Daily Average Monthly
Lead 0.62 mg/i 0.38 mg/i
Zinc 0.1 mg/i 0.1 mg/i
8-12

-------
WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY (WET)
The total toxic effect of an effluent measured directly with a
toxicity test.
DEFINITION OF LC 50
Concentration of a toxicant which is lethal to 50 percent of the
exposed organism. Usually expressed in conjunction with the exposure
duration, i.e., 48 hr LC 50 .
DEFINITION OF NOEC
No Observed Effect Concentration (NOEC) - the highest
concentration of an effluent or a toxicant at which no adverse
effects are observed on the aquatic test organisms.
NOTES:
8-13

-------
EXAMPLES OF TOXIC UNITS (TU)
Acute:
100
• TU=
• LC 50
100
• TU= 28%
• TU= 3.6
Chronic :
• TU= NOEC
100
• TU :•• 10%
• TU = 10
DEFINITION OF ACUTE-CHRONIC RATIO
• Acute-chronic ratio (ACR) - the ratio of the acute toxicity
of an effluent or a toxicant to its chronic toxicity. It is used as a
factor for estimating chronic toxicity on the basis of acute toxicity
data, or for estimating acute toxicity on the basis of chronic toxicity
data.
• Example:
LC TU
ACR = NOEC orIC = TU
ACR- LC 50 28%
- NOEC1O%
ACR= 2.8
8-14

-------
PRACTICAL EXERCISE
Whole Effluent Toxicity
Water Quality—Based Effluent Limitations
DIRECTIONS :
Preliminary examination of toxicity testing data submitted by Luster
Glass, Inc. indicates that toxicity is present in the effluent discharged
to the Illinois River. Therefore, you must determine if there is a need
for developing whole effluent toxicity (WET) effluent limitations for the
Luster Glass permit. If you determine a need for WET effluent
limitations, then calculate those limits.
GIVEN :
Cr = (Cd)(Qd) + (Cs)(Qs)
(Qd + Qs)
Where
Cr = receiving water concentration
Cd = effluent concentration
Qd = effluent flow
Cs = receiving water background concentration
Qs = appropriate receiving water flow
Toxicity Data (Fathead minnows) from Discharge Monitoring Reports:
LC NOEC Acute to Chronic
( % effluent) ( % effluent) Ratio
58.0 50 1.16
25.2 3 8.40
55.0 10 5.50
46.3 30 1.54
44.8 25 1.79
5.9 1 5.90
67.8 10 6.78
3.9 1 3.90
50.1 30 1.67
52.0 10 5.20
32.1 3 10.70
41.7 30 1.39
Average 40.2 16 4.5
(1) Select the effluent concentrations (Cd) for acute (LC ) and chronic (NOEC)
toxicity representing the most toxic concentration and convert into toxic
units (TU).
Acute
Chronic
8-15

-------
(2) Calculate the receiving water concentration (Cr) in toxic units for both
acute and chronic toxicity given the following:
Cs = 0
= 23.6 cfs (for acute protection)
Qs = 70.9 cfs (the 7Q10 for chronic protection)
Qd = 7.06 cfs
Acute
Chronic
(3) Determine the need for WET limitations by comparing each receiving water
concentration calculated in question (2) with the State water quality
standards for acute and chronic protection. Given that:
State Water Quality Standard for Acute Protection = 0.3 TU 1
State Water Quality Standard for Chronic Protection = 1.0 TU
Are WET effluent limitations necessary? Explain your answer.
(4) If it was determined in question (3) above that WET limitations are
needed, then calculate the waste load allocations for acute and chronic
WET using the following equation:
Cd = WLA = Cr (Qd + Qs) — (Cs)(Qs)
Qd
8-16

-------
(5) Convert the acute WLA (in TU 1 ) to TU using the acute to chronic ratio
(ACR) provided with the toxici.ty data.
(6) Given that all State water quality standards are expressed as never to be
exceeded (i.e., water quality-based limits must be protective of the most
stringent waste load allocation), calculate a maximum daily limitation
(MDL) and an average monthly limitation (AML) for WET using the waste load
allocations calculated above. (Note: Assume a ratio of daily maximum to
monthly average of 1.6 for WET.)
8-17

-------
MONITORING CONDITIONS AND
ANALYTICAL METHODS

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• The who, what, where, when, and how of monitoring
• Permit writer’s responsibility
PURPOSE OF MONITORING
• Determine compliance with permit conditions
• Assess treatment efficiency
• Establish a basis for enforcement actions
NOTES:
9-1

-------
MONITORING TYPES
• Self monitoring
- Permittee performs sampling and analysis; submits
results to regulatory authority on discharge monitoring
report (DMR)
• Compliance monitoring
- Permitting authority, or a designated representative,
performs a compliance inspection
ELEMENTS OF MONITORING
• Sample location
• Sample frequency
• Type of sample
• Analytical methods
• Reporting
NOTES:
9-2

-------
SAMPLE LOCATION QUESTIONS
• Is the sample point on the facility property?
• Is the sample point accessible?
• Will the results be representative?
• Are monitoring internal points needed?
FREQUENCY CONSIDERATIONS
• Size of facility
• Type of treatment
• Location of discharge
• Frequency of discharge
• Compliance history
Nature of pollutants
NOTES:
9-3

-------
EXAMPLE: MONITORING FREQUENCY
PLANT CAPACITY
( MGD) FLOW OTHER PARAMETERS
o - 0.099 Weekly Quarterly
0.1 - 0.99 Daily Monthly
1.0 - 4.99 Record continuously Weekly
report daily
> 5.0 Record continuously Daily
report daily
TYPES OF SAMPLING
• Grab
• Composite
- Time proportional
- Flow proportional
• Continuous
NOTES:
9-4

-------
ANALYTICAL METHODS
• What methods to use
• Alternative methods
• Indicator parameters
• Financial considerations
NOTES:
9-5

-------
ANALYTICAL COSTS
Priority pollutants scan
(8080, 8240, 8270, cyanide, total phenols,
priority pollutant metals)
Purgeable holocarbons and aromati cs
Gasoline (BTX)
Total organic carbon
BOD 5
Metals
(As, Cd, Pb, Se, Sb, Ti)
(Ag, Ba, Be, Ca, Cr, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Mo,
Na, Ni, V, Zn)
Hex-chrome
Cyanide (total)
Phenols (total)
PCP
Pesticides
Herbicides
EP Toxicity (metals)
Oil and grease
Odor, color, turbidity
Total suspended solids
Volatile organics (VOA)
Chlorinated pesticides and PCBs
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)
Fecal coliform
NOTES:
$1000 - $1500
$150 - $300
$50-$150
$40 - $75
$25 - $40
$10 - $20 each
$10 - $20 each
$25 - $50
$25 - $50
$40 - $75
$120 - $165
$100 - $200
$110 - $250
$125-$175
$25 - $50
$20 - $35
$10-$20
$200 - $300
$125 - $200
$150 - $200
$10-$25
9-6

-------
PERMIT ANALYTICAL COSTS (ANNUAL)
PERMIT NO. 1
Times Unit Annual
Per Year Cost(S) Cost(S )
BOD 5 104 30 3,120
TSS 104 15 1,560
Fecal Coliform 104 15 1,560
Oil and Grease 104 35 3,640
Total 9,880
PERMIT ANALYTICAL COSTS (ANNUAL)
PERMIT NO. 2
Times Unit Annual
Per Year Cost($) Cost(S )
Priority Pollutants 4 1,250 5,000
Phenols 52 50 2,600
BOD 5 156 30 4,680
TSS 156 15 2,340
BTX 52 100 2,340
Nickel 156 15 2,340
Chromium 156 15 2,340
Copper 156 15 2,340
Lead 156 15 2,340
Zinc 156 15 2,340
Cyanide 52 35 1,820
Hardness 156 15 2.340
Total 35,680
9-7

-------
REPORTING
• What is reported
• When is information reported
• Who is responsible for reporting
• What format is used for reporting
RECORD KEEPING
• How long are records kept
• What kind of records
• Where are the records maintained
• Who keeps the records
NOTES:
9-8

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Whole effluent toxicity definition
• Types of toxicity tests
• Toxicity endpoints
• Quality assurance/quality control
NOTES:
9-9

-------
WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY (WET)
• Aggregate toxic effect of an effluent measured directly with
a toxicity test
• A toxicity test measures a degree of response of an exposed test
organism to a specific chemical or effluent
U.S. District Court of Washington, DC in 1988 ruled that
toxicity was a parameter. A parameter similar to BOD, TSS,
etc., and therefore could be treated as such in a NPDES permit.
NOTES:
9-10

-------
FRESHWATER FISH
Fathead minnow: adult fecnale (left) and breeding male
(right).
SALTWATER FISH
Silvers ide
( Menidia )
9—11

-------
SALTWATER MYSID SHRIMP
Lateral and dorsal view of a typical mysid.
9-12

-------
ACUTE TESTS
• Endpoint: mortality
• Capabilities
- Standardized protocol
- Rapid and inexpensive
- Endpoint is easy to quantify
• Limitations
- Indicates only fatal concentrations
• Works only for fast acting chemicals
- May or may not reflect real-world exposure
DEFINITION OF LC 50
Concentration of a toxicant which is lethal to 50 percent of the
exposed organism. Usually expressed in conjunction with the exposure
duration, i.e., 48 hr LC 50 .
NOTES:
9-13

-------
100%
______ 100
EXAMPLE OF ACUTE TEST DATA
Effluent Concentration
25%
_ 40 _
% Mortality
50%
i80
12.5%
i20
LC —30%
6.25%
100
z
0
z
U
z
0
U
1o
-J
LL.
z
U
I
U
0 20 40 60 80
PERCENT MORTALITY
100
9-14

-------
CHRONIC TESTS
• Endpoint: mortality, growth, reproduction, etc..
• Capabilities
- More sensitive than acute tests
- Assesses parameters other than death
• Limitations
- Much more costly and time-intensive
- Requires higher level of expertise to conduct test
DEFINITION OF NOEC
• No Observed Effect Concentration (NOEC) - the highest
concentration of an effluent or a toxicant at which no adverse
effects are observed on the aquatic test organisms.
NOTES:
9-15

-------
DEFINITION OF LOEC
•
Lowest Observed Effect Concentration (LOEC) - the lowest
concentration of an effluent or toxicant that results in observable
adverse effects in the aquatic test population.
DEFINITION OF IC 25
•
Inhibition Concentration (IC) - the toxicant concentration that
causes a 25 percent reduction in a non-lethal biological
measurement of the test organisms, such as reproduction or
growth. Determined using curve fitting with an assumption
of a continuous dose-response relationship.
NOTES:
9-16

-------
RESPONSE CURVE FOR CERIODAPHNIA QL!fflA
CHRONIC TEST
35
0
> 25
0
20
E
15
D
0
100
1 10
NOTES:
Percent effluent (log scaie)
9-17

-------
• Specific tests
• Specify procedures
• Use multiple species
• Specify endpoints
• Get QA/QC information
QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL
• Standard operating procedures manual
• Standard test protocols
• Reference toxicant testing
• Chain-of-custody
• Data logs
• Laboratory certification
TOXICITY MONITORING
NOTES:
9-18

-------
MUNICIPAL NPDES PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Permit applications
• Development of effluent limits
• Special conditions
- Pretreatment
- Sludge
- Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs)
• Key responsibilities of the municipal permit writer
SOURCES OF FACILITY INFORMATION
• Application Form 1 and Form A (2A)
• Supplemental information (sludge, toxicity, pretreatment, CSOs)
• Construction grants - “NEEDS”
• Solid waste agencies
• Pretreatment program submission
• Annual pretreatment performance report
Pretreatment auditlPCl
NOTES:
10—1

-------
TECHNOLOGY-BASED REQUIREMENTS FOR
MUNICIPAL DISCHARGERS SECONDARY TREATMENT
(40 CFR PART 133)
30 Day Avg. 7 Day Avg .
5 - Day BOD 30 mg/I 45 mg/I
TSS 30 mg/ 45 mg/I
pH 6-9
Removal 85% BOD 5 and TSS
EXCEPTIONS/ALTERNATIVES TO SECONDARY
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
• Substitution of CBOD 5 for BOD 5 [ 133.102(a)(4))]
• Substitution of COD or TOC for BOD 5 [ 133.104(b)]
• Adjustments to reflect:
- Combined sewers [ 133.103(a-e)1
- Industrial wastes
- Waste stabilization ponds
- Less concentrated influent for separate
sewers
- Less concentrated influent for combined
sewers
• Treatment Equivalent to Secondary [ 133.10S]
• Waiver from secondary treatment for marine [ 125.56-125.67]
discharges
10-2

-------
SPECIAL PERMIT CONDITIONS

-------
EQUIVALENT TO SECONDARY
• Must be trickling filter or lagoon
• Biological treatment = 51+% treatment
• Plant exceeds 30/30 with proper 0 & M
• Water quality not adversely affected
• E.T.S. limits:
- Up to 45 mg/I (30 day average)
- Up to 65 mg/I (7 day average)
- Not less than 65% removal
• Guidance distributed December 1985
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
• What is pretreatment
• Statutory authority
• Role of the POTW
• NPDES permit requirements
NOTES:
10—3

-------
NATIONAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
• Major goal is controlling discharges in order to:
- Prevent interference with POTW processes
- Prevent pass through of pollutants
- Protect sludge management options
• Additional programmatic goals
- Encourage recycling and reclamation
- Ensure POTW personnel health and safety
NOTES:
10—4

-------
STATUTORY AUTHORITY - CLEAN WATER ACT
Section 307(b) - National Pretreatment Standards
- Basis for technology-based National pretreatment
standards and general and specific prohibitions to prevent
pass through and interference
- Provision for adjustment of technology-based standards
to account for POTW removal (through removal credits)
Section 402(b)(8) - NPDES Permit Requirements
- POTWs must identify indirect dischargers
- POTWs must establish local programs to ensure
compliance with pretreatment standards by indirect
dischargers
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS - GENERAL
PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS
(40 CFR PART 403)
• Objectives:
- Prevent pass through
- Prevent interference, including protection of sludge use
and disposal
- Promote reuse and reclamation of effluents and sludges
• Elements:
- National Pretreatment Standards
- Requirements for POTW and State programs
- Industrial and POTW reporting requirements
• Effluent Limitations Guidelines (40 CFR 405-471)
- Including categorical pretreatment standards
10—5

-------
NATIONAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
• Prohibited discharge standards
• National categorical pretreatment standards
• Local limits
PROHIBITED DISCHARGE STANDARDS
• General prohibitions
• Specific prohibitions
NOTES:
10—6

-------
SPECIFIC PROHIBITED DISCHARGES [ 4O3.5(b)]
• Fire/explosive hazard
- Flashpoint less than 140°F/60°C
• pH lower than 5.0
• Solid or viscous substances which obstruct flow to the POTW
• Any pollutant (including BOD) at flow or concentration rate which
interferes with the POTW
• Thermal discharges causing headworks to exceed 104°F/40°C,
unless POTW designed for such temperatures
• Petroleumlmineral oils causing interference or pass through
• Pollutants which create toxic gases/fumes causing worker health and
safety problems
• Trucked or hauled wastes except at points designated by the POTW
• Generally, treatment cannot be achieved by dilution
NOTES:
10—7

-------
NATIONAL CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT
STANDARDS
•
Uniform, technology-based requirements
for
industries
in specific industrial categories
LOCAL LIMITS
•
Locally established limits, designed to implement the
and specific prohibitions and achieve environmental
general
objectives
• Protection of water quality
- Protection of sludge quality
- Plant operations (e.g., inhibition)
- Worker health and safety
- Air emissions (future?)
NOTES:
10—8

-------
OVERVIEW OF PRETREATMENT PROGRAM PROCESS
Region/State P01W Notified, POTW Performs POTW Prepares
and Submits
identifies —9 Requirement in —a Developmental —9
POTW8 NPDES Permit Work Program
Document
Rejects
Region/State 1 1 P01W Becomes Region/State
Region/State Requires I Reviews P01W
Performs 4_ implementation i Control 4Approves— Program
PCI/Audit
in NPDES Permit ] [ Authority Document
NOTES:
10—9

-------
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
• Who?
- POTWs>5MGD
- POTWs <5 MGD with past problems
• What?
- Legal authority
- Industrial user survey
- Individual control mechanisms for all SLUs
- Compliance/enforcement
- Resources
- Data management
NPDES PERMITS DRIVE THE PRETREATMENT
PROGRAM BY REQUIRING:
• Adequate legal authority
• Maintain industrial user inventory
• Develop/implement local limits
• Issue individual control mechanisms to all SIUs
• Conduct compliance monitoring activities
• Take swift and effective enforcement
• Perform data management and recordkeeping
• Report to the approval authority (EPA or State)
• Ensure public participation
10—10

-------
KEY RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE
MUNICIPAL PERMIT WRITER
• Write a good permit
• Identify need for, and set where appropriate, water quality-based
controls
- Chemical-specific
- WET
• Incorporate pretreatment requirements
• Incorporate sludge requirements
• Incorporate CSO controls
• Coordinate permit issuance with the pretreatment, sludge and
CSO coordinator/expert
NOTES:
10—11

-------
Organization of the Pretreatment Program and
Summary of Responsibilities
EPA Headquarters
• Oversee Program implementation at All Levels
• Develop and Modify Regulations for the Pretreatment Program
• Develop Policies to Clarify and Further Define the Program
• Develop Technical Guidance for Program Implementation
• Initiate Enforcement Action as Appropriate
EPA Regions
• Fulfill Approval Authority Responsibilities for States without Program Delegation
• Oversee Slate Program implementation
• Initiate Enforcement Actions as Appropriate.
Approval Authorities
(NPDES States with Pretreatment Program Delegation)
• Notify POTWs of Their Responsibilities
• Review and Approve POTW Pretreatment Programs
• Review Modifications to Categorical Pretreatment Standards
• Oversee POTW Program Implementation
• Provide Technical Guidance to PO1Ws
• Regulate Industries in Nonpretreatnient Cities
• initiate Enforcement Action Against Noncompliant POTWs or Industries.
Control Authorities
(POTWS with an Approved Pretreatment Program)
• Develop and Maintain an Approved Pretreatment Program
• Evaluate Compliance of Regulated Industrial Users
• Initiate Enforcement Action Against Industries as Appropriate
• Submit Reports to Approval Authority.
• Develop Local Limits (or demonstrate that they arc not necessary)
• Develop and Implement an Enforcement Response Plan
Industrial Users
• Comply with Applicable Pretreatment Standards: Prohibited Discharge Standards.
Categorical Standards. State Requirements. and Local Limits
• Comply with Federal and POTW Reporttng Requirements.
10—12

-------
PRESENTATION PREVIEW
1. What is hazardous waste?
2. NPDES pretreatment implications
3. POTW RCRA permit -by-rule
4. Available guidance
ONLY “SOLID” WASTES CAN BE
HAZARDOUS WASTES
• Solid wastes - any material which is:
- Abandoned for disposal
- Burned
- Stored (even if to be reused later)
- Treated/reconditioned
- Accumulated for speculation
• Exclusions
- Wastes regulated by other Federal law
- NPDES effluents
- Radioactive materials
- Sludge (depends on disposal practice)
- Domestic sewage and any other wastes which mix with
domestic sewage in sewer
NOTES:
10—13

-------
RCRA REQUIREMENTS ASSUME THAT:
•
NPDES (secondary treatment) and pretreatment (local limits,
categorical standards, and prohibited discharges) adequately
address wastes being discharged to sewer systems
SOLID WASTES ARE HAZARDOUS WASTES IF:
•
They exhibit hazardous characteristics
- Ignitable (flashpoint <140°F)
- Corrosive (pH <2.5 or >12.5)
- Reactive (unstable in water)
- Toxic (TCLP test - 40 substances)
- Exclusion for household wastes and special recycled
wastes: sludge conditioner or treatment aid at POTW
•
The waste/or process is listed in Federal or State regulations
NOTES:
10—14

-------
FOUR TYPES OF LISTED WASTES
1. Generic industrial sources (21)
2. Specific industrial processes (88)
3. Acutely hazardous chemicals (204)
4. Toxic (known characteristic wastes) (454)
PRESSURES TO DISPOSE OF HAZARDOUS
WASTES AT POTWS
• Land ban and RCRA closure requirements make self-disposal
costly/impossible
• Limited number of permitted TSDFs
• Domestic sewage exclusion is attractive to generators
• Increasing number of CERCLA cleanups approaching POTWs
for partial treatment
NOTES:
10—15

-------
NPDES PERMIT IMPLICATIONS OF
ACCEPTING HAZARDOUS WASTES
• Inhibition of biological treatment (permit violation)
• Pass through (permit violation)
• Sludge contamination (permit violation)
• Possible worker health and safety effects
• Increased self-monitoring
• Report new/changed influent
• NPDES permit modification
PRETREATMENT IMPLICATIONS OF
ACCEPTING HAZARDOUS WASTES
• Local limits analysis needed to determine acceptability of
waste
• Local limits development
• Designating and monitoring a receiving point for wastes
• Treating the source as SIU: permitting, monitoring, tracking
and enforcement
• New multijurisdictional issues
NOTES:
10—16

-------
RCRA IMPLICATIONS OF
ACCEPTING HAZARDOUS WASTES
• POTW has duty to inform potential generators of RCRA
requirements for manifesting waste and proper disposal
• Treating, storing, or disposing hazardous wastes requires
RCRA permit
• POTWs having releases of hazardous wastes or hazardous
constituents may have to undertake corrective action
• POTWs whose sludge is a characteristic waste must
manifest and dispose at a TSD facility
REQUIREMENTS FOR POTWs WITH RCRA
PERMITS-BY-RULE
• NPDES permit/compliance with permit conditions
• Waste received by POTW must comply with all pretreatment
requirements
• EPA hazardous waste facility identification number
• Hazardous waste manifest system and written operating
record at facility
• Biannual reports to State or EPA region waste management
division
NOTES:
10—17

-------
CONTENTS OF PERMIT-BY-RULE RIDER PERMITS
• Reporting duties:
- Sample wastes
- Report findings
• Corrective action duties:
- Interim emergency measures
- Provide data and facility access
- Develop C.A. plan/reopener
- Implement plan within date certain
RIDER PERMIT ISSUANCE PROCESS
• Duration - 10 years
• Use RCRA procedures
• Consolidate with NPDES when possible
• Consolidation requires cooperation between programs
• State program issuance complexities
NOTES:
10—18

-------
AVAILABLE RCRA/CERCLA GUIDANCE
• RCRA information on hazardous wastes for POTWs (9/85)
• Guidance for the identification of hazardous wastes delivered
to POTWs by truck, rail or dedicated pipe (6/87)
• Guidance for implementing RCRA permit-by-rule requirements
at POTWs (7/87)
• Policy on the discharge of wastewater from CERCLA sites
into POTWs (4/86)
POTW AS A HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATOR
• Emuent or sludge is hazardous
- Contains listed waste
- Exhibits characteristics
• POTWs must:
- Manifest wastes
- Send to permitted TSDF
- Hold long-term liability
NOTES:
10—19

-------
Revised 07/91
SUMMARY STATUS OF NATIONAL CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS: MILESTONE DATES
FINAL REGULATIONS
Proposed PSES 90-Day
40 CFR New Source Promulgation Effective Compliance Compliance Report
Industry Category Part Rule Date Date Date BMR Due Date Date Due Date
Aluminum Forming 4672 11-22-82 10-24-83 12-07-83 06-04-84 10-24-86 01-22-87
Battery Manufacturing 461 11-10-82 03-09-84 04-23-84 10-20-84 03-09-87 06-07-87
Coil Coating (Phase I) 465 01-12-81 12-01-82 01-17-83 07-16-83 12-01-85 03-01-86
Coil Coating (Canmaking) 465 02-10-83 11-17-83 01-02-84 06-30-84 11-17-86 02-15-87
Copper Forming 468 11-12-82 08-15-83 09-26-83 03-25-84 08-15-86 11-13-86
Electrical and Electronic 469 08-24-82 04-08-83 05-19-83 11-15-83 07-01-84 (TrO)i 09-29-84
Components (Phase I) I 1-08-85(As) 02-06-86
Electrical and Electronic 469 03-09-83 12-14-83 01-27-84 07-25-84 07-14-86 10-12-86
Components (Phase II)
Electroplating 413 07-03-80 01-28-81 03-30-81 09-26-81 (Non-integ) 04-27-84 (Non-intcg) 07-26-84
06-25-83 (Integrated) 06-30-84 (Integrated) 09-28-84
-- 07-15-83 08-29-83 02-25-84 (T1’O) 07-15-86 (T O) 10-13-86
Inorganic Chemicals 415 — 07-20-77 07-20-77 01-16-78 07-20-80 10-18-80
(Interim. Phase I, and 07-24-80 06-29-82 08-12-82 05-09-83 06-29-85 09-27-85
Phase II) 10-25-83 08-22-84 10-05-84 04-03-85 08-22-87 11-20-87
Iron and Steel 420 01-07-81 05-27-82 07-10-82 04-06-83 07-10-85 10-08-85
Leather Tanning and 425 07-02-79 11-23-82 01-06-83 07-05-83 11-25-85 02-23-86
Finishing 01-21-87 04-04-88 05-04-88 10-31-88 03-31-89 (Subpart C) 6 06-29-89
Metal Finishing 433 08-31-82 07-15-83 08-29-83 02-25-84 06-30-84 (Part 433, TTO)’ 09-28-84
07-10-85 (Part 420, TTO) 10-08-85
02-15-86 (Final) 05-16-86
Metal Molding and Casting 464 11-15-82 10-30-85 12-13-85 06-11-86 10-31-88 01-29-89
(Foundries)
Nonferrous Metals Forming 471’ 03-05-84 08-23-85 10-07-85 04-05-86 08-23-88 11-21-88
and Metal Powders
Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing 421 02-17-83 03-08-84 04-23-84 10-20-84 03-09-87 06-07-87
(Phase I) 012287 01-21-88 03-07-88 09-06-88 02-22-88 (Subpart J) 9 05-02-88

-------
Reviged 07191
SUMMARY STATUS OF NATIONAL CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS: MILESTONE DATES
FINAL REGULATIONS
Proposed PSES 90-Day
40 CFR New Source Promulgation Effective Compliance Compliance Report
Industry Category Part Rule Date’ Date Date BMR Due Date Date Due Date
Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing 421 06-27-84 O 9 20- S 5 11-04-85 05-03-86 09-20-88 12-19-88
(Phase II)
Organic Chemicals. Plastics. 414 03-21-83 11-05-87 12-21-87” 06-20-88 11-05-90 02 .0491
and Synthetic Fibers
Pesticide Chemicals 455 11-30-82 10 O4 85 12
Petroleum Refining 419 12-21-79 10-18-82 12-01-82 05-30-83 12-01-85 03-01-85
Pharmaceuticals Manufacturing 439 11-26-82 10-27-83 12-12-83 06-09-84 10-27-86 01-25-87
Porcelain Enameling 466 02-27-81 11-24-82 01-07-83 07-06-83 11-25-85 02-23-86
Pulp. Paper, and Paperboard 430,431 01-06-81 1 1-18-82 01-03-83 07-02-83 07-01-84 09-29-84
Steam Electnc Power Generation 423 10-14-80 11-19-82 01-02-83 07-01-83 07-01-84 09-29-84
Timber Products Processing 429 10-31-79 01-26-81 03-30-81 09-26-81 01-26-84 04-25-84
Footnotes
‘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 Clean Water Act which will be applicable to such source if such standards are thereafter promulgated in accordance with that section,
provided that (1) the construction occurs at a new or “greenfield site, (2) the construction on an existing site “totally replaces” the process or production equipment causing the discharge, or
(3) the construction is “substantially” independent of an existing source at the same site
2 The Aluminum Forming Categorical Pretreatment Standards were revised on 12/27/88, as issued in 53 FR 52366 These revisions include relaxed pretreatment standards for existing sources
New discharge limits were set for oil and grease for all subparts and for chromium, cyanide (T), zinc, and Total Toxic Organics (T O) for the cleaning or etching rinse of Subparts C and D
‘The compliance date for ‘Tl’O for facilities subject to existing source Electrical and Electronic Components, Phase! regulations, is July 1, 1984 The compliance date for arsenic under this category
is November 8, 1985
‘The Electroplating proposed rule date is not used to dctermine the new source/existing source status of a facility The Metal Finishing proposed rule date is used to make this determination for
all electroplating and metal finishing facilities

-------
Revised 07/91
SUMMARY STATUS OF NATIONAL CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS: MILESTONE DATES
FINAL REGULATIONS
Footnotes (Continued )
‘The compliance date for Subparts A, B, 1, AL. AR, BA, and BC of the Inorganic Chemicals category is July 20, 1980 The compliance date for Subparts AJ, AU, BL, BM, BN, and BO (except
discharges from copper sulfate or nickel sulfate processes) is August 22, 1987 The compliance date for copper sulfate or nickel sulfate processes and for all Subparts of Part 415 not listed above
us June29, 1985
6 These dates apply only to Subpart C
7 Existing sources that are subject to the Metal Finishing standards in 40 CFR Part 433 must comply only with the interim limit for ‘ll’O by June 30, 1984. Plants also subject to the Iron and Steel
Manufacturing standards in 40 CFR Part 420 must comply with the interim TFO limit by July 10, 1985 The compliance date for metals, cyanide, and final 11 ’O is February 15, 1986, for all
sources
5 lhese regulatint crc revised on March 17, 1989, (54 FR 11346) to allow pollutant discharge from the tube reducing spent lubricant process of Subpart C and Subpart I provided nitrosaminc
compound discharge limits arc met
These dates arc for Subpart 3, tungsten category
iO() April 26, 1989, a modification of some Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing regulations were proposed (54 FR 18411)
D
3 Ii()fl June 29, 1989, part of the OCPSF regulations were remanded to EPA for additional consideration.
‘ On July 25, 1986, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals remanded to the EPA the final regulation originally promulgated on October 4, 1985, for the Pesticide Chemicals category. EPA removed
the regulation from the Code of Federal Regulations on December 15, 1986 (40 FR 44911)
Note The compliance date for any discharge that is subject to Pretreatment Standards for New Source (PSNS) facilities is within 90 days of the date of the commencement of the discharge
The Baseline Monitoring Report (BMR) for a new source is due 90 days prior to the commencement of discharge.

-------
A/R6-36a/#2f
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS FOR EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC INDUSTRtAL CATEGORIES
CATEGORY OF BG()
CFR PART NUMBER INDUSTRIAL STUDIES SUBCATEGORY SOD DOCUMENT NUMBER GPO STOCK NUMBER NTIS ACCESSION NUMBER
405 DaIry Products a) Dairy Products Processing EPA 440/1-14/0214 5501 .00898 PB238835/AS
Processing (Draft)
406 Grain MIII . a) Grain Processing EPA 440/1-74/028-a 550100844 PB238316/AS
(Draft)
b) AnImal Feed, Beakfast Cereal & EPA 440/1-74/039-a 550101007 PB240861/AS
Wheat (Draft)
407 Canned 8 Preserved a) Citrus. Apple & Potatoes (Draft) EPA 440/1-74/027-a 550 100790 P5238649/AS
Fiults & Vegetables
Procssalng
408 Canned 8 Preserved a) Catfish, Crab, Shrimp (Draft) EPA 440/1-74/020-a 5501-00920 P9238614/AS
Seafood Processing
b) Report to Congress. EPA 440/1-80/020 P9811 82354
SectIon 74 Seafood
Processing Executive Summary-
(Volumes I-Ill)
409 Sugar ProcessIng a) Beet (Final) EPA 440/1-74/002-b 5501.00117 P9238462/AS
b) Cane EPA 440/1-74/002-c 5501-00826 PB238147/AS
410 TextIle Mills a) Textile Mills EPA 440/1-74/002-a 5501-00903 PB238832/AS
b) Textile Mills (Final) EPA 440/1-82/0022 P583-I 15871
411 Cement Manufacturing a) Cement Manufacturing (Draft) EPA 440/1-74/005-a 5501-00866 PB238610/AS
412 Feedlots a) Feedlots (Draft) EPA 440/1.74/001-a 5501-00842 P8238651/AS
413 ElectroplatIng a) Copper, Nlclcel, Chrome and Zinc EPA 440/1-74/003-a 5501-00816 P8238834/AS
(Draft)
b) Electroplating Pretreatment (Anal) EPA 440/1-79/003 P880-196488
414 OrganIc Chemicals a) Major Organic Produclti (Draft) EPA 440/1-74/009-s 5001-008812 P8241906/AS
Manufacturing
b) Orcianlc Chemicals & EPA 440/1-83/009-b P883-205625
Plastics & Synthetic Fibers
(Proposed)
415 ktOganIc Chemicals a) Major InorganIc Chemical Products EPA 440/1-74/007-a 5502.00121 PB23861 1/AS
Manufacturing (Draft)
b) Inorganic Chemicals (Proposed) EPA 440/1-80/007-b P881-122632
c) Inorganic Chemicals (Final) EPA 440/1-82/007 P882-265612
416 Plastic & Synthetic a) Synthetic Resins (Draft) EPA 440/1-74/010-a 5501-00815 P882-3924/AS
b) Synthetic Polymers EPA 440/1-74/036 5501-01012 PB240862/AS
c) Organic Chemucals/Placiic& EPA 440/1-83/009 b PB83 205625
Synthotic I iber (Piopo .od)

-------
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS FOR EFFLUENT UMITATIONS GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC INDUSTRIAL CATEGORIES (Continued)
CATEGORY OF BGD
CFR FART NUMBER INDUSTRIAL STUDIES SUSCATEGORY BGD DOCUMENT NUMBER GPO STOCK NUMBER NTIS ACCESSION NUMBER
417 Soaps & Detergents a) Soaps & Detergents (Draft) EPA 440/1-74/010-. 5501-00867 PB2S86 13/AS
Manufacturing
418 Fertilizer a) Basic Fertilizer Chemicals (Draft) EPA 440/1.74/011- . 5501-00868 P8238652/AS
b) Formulated Fertilizer (Draft) EPA 440/1-75/0424 5501-01006 P8240863/AS
Petroleum Refining a) Petroleum Refining (Draft) EPA 440/1-74/014-a 5501-00912 PR a8612/AS
b) Petroleum RefinIng (Proposed) EPA 440/1-79/014-b P88t-1 18413
c) Petroleum Refining (Final) EPA 440/1-82/014 PB83- 172569
420 Iron & Steel a) Steel MakIng (Draft) EPA 440/1.74/024-a 550100900 PB238837/AS
b) Iron & Steel EPA 440/1.80/024-a P881-t84384
Volumes I-V
C) Iron & Steel (Final) EPA 440/1-82/024
Volume I PB82-24 0425
Volume II P882-240433
Volume Ill P882-240441
Volume N P882-240458
Volume V P882-240466
Volume 1 P882-240484
421 Nonferrous Metals a) Bauxlts Refining EPA 440/1-74/0910 5501-00116 P8128463/AS
Manufacturing
b) Primary Aluminum Smelting EPA 440/1-74/019 -d 5501-00017 P8234859/AS
C) Secondary AlumInum Smelting EPA 440/1.74/019-. 5501-00819 P8238464/AS
422 Phosphate a) Phosphorus DerIved Chemicals EPA 440/1-74/006-a 5503-00078 P8241018/AS
Manufacturing (Draft)
423 Steam Electric a) Steam Electric Power EPA 440/1-74/029-a 5501-01001 P8230853/AS
Powerplanti (Draft)
b) Steam Electric (Proposed) EPA 440/1-80/029-b P881-I 19075
424 Ferroalloy a) Smelting & Slag Processing EPA 440/1-74/008-a 5501-00780 P8238650/AS
(Draft)
425 Leather Tanning a) Leather Tanning (Draft) EPA 440/1-74/016-a 5501-00818 PB238648/AS
b) Leather Tanning (Final) EPA 440/1-82/016 P883-172593
426 Glass Manufacturing a) Pressed & Blown Glass EPA 440/1-75/034-a 5501-01036
b) Insulation Fiberglass EPA 440/1-74/001-b 5501-00781 PB128078/AS
c) Flat Glass EPA 440/1-74/001-C 5501-00814 --
427 Asbestos a) Building, Construction EPA 440/1-74/017-a 5501-00827 P8238320/AS
Manufacturing and Paper (Oral I)

-------
A/I-4o-36a/# -
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS FOH EFFLUENT LiMITATIONS GUIDELINES - iD STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC INDUSTRIAL CATEGORIES (Continued)
CATEGORY OF BGD
CFR PART NUMBER INDUSTRIAL STUDIES SUBCATEGORY ROt) DOCUMENT NUMBER GPO STOCK NUMBER NTIS ACCESSION NUMBER
429 Ribber Processing a) lit. & Synthetic EPA 440/1-74/0134 550100885 P8238609/AS
b) Fabricated & Reclaimed EPA 440/1-74/030. 5501-01016 P8241916/AS
Ribber
429 Timber Products a) Plywood & Wood (Draft) EPA 440/1-74/023-a 5501-00853 P624061 1/AS
Processing
b) Timber Products (Final) EPA 440/1-81/023 PB8 I-22728
430 Pulp, Paper and a) Unbiesehed Kraft and EPA 440/1-74/025-a P 823RA33/AS
Paperboard Semi-chemical Pulp (Draft)
b) Pulp & Paper & Paperboard and EPA 440/1-82/025 P881-163949
Builders Paper & Board Mills
(Final)
0) Pulp. Paper & Paperboard and EPA 440/1-82/025 P683-163949
Bulldere Paper & Board Mills
(Final)
431 BuIlder’s Paper & a) Builders Paper & Roofing (Draft) EPA 440/1-74/026-a 5501-00909 P8238076/AS
Board Mills
b) Pulp. Paper & Paperboard and EPA 440/1-82/025 P883-163949
Builder’s Paper & Board Mills
(Final)
432 Meat Products and a) Red Meat Processing EPA 440/1-74/012-a 5501-00843 P8238076/AS
Rendering
b) Renderer EPA 440/1-74/031 P8238836/AS
433 Metal Finishing a) Metal FinIshIng (Proposed) EPA 440/1-82/091-b P883-102004
b) Metal Finishing (Anal) EPA 440/1-82/091 P834-115989
434 Coal Mining a) Coal Mining (Proposed) EPA 440/1-81/067-b P681119296
b) Coal Mining (Final) EPA 440/1-82/057 P683/108042
436 Mineral MinIng a) Repoit to Congress EPA 440/1-82/059 P682242207
& Processing The Effects of Discharges from
Limestone Quarries on Water
Quality and Aquatic Blota
440 Ore Mining a) Volume I EPA 440/1-78/0614 P8286520/AS
and Dressing
b) Volume I I EPA 440/1-78/0614 P8286521/AS
c) Ore Mining & Dressing (Proposed) EPA 440/1-82/061-b PBS2-250952
455 Pesticides a) Pesticides EPA 440/1-76/OW-. PB285480/AS
b) Pesticides (Poposod) EPA 440/1-82/079-b - PB&3-1 53 il l
C) Test Methods for Non-Conventional EPA 440/1-82/079-c P883-176636
Pesticides Chemical Analysis
ol lndustiial & Municipal Waste-

-------
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS FOR EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDEUNES AND STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC INDUSTRIAL CATEGORIES (Continued)
CATEGORY OF BGD
CFR PART NUMBER INDUSTRIAL. STUDIES SUSCATEGORY ROD DOCUMENT NUMBER GPO STOCK NUMBER NTIS ACCESSION NUMBER
461 Battery Manufacturing a) Battery Manufacturing (Proposed) EPA 440/1.82/067-b P883-197921
463 PlastIc Processing a) Plastic Molding & Forming EPA 440/1-84/069-b P684-171578
(Proposed)
465 CoIl CoatIng a) Coil Coating (Final) EPA 440/1-82/071 P883-205542
b) CoB Coating Canmaking (Final) EPA 440/1-83/Oil P884-190847
466 Poros llin a) Poroelain (Proposed) EPA 440/1-80/012-b P881-201521
488 Copper Forming a) Copper (Final) EPA 440/1-84/074 P684-192459
469 EI.ctron lca a) EIecttlcal S Electronic EPA 440/1-82/015-b P882-249613
Components (Phrase I)

-------
Approved State NPDES Pennit Program
A roved State NPDES and
Prcueauncnt Programs
Figure 1-1. Status of State NPDES and Pretreatment Program Approvals, November 1990
Thirty-nine States and territories have federally approved NPDES programs. Twenty-seven States
have federally approved pretreatment programs.
I .
t )
- .4
Source: “NatinnRl Pretreatment Program Report to Congress”
(EPA; 21W-4004; July, 1991)

-------
Source: “NatinnRl Pretreetment ProgrAm Report to Congress”
(FPA: 21W—4004; July, 1991)
Figure 1-2. Approved Local Pretreatment Programs
Numbers
41 4TR1t-30
PtsiWs Ii,
Appi.v.d
I
P a
Plants hi
She-Run
“° •
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
78
79
133
405
327
124
78
54
121
43
82
178
174
537
382
252
128
57
163
62
93
—
—
199
—
—
22
—
—
—
Total
1,442
2,015
314
F’.,
April 1990
D State-Run Programs

-------
MUNICIPAL SLUDGE
PERMIT CONDITIONS

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Definition of sludge
• Statutory requirements
• Interim program
• Implementation procedures
• Long term program
NOTES:
11—1

-------
DEFINITION OF SEWAGE SLUDGE
Any solid, semisolid, or liquid residue removed during the
treatment of municipal wastewater or domestic sewage. Sewage sludge
includes, but is not limited to, solids removed during primary, secondary, or
advanced wastewater treatment, scum, septage, portable toilet pumpings,
type III marine sanitation device pumpings (33 CFR Part 159) and sewage
sludge products. Sewage sludge does not include grit or screenings, or
ash generated during the incineration of sewage sludge. 40 CFR 122.2
VOLUME OF SLUDGE PRODUCED IN THE U.S.
NOTES:
11—2

-------
WATER QUALITY ACT OF 1987
SLUDGE USE AND DISPOSAL §405
• EPA will develop technical standards for proper use and
disposal (expected January 1992)
• Technical standards will be implemented primarily
through NPDES program
• Interim NPDES permit conditions will be based on case-by-case
judgment of permit writer
• Non-NPDES POTWs and other treatment works regulated
through separate sludge-only permit
SCOPE OF INTERIM PROGRAM
• Permits for all NPDES POTWs issued after 2/4/87 will address
sludge use and disposal
• As needed to protect public health and the environment EPA
may regulate
- End users
- Industrial facilities which treat domestic waste
- Privately owned treatment works
- Federal facilities
• Class I sludge management facilities must receive special
attention
NOTES:
11-3

-------
ALL POTW PERMITS MUST CONTAIN:
• Standard conditions ( 122.41)
• Minimum monitoring and reporting ( 122.44)
• Applicable existing sludge requirements
- Landfill/land application
- 40 CFR Part 257
- Incineration
- 40 CFR Parts 60 and 61
- 40 CFR Part 761
CONDITIONS FOR ALL PERMITTED FACILITIES
• General duty to comply with existing requirements/future
Part 503 ( 122.41(a)(1))
• Reopener once Part 503 standards are promulgated ( 122.44(c)(4))
• Duty to mitigate ( 122.41(d))
• Records retention (5 years) ( 122.41(j)(2))
• Notification requirements for significant changes to use and disposal
( 122.41(l)(1)(iii))
• Reopener for changed conditions ( l22.62(a)(1))
• Analytical methods ( 122.41(j)(4))
NOTES:
11-4

-------
CLASS I SLUDGE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
• Any POTW required under 40 CFR 403.8(a) to have an
approved pretreatment program, including POTWs covered
under 403.10(e) State program
• Any other treatment works treating domestic sewage which
have been designated by EPA and approved State programs
as priorities (e.g., POTWs which incinerate sludge)
CLASS I FACILITY PERMITS MUST CONTAIN:
• Standard conditions ( 122.41)
• Applicable existing sludge requirements ( 122.44)
• Other conditions necessary to protect health and the
environment developed on a case-by-case basis
- Regulate additional pollutants
- Prescribe management practices/siting characteristics
- More than minimum monitoring
- Restrict public access
- Ground-water protection measures
NOTES:
11—5

-------
SELF-MONITORING AND REPORTING
RECOMMENDATIONS
• Non-Class L’no industry
- Annual metals scan (Cd, Pb, Ni, Zn, Cr, Cu)
• Non-Class I/industry
- Priority scan at application
- Annual 503 scan
• Class I
- Annual priority pollutant scan
- 503 pollutants periodically
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION*
• Sludge profile - quality and quantity
• Other sludge permits held
• Topographical map of sludge disposal sites
• Narrative description of disposal practices
• Identify other entities handling sludge
* 12221(d)(3)(jjj) and §501.1S(a)(2)
NOTES:
11-6

-------
SOURCES OF SLUDGE FACILITY INFORMATION
• National survey - results released November 1990 (55 Fed. Reg. 47210)
• Other Federal and State sludge/solid waste agencies
• Pretreatment program submission and audit reports
• Compliance inspection reports
• Public health agencies
• Construction grants database
• Agricultural agencies
• 208 basin plans
• RCRA 4003 solid waste plan
EPA/STATE INTERIM AGREEMENTS
• All States may participate
• Establishes responsibility for interim program implementation
- Permitting
- Compliance monitoring
- Enforcement
- Information exchange
• EPA responsible for interim permitting in the absence of
EPA/State agreements
NOTES:
11—7

-------
STATE PERMIT ISSUANCE PROCEDURES
• State permits must notice that conditions are Federally
enforceable
• Fact sheet must also note Federal enforceability
• EPA reviews all Class I facility permits and affirmatively
approves sludge conditions
• Region must affirmatively approve the permit (letter or
certification)
EPA ALTERNATIVES FOR ISSUANCE
IN NPDES STATES
• Attach sludge-only “rider” conditions to State permits
- Follows state process and procedures
• Separate sludge permit
- NPDES permit (402 and 405)
- NPDES procedures
NOTES:
11-6

-------
LONG TERM REGULATORY PROGRAM
Part 503 - Sewage Sludge Technical Standards
- Land application
- Incineration
• Monotills
- Distribution and marketing
- Surface disposal
Due: April 1992
Part 258 - Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
- Management practices
- Financial responsibility
- Siting criteria
Promulgated: October 9, 1991 (56 FR 50977)
NOTES:
11-9

-------
LONG TERM PROGRAM - PART 503
• Health/environ mental -based standards
- Sludge quality
- Management practices
- Siting requirements
- Implemented primarily through NPDES permits
• Land application (42%)
• Agricultural lands
- Nonagricultural lands
• Distribution and marketing (6%)
• Incineration (14%)
• Monofills and surface disposal (2%)
• Domestic septage
• Court ordered promulgation by January 1992
NOTES:
11-10

-------
PART 503 COMPLIANCE DEADLINES
• Within 1 year of promulgation of the regulations
• Within 2 years, if construction of new pollution control facilities is
required
TOOLS AVAILABLE TO ASSIST PERMIT WRITERS
• NPDES/sludge permitting and State program regulations
54 Fed. Reg. 18716 (5/2/89)
• Sludge permitting strategy, OW (9/89)
• Case-by.case permitting guidance, OWEC (5/90)
• Guidance on sampling and analysis of municipal sewage sludge,
OWEC (8/89)
• Proposed technical criteria 54 Fed. Reg. 5746 (2/6/89)
NOTES:
11—11

-------
STORM WATER PERMITTING

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Storm Water Program Overview
• Industrial Requirements
• Municipal Requirements
NOTES:
12-1

-------
WATER QUALITY IMPACTS
ATTRIBUTABLE TO STORM WATER
• Naturally, pollution from diffuse sources such as runoff from
agriculture and urban areas are the leading causes of water quality
impairment
• Diffuse pollution sources are increasingly important as controls
for industrial process dischargers and POTWs are implemented
• 38 States have reported urban runoff as a major cause of use
impairment
• 21 States report construction site runoff as a major cause of use
impairment
• In some municipalities, illicit connections to separate storm sewers
have had a significant adverse impact. Removing illicit discharges
presents opportunities for dramatic improvement in the quality
of storm water discharges from urban areas.
• One study showed that 14% of the buildings studied within a
drainage basin had improper connections to storm sewers;
connections approved when the structures were built.
NOTES:
12-2

-------
CLEAN WATER ACT REQUIRES PHASED APPROACH
FOR PERMITTING STORM WATER DISCHARGES
• Prior to 10/1/92, storm water permits are only required for:
- Storm water regulated under an existing permit
- Storm water that is associated with an industrial activity
- Storm water that is discharged from municipal separate
storm sewers serving 100,000 or more persons
- Administrator or State Director may designate, for permitting,
storm water discharges contributing to a violation of water
quality standards or which are significant contributors of
pollutants
• All other storm water discharges are the subject of 2 EPA studies,
and subsequent regulation after 10/1/92
NOTES:
12-3

-------
STORM WATER DISCHARGE ASSOCIATED WITH
INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY
• Discharge from any conveyance which is used for collecting
and conveying storm water
• Directly related to manufacturing, processing, or raw materials
storage areas
• Located at an industrial plant
• Other industrial facilities and operations
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR STORM WATER
DISCHARGES ASSOCIATED WITH
INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY
• Discharges of storm water associated with industrial activity are
required to either:
- Apply for an individual permit (Form 2F),
- Apply for a permit through a group application, or
- Seek coverage under a storm water general permit
using notice of intent
NOTES:
12-4

-------
Group:
Part 1
September 30, 1991
Review Period
Part 2
12 months after
Part 1 approval
60 days
Construction:
90 Days Prior to
Initiation of
Construction
Estimated coverage: 100,000 facilities
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR INDUSTRIAL
STORM WATER PERMITS
• Permits must require the achievement of CWA 301 [ effluent
limitations (BAT/BCT)] and water quality-based limitations
• Permitted industries must continue to meet all existing
requirements of CWA 402
NOTES:
12-5
INDUSTRIAL STORM WATER PERMIT
APPLICATION DEADLINES
Individual: November 18, 1991
General 180 Days from
Permit NOl: General Permit
Issuance

-------
Part 1
Review Period
Part 2
Medium
Municipalities
May 18, 1992
90 Days
May 17, 1993
Large
Municipalities
November 18,
1991
90 Days
November 16,
1992
Estimated coverage: 173 Cities and 47 Counties
NOTES:
12—6
MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEMS
• Large system - serving a population of 250,000 or more
• Medium system - serving a population of 100,000 or more, but less
than 250,000
MUNICIPAL PERMIT APPLICATION DEADLINES

-------
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR MUNICIPAL
SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM PERMITS
• System or jurisdiction-wide permits allowed
• Effectively prohibit non-storm water discharges into storm
sewers
• Controls to reduce discharge of pollutants to MAXIMUM EXTENT
PRACTICABLE (MEP)
NOTES:
12-7

-------
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW (CSO)
PERMITTING

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• CSO Overview
• Permitting Requirements
NOTES:
13-1

-------
cso
Definition
CSOs are flows from a combined sewer in excess of the interceptor
or regulator capacity that are discharged into a receiving water without
going to a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW).
• CSOs point sources
• CSOs are .gj bypasses
• CSOs are jj. j subject to secondary treatment regulations
• CSOs subject to BCT and BAT and State water
quality standards
NOTES:
13-2

-------
CSO URBANIZED AREAS
13-3

-------
CSO PERMIT APPLICATION FORMS
• Form 2A - Permitted in conjunction with a POTW
• Form 2C - Permitted separately’ from a POTW
NOTES:
13-4

-------
THE CSO CONTROL STRATEGY REQUIRES
• States to develop CSO permitting strategies by January 15, 1990
• Regions to approve State CSO permitting strategies by March 31, 1990
CSO PERMITS
• Permit issuance
• Minimum technology-based limitations
• Additional CSO control measures
• Monitoring
NOTES:
13-5

-------
MINIMUM BCT/BAT LIMITATIONS
• Prohibition of dry weather overflows;
• Proper operation and regular maintenance programs for the
sewer system and combined sewer overflow points;
• Maximum use of the collection system for storage;
• Maximization of flow to the POTW for treatment;
• Review and modification of pretreatment programs to assure
CSO impacts are minimized; and
• Control of solid and floatable materials in CSO discharges.
NOTES:
13-6

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
•
Additional nonregulatory monitoring
•
Compliance schedules in permits
•
Best management practices
ADDITIONAL NONREGULATORY MONITORING
•
Used to supplement controls
•
Used to collect data for future limit development
NOTES:
I —
i

-------
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
• 40 CFR §122.47
- Allows for establishing schedules of compliance that lead to
compliance with CWA and regulations
- Interim dates if schedule exceeds 1 year from permit
issuance
- Reporting 14 days following each interim date
NOTES:
14-2

-------
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY
Section 304(e)
- The Administrator. . .may publish regulations supplemental
to effluent limitations for a class or category of point
sources for toxic or hazardous pollutants under Section 307(a)
or 311 of the Act to control:
- Plant site runoff
- Spillage or leaks
- Sludge or waste disposal
- Drainage from raw material storage
.which are associated with or ancillary to the industrial
manufacturing or treatment process and may contribute
significant amounts of such pollutants to navigable waters.
Section 402(a)(1)
- In the absence of BMPs promulgated for a category of point
sources (such as steel mills, petroleum refiners, etc.) under
authority of Section 304(e), permit writers may use the authority
of Section 402(a)(1) to place BMPs in permits on a case-by-case
basis
NOTES:
14-3

-------
USE BMPs WHEN...
• Numerical limits are infeasible
• In lieu of chemical analysis
• Where history of leaks and spills exists
• Housekeeping is sloppy
• Facility is complex and toxic pollutant data lacking
• Other options are too expensive
BMPs IN NPDES PERMITS
• BMP plan
• Site-specific BMPs
- Facility-specific
- Pollutant-specific
NOTES:
14-4

-------
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF A BMP PLAN
• General requirements
- Name and location of facility
- Statement of BMP policy and objectives
- Review by plant manager
• Specific requirements
- BMP committee
- Risk identification and assessment
- Reporting of BMP incidents
- Materials compatibility
- Good housekeeping
- Preventive maintenance
- Inspections and records
- Security
- Employee training
BMPs ARE...
• Flexible
• Procedural
• Qualitative
Most effectively used in conjunction with effluent limitations
in permits
NOTES:
14-5

-------
PROCEDURAL
•
•
•
Conduct routine training
Maintain maintenance logs
Perform routine wall-thickness testing
.
QUALITATIVE
•
BMPs generally tell how or what, not how much
BUT BMPS ALSO MAY BE:
•
Construction
•
Instrumentation
•
Monitoring
‘
Operation and maintenance
NOTES:
FLEXIBLE
• Visual inspections,
• Non-destructive testing, or
• A dike or berm
14-6

-------
NOTES:
BMPs SHOULD NOT :
• Substitute for quantitative controls
• Tell managers how to run their plants
• Require costly methods when inexpensive ones will suffice
GENERIC BMPs
• Preventive maintenance
• Water conservation/non-use
• Secondary containment
• Nondestructive testing
• Materials engineering
• Materials handling
• Visual inspections
• Covering
• Sealing
• Packaging
• Waste stream segregation
• Source elimination
• Good housekeeping
• Alarm systems
• Diverting
• Paving
• Runoff control
• Sludge management
• Training
• Monitoring
• Security
14-7

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 11/4/91 - 1:25 PM
NPDES
Best Management Practices
GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water Enforcement and Permits
NPDES Technical Support Branch
June 1981
14$

-------
l6OAJDisk #1 - 11/4 1 - 1:26 PM
PREFACE
During the period June 13, 1978, to February 26, 1979, Hydroscience, Inc., under
Contract No. 68-03-2568 to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), gathered
information leading to the identification of best management practices (BMPs) currently used
by industry. The result of the data gathering and analysis by Hydroscience, Inc. was a draft
report entitled “NPDES Best Management Practices Guidance Document” EPA 600/9-79-
045. In response to keen public interest in the draft report, EPA made the report available to
the public and provided a 45-day comment period. The comment period subsequently was
extended twice, resulting in a total 120-day comment period on the report. After evaluating
the comments received, EPA revised the draft report, and published the final document. This
document supersedes the Hydroscience draft report dated December, 1979.
14-10

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18/91 1:21 PM
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this document is to assist National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permitting authorities, compliance officers, and permit applicants to
develop Best Management Practices (BMP) plans for industry. BMPs are authorized under
the 1977 Clean Water Act for the control of discharges to receiving waters of significant
amounts of any pollutant listed as hazardous under Section 311 of the Act or toxic under
Section 307 of the Act from activities which are associated with or ancillary to industrial
manufacturing or treatment processes. The general types of discharges to be controlled by
BMPs are plant site runoff, spillage and leaks, sludge and waste disposal and drainage from
material storage areas.
This document provides a basis for developing BMP plans. The proper use of the
document requires engineering experience with industrial manufacturing and treatment
processes and knowledge of current laws and regulations applicable to NPDES permits, BMP
plans, and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans.
The guidance herein is based on a review by Hydroscience, Inc. (EPA Contract No. 68-
03-2568) of current practices used by industry to control the non-routine discharge of toxic
pollutants and hazardous substances. Included in the review are published articles and
reports, technical bulletins (also termed material safety data sheets) on specific compounds,
and discussions with industry through telephone contacts, written questionnaires, and site
ViSitS.
14-11

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 1O/18 1 - 1:24 PM
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 established the objective
of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s
waters. This objective has remained unchanged in the 1977 amendments to the Act,
commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act of 1977, hereinafter “the Act.” To achieve this
end, the Act sets forth a series of goals, including the goal of eliminating the discharge of
pollutants into navigable waters by 1985. The principal mechanism for reducing the discharge
of pollutants from point source is through implementation of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) established by Section 402 of the Act.
At the time of first round NPDES permit issuance, conventional pollutants (BOD, pH,
TSS, etc.) were considered the parameters which most urgently needed controls. In second
round permitting, however, the Agency emphasis is shifting from the conventional pollutants
to the control of toxic pollutants and hazardous substances.
Traditionally, NPDES permits have contained chemical-specific numerical effluent
limits. Effluent guidelines are not always available to prescribe these effluent limits nor to
guarantee water quality sufficient for the protection of indigenous aquatic life. To improve
water quality, the Act provides for water pollution controls supplemental to effluent
limitations guidelines. Best Management Practices (BMPs) are one such supplemental
control. Pursuant to sections 304 and 402 of the Act, BMPs may be incorporated as permit
conditions. In the context of the NPDES program, BMPs are actions or procedures to prevent
or minimize the potential for the release of toxic pollutants or hazardous substances in
significant amounts to surface waters. BMPs, although normally qualitative, are expected to
be most effective when used in conjunction with numerical effluent limits in NPDES permits.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Section 304(e) of the Act authorized the Administrator to publish regulations to control
discharges of significant amounts of toxic pollutants listed under Section 307 or hazardous
substances listed under Section 311 from activities which the Administrator determines are
associated with or ancillary to industrial manufacturing or treatment processes. The
discharges to be controlled by BMPs are plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste
disposal, and drainage from raw material storage.
14-12

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18/91 - 1:24 PM
Section 402(a)(1) of the Act allows the Administrator to prescribe conditions in a
permit determined necessary to carry out the provisions of the Act. BMPs are one such
condition.
BMPs are intended to complement other regulatory requirements imposed by RCRA,
OSHA, the Clean Air Act, and SPCC plans for hazardous substances under the Clean Water
Act. Pursuant to Section 311 of the Act, EPA has proposed (40 CFR Part 151) requirements
for SPCC plans to prevent discharges of hazardous substances from facilities subject to
NPDES permitting requirements. The guidelines proposed for hazardous substances SPCC
plans are very similar to those required for oil SPCC plans in the Oil Pollution Prevention
Regulations, (40 CFR Part 112). Since the Agency has received favorable comments about
the Oil Pollution Prevention Regulations, the NPDES BMP regulation has been structured to
be similar to the oil SPCC regulation.
BMP REGULATORY HISTORY
On September 1, 1978, EPA proposed regulations (43 FR 39282) addressing the use of
procedures to control discharges from activities associated with or ancillary to industrial
manufacturing or treatment processes. The proposed rule indicated how best management
practices would be imposed in NPDES permits to prevent the release of toxic and hazardous
pollutants to surface waters. The proposed regulation was incorporated as “40 CFR Part
125, Subpart L - Criteria and Standards for Best Management Practices Authorized Under
Section 304(e) of the Act” on the August 21, 1978, proposed NPDES regulations (43 FR
37078). A 60-day comment period on proposed Subpart L was provided.
After evaluating the comments received on the proposed regulation, EPA revised
Subpart L and promulgated the regulation as Subpart K (44 FR 32954-5) on June 7, 1979.
Industries regulated by Subpart K were to develop a BMP program and submit the program
with their permit application. Subpart K stated that information on the development of BMP
programs was contained in a publication entitled “NPDES Best Management Practices
Guidance Document.” Subpart K was to become effective on August 13, 1979. However,
publication of the report was delayed beyond August 13, 1979. Therefore, on August 10,
1979, EPA deferred applicability of the BMP portions of the NPDES regulations until 60 days
after publication in the Federal Register of a notice of availability of the final document (44 FR
47063). EPA announced on March 20, 1980 the availability of the draft report and provided a
45-day comment period (45 FR 17997), which subsequently was extended twice, resulting in
a 120-day comment period on the report. Based on public comments on the draft report and
14-13

-------
160A/Dtsk #1 - 1Of18 , 1 - 1:24 PM
further discussion with industry, the Agency revised the draft report and published this
guidance document.
FINAL BMP REGULATION
[ Reserved]
FINAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
[ Reserved]
14-14

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18/91 - 1:25 PM
SECTION II
USE OF THE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
This document should be used for guidance in developing BMP plans. The document is
not intended to specify site-specific or pollutant-specific BMPs. As its name suggests, the
NPDES Best Management Practices Guidance Document is to be considered guidance by
NPDES permitting authorities, compliance officers, permit applicants and permittees and
should be used in a flexible manner in the formulation of BMP plans. Consequently, the
document identifies elements of each specific requirement that should be considered in the
development of the BMP plan, but does not require that each element be included in every
facility’s BMP plan.
In utilizing this document to develop a BMP plan, the applica.nt/permittee is encouraged
to use the most cost-effective and innovative techniques to fit the particular facility or
circumstances. The format and content of a BMP plan may vary from site to site and industry
to industry, depending upon the specific situation. In addition, an applicant/permittee may
add, delete, or modify the elements of the specific requirements presented in the document
where equivalent results can be attained.
If an applicant/permittee needs assistance to develop a BMP plan, he or she may
contact the appropriate permit issuing authority for advice. The permitting authority, as
necessary, may seek assistance from the Technical Program Development Section of the
NPDES Technical Support Branch in Washington, D.C.
14-15

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
SECTION III
BMP PLANS
SCOPE
The activities which are associated with or ancillary to the industrial manufacturing or
treatment process are subject to BMPs. For brevity, all such activities are referred to as
“ancillary sources.” The ancillary sources at the plant should be examined to determine if
there is a reasonable potential for equipment failure (e.g., spillage or leakage), natural
conditions (e.g., plant site runoff or drainage from raw material storage), or other
circumstances (e.g., sludge or waste disposal) which could result in the discharge of a
significant amount of toxic pollutants or hazardous substances to receiving waters. The
ancillary sources are divided for discussion in this document into five categories: material
storage areas; loading and unloading areas; plant site runoff; in-plant transfer, process, and
material handling areas; and sludge and hazardous waste disposal areas.
Material storage areas include storage areas for toxic and hazardous chemicals as raw
materials, intermediates, final products or byproducts. Included are: liquid storage vessels
that range in size from large tanks to 55-gallon drums; dry storage in bags, piles, bins, silos,
and boxes; and gas storage in tanks and vessels.
Loading and unloading operations involve the transfer of materials to and from trucks or
railcars but not in-plant transfers. These operations include pumping of liquids or gases from
truck or railcar to a storage facility or vice versa, pneumatic transfer of dry chemicals to or
from the loading or unloading vehicle, transfer by mechanical conveyor systems, and transfer
of bags, boxes, drums, or other containers from vehicles by fork-lift trucks or other materials
handling equipment.
Plant runoff is generated principally from rainfall on a plant site. Runoff from material
storage areas, in-plant transfer areas, loading and unloading areas, and sludge disposal sites
potentially could become contaminated with toxic pollutants and hazardous substances.
Heavy metals from sludge disposal sites are of special concern. Fallout, resulting from the
plant air emissions which settle on the plant site, may also contribute to contaminated runoff.
Contaminated runoff may reach a receiving body of water through overland flow, drainage
ditches, storm or noncontact cooling water sewers, or overflows from combined sewer
systems.
14-16

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
In-plant transfer areas, process areas, and material handling areas encompass all in-
plant transfer operations from raw material to final product. Various operations could include:
transfer of liquids or gases by pipelines with appurtenances such as pumps, valves, and
fittings; movement of bulk materials by mechanical conveyor-belt systems; and fork-lift truck
transport of bags, drums, and bins. All transfer operations within the process area with a
potential for release of toxic pollutants and hazardous substances to other than the process
waste water system are addressed in this grouping.
Sludge and hazardous waste disposal areas are potential sources of contamination of
receiving waters. These operations include landfills, pits, ponds, lagoons, and deep-well
injection sites. Depending on the construction and operation of these sites there may be a
potential for leachate containing toxic pollutants or hazardous substances to seep into
groundwater, eventually reaching surface waters, or for liquids to overflow to surface waters
from these disposal operations. BMP requirements are not intended to duplicate the
requirements of RCRA. Actions taken for compliance with RCRA may be referenced in the
BMP plan.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
BMPs may include some of the same practices used by industry for pollution control,
SPCC plans for oil and hazardous substances, safety programs, fire protection, protection
against loss of valuable raw materials or products, insurance policy requirements or public
relations. The minimum requirements of a BMP Plan are listed in Table 1 and are divided into
two categories: general requirements and specific requirements.
Table 1. Minimum Requirements of a BMP Plan
A. General Requirements
1. Name and location of facility
2. Statement of BMP policy and objectives
3. Review by plant manager
B. Specific Requirements
1. RMP Committee
2. Risk Identification and Assessment
3. Reporting of BMP Incidents
4. Materials Compatibility
5. Good Housekeeping
14-17

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 1O/18, 1 - 1:51 PM
6. Preventive Maintenance
7. Inspections and Records
8. Security
9. Employee Training
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
The BMP plan should be organized and described in an orderly narrative format and
should be reviewed by the plant engineering staff and plant manager. A description of the
facility, including the plant name, the type of plant, processes used, and the products
manufactured should be included in the BMP plan. A map showing the location of the facility
and the adjacent receiving waters also should be part of the plan. Specific objectives for the
control of toxic pollutants and hazardous substances should be included in the statement of
corporate policy.
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
Each of the 9 specific requirements listed in Table 1 should be addressed in the BMP
plan. The size and complexity of the BMP plan will vary with the corporate environmental
policy, size, complexity, and location of the facility, among other factors. It is anticipated that
the length and detail of the BMP plan will be commensurate with the quantity of toxic and
hazardous chemicals onsite and their opportunity for discharge. A fundamental concept of the
BMP plan is determining the potential for toxic and hazardous chemicals to reach receiving
waters and taking appropriate preventive measures.
Discussions of the specific requirements are presented on the following pages. Each
specific requirement contains important elements that should be considered in developing a
BMP plan. All elements may not be applicable to all facilities. Elements should be added,
deleted, or modified to fit the needs of a particular facility. Permittees are encouraged to use
innovative techniques to achieve equivalent results.
1. BMP Committee
The BMP Committee is that group of individuals within the plant organization which is
responsible for developing the BMP plan and assisting the plant management in its
implementation, maintenance, and updating. Thus, the Committee’s functions are similar to
those of a plant fire prevention or safety committee.
14-18

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
The scope of activities and responsibilities of the BMP Committee should include all
aspects of the facility’s BMP plan, such as identification of toxic and hazardous materials
handled in the plant; identification of potential spill sources; establishment of incident
reporting procedures; development of BMP inspection and records procedures; review of
environmental incidents to determine and implement necessary changes to the BMP plan;
coordination of plant incident response, cleanup and notification of authorities; establishment
of BMP training for plant personnel; and aiding interdepartmental coordination in carrying out
the BMP plan.
Other Committee duties could include review of new construction and changes in
processes and procedures at the facility relative to spill prevention and control. The
Committee can also periodically evaluate the effectiveness of the overall BMP plan and make
recommendations to management on BMP-related matters.
Plant management has overall responsibility for the BMP plan . The plan should contain
a clear statement of the management’s policies and responsibilities related to BMPs.
Authority and responsibility for immediate action in the event of a spill should be clearly
established and documented in the BMP plan, with the Committee indirectly involved in that
responsibility. The Committee should advise management on the technical aspects of
environmental incident control, but should not impede the decisionmaking process for
preventing or mitigating spills and incidents.
The size and composition of the BMP Committee should be appropriate to the size and
complexity of the plant and the specific toxic and hazardous chemicals handled at the plant.
Facility personnel knowledgeable in spill control and waste treatment such as environmental
specialists, production foreman, safety and health specialists, and treatment plant supervisor
should be included. In some small plants, the Committee might consist of the one manager or
engineer assigned responsibility for environmental control. For very small facilities, the
Committee function might even have to be fulfilled by competent engineers or managers from
the corporate staff or the nearest large plant.
A list of personnel on the BMP Committee should be included in the BMP plan. The list
should have the office and home telephone numbers of the Committee members and the
names and phone numbers of backup or alternate people.
14-19

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
Elements of the “BMP Committee,” listed below, should be considered in developing a
BMP plan:
Inclusion of facility personnel knowledgeable in spill control, safety and health, and
waste treatment such as environmental specialists, production foreman, occupational
safety and health specialists, and treatment plant supervisor.
Responsibility for:
— Providing assistance to plant management for developing a BMP plan
— Providing assistance to plant management in implementing, maintaining, and
updating the BMP plan
— Identifying toxic and hazardous substances
— Identifying potential spill sources
— Establishing BMP incident reporting procedures
— Developing BMP inspections and records procedures
— Reviewing environmental incidents
— Coordinating plant incident response, cleanup, and notification procedures
— Establishing BMP training for plant and contractor personnel
— Providing assistance for interdepartmental coordination in carrying out the BMP
plan
— Reviewing new construction and changes in processes and procedures
— Evaluating the effectiveness of the BMP plan
— Making recommendations to management in support of corporate policy on BMP-
related matters.
2. Risk Identification and Assessment
The areas of the plant subject to BMP requirements should be identified by the BMP
Committee, plant engineering group, environmental engineer, or others in the plant. Each
area should be examined for the potential risks for discharges to receiving waters of toxic
pollutants or hazardous substances from ancillary sources. Any existing physical means
(dikes, diversion ditches, etc.) of controlling such discharges also should be identified.
The areas described above should be clearly indicated on a plant plot plan or drawing. A
simplified materials flowsheet showing major process operations can be used to indicate the
direction and quantity of materials flowing from one area to another. The direction of flow of
potential spills and surface runoff could also be estimated based on site topography and
indicated on the plant site drawings. Dry chemicals which are toxic pollutants or hazardous
substances should be evaluated if they have the potential to reach navigable waters in
significant quantities via rainfall runoff, for example.
14-20

-------
l6OAJDisk #1 - 10/18/91 1:51 PM
A hazardous substance and toxic chemical (materials) inventory should be developed
as a part of the “Risk Identification and Assessment.” The detail of the materials inventory
should be proportionate to the quantity of toxic pollutants and hazardous substances on site
and their potential for reaching the receiving waters. For example:
1. The plant has determined that materials stored in bulk quantities at a tank farm
have a high potential for reaching the receiving waters in the event of structural
failure or overfills. Therefore, the materials inventory for the tank farm should be
detailed, and should provide the identity, quantifies, and locations of each material.
2. The plant has determined that materials stored in small quantities at the research
laboratory have a low potential for reaching the receiving waters. Therefore, the
materials inventory for the laboratory could be minimally detailed, and may not
include the identity, quantity, or location of each material but might include an
estimate of the total quantity of toxic and hazardous materials stored and would
provide the location of the laboratory. The rational for the “low risk” nature of the
laboratory would be provided in this part of the BMP plan.
3. The plant has determined that materials used in a batch operation in the
manufacturing process have a high potential for reaching the receiving water. The
plant supplies a variety of products through the batch operation process to
accommodate fluctuations in public demand. Consequently, the materials used for
the batch process vary from week to week, oftentimes unexpectedly. Therefore, the
materials inventory for the batch operation should be detailed but remain flexible.
The inventory might include the identification of each material expected for use, and
the maximum quantity of material that the batch process can handle. The materials
inventory could be updated to include any material substitutions unanticipated at
the time of the original inventory.
The examples above illustrate the flexibility of the materials inventory. A materials
inventory should be part of the “Risk Identification and Assessment” of every BMP plan but
the detail of the inventory will vary with the size and complexity of the plant, the quantities of
toxic and hazardous chemicals on site and the potential for those materials to reach surface
waters. Determining the potential for incidents reaching receiving waters as well as the
detail needed for the materials inventory requires sound engineering judgment.
The materials inventory and other useful technical information should be made available
to the BMP Committee but may require separate filing from the BMP plan documents to
protect proprietary information or trade secrets. These data may include physical, chemical,
toxicological, and health information (e.g., technical bulletins or material safety data sheets)
on the toxic pollutants and hazardous substances handled; the quantities involved in various
14-2

-------
160A/Disk#I - 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
operations or ancillary sources; and the prevention, containment, mitigation, and cleanup
techniques that are used or would be used in the event of a discharge.
Materials planned for future use in the plant should be evaluated for their potential to be
discharged in significant amounts to receiving waters. Where the potential is high, the same
type of technical data described above should be obtained.
Elements of “Risk Identification and Assessment,” listed below, should be considered
in developing a BMP plan:
• Identification of areas of the plant subject to BMP requirements
• Examination of identified areas for potential risks of BMP incidents reaching receiving
waters
• Identification of existing site-specific or pollutant-specific containment measures
• Plant plot plans or drawings that clearly label the identified areas
• Simplified flowsheet(s) of the major process operations
• Estimation of the direction of flow of potential discharges toward navigable waters
• Evaluation of the potential for materials planned for future use to be discharged to
receiving waters in significant amounts.
• Materials inventory system tailored to the need of the particular facility
• Physical, chemical, toxicological, and health information on the toxic and hazardous
chemicals on site.
3. Reporting of BMP Incidents
A BMP incident reporting system is used to keep records of incidents such as spills,
leaks, runoff, and other improper discharges for the purpose of minimizing recurrence,
expediting mitigation or cleanup activities, and complying with legal requirements. Reporting
procedures defined by the BMP Committee should include notification of a discharge to
appropriate plant personnel to initiate immediate action; formal written reports for review and
evaluation by management of the BMP incident and revisions to the BMP plan; and
notification as required by law to governmental and environmental agencies in the event that
a spill or other reportable discharge reaches the surface waters.
The reporting system should designate the avenues of reporting and the responsible
company and government officials to whom the incidents would be reported. A list of names,
office telephone numbers, and residence telephone numbers of key employees in the order of
14-22

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 1O/18 1 - 1:51 PM
responsibility should be utilized when necessary for immediate reporting of BMP incidents to
plant management for implementation of emergency response plans.
A communications system should be designated and available for notification of an
impending or actual BMP incident. Reliable communications with the person or persons
directly responsible would expedite immediate action and countermeasures to prevent
incidents or to contain and mitigate discharged chemicals. Such a communication system
could include telephone or radio contact between transfer operations, and alarm systems that
would signal the location of an incident. Provisions to maintain communications in the event
of a power failure should be addressed.
Written reports on all BMP incidents should be submitted to the plant’s BMP
Committee and plant management for review. Written reports should include the date and
time of the discharge, weather conditions, nature of the materials involved, duration, volume,
cause, environmental problems, countermeasures taken, people and agencies notified, and
recommended revisions, as appropriate, to the BMP plan, operating procedures, and/or
equipment to prevent recurrence.
Procedures and key data should be outlined for necessary reporting of BMP incidents to
federal, state, and local regulatory authorities. In some circumstances, voluntary reporting to
authorities such as municipal sewage treatment works, drinking water treatment plants, and
fish and wildlife commissions may be desirable. The plant individuals responsible for
notification should be listed. Pertinent telephone numbers should be listed for those
individuals in the plant and those in the agencies to be notified. The phone numbers should
be reviewed periodically for accuracy and might actually be used in the course of a “spill
drill.”
Elements of “Reporting of BMP Incidents,” listed below, should be considered in
developing a BMP plan:
• Maintenance of records of incidents through formal reports for internal review
• Notification as required by law to governmental and environmental agencies should
an incident occur
• Procedures for notifying the appropriate plant personnel and taking preventive or
mitigating actions
• Identification of responsible company and government officials
14-23

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 1O/18, 1 - 1:51 PM
• A list of names, office telephone extensions, and residence telephone numbers of key
personnel
• A communications system for reporting incidents in-plant (i.e., telephone, alarms,
radio, etc.).
4. Materials Compatibility
Incompatibility of materials can cause equipment failure resulting from corrosion, fire, or
explosion. Equipment failure can be prevented by ensuring that the materials of construction
for containers handling hazardous substances or toxic pollutants are compatible with the
containers’ contents and surrounding environment.
Materials compatibility encompasses three aspects: compatibility of the chemicals
being handled with the materials of construction of the container, compatibility of different
chemicals upon mixing in a container, and compatibility of the container with its environment.
The specific requirement of materials compatibility in the BMP plan should provide
procedures to address these three aspects in the design and operation of the equipment on
site handling toxic and hazardous materials.
The BMP documentation on materials compatibility should recognize the engineering
practices already used in the plant, and should summarize these existing practices with
regard to corrosion and other aspects of material compatibility. Specific consideration should
be given to procedures and practices delineating the mixing of chemicals and the prohibition of
mixing of incompatible chemicals which might result in fire, explosion, or unusual corrosion.
Thorough cleaning of storage vessels and equipment before being used for another chemical
should be standard practice to ensure that there is no residual of a chemical that is
incompatible with the second, or later, chemical to be used. Coatings or cathodic protection
should be considered for protecting a buried pipeline or storage tank from corrosion.
Where applicable, material testing procedures should be described. Proposed
substitutions for currently used toxic or hazardous chemicals should be studied to determine
whether the construction materials of the existing containers are compatible with the
proposed new conditions. The procedures utilized by the plant or an outside contractor to
perform the materials compatibility study should be documented. Materials compatibility
aspects of waste disposal which are covered by the RCRA hazardous waste regulations
should be referenced in the BMP plan.
14—24

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 1O/18 1 - 1:51 PM
Elements of “Materials Compatibility,” listed below, should be considered in
developing a BMP plan:
• Evaluation of process changes or revisions for materials compatibility
• Incorporation of existing engineering practices for materials of construction, corrosion,
and other aspects of materials compatibility
• Evaluation of procedures for mixing of chemicals and of possible incompatibility with
other chemicals present
• Cleansing of vessels and transfer lines before they are used for another chemical
• Use of proper coatings and cathodic protection on buried pipelines if required to
prevent failure due to external corrosion.
5. Good Housekeeping
Good housekeeping is essentially the maintenance of a clean, orderly work environment
and contributes to the overall facility pollution control effort. Periodic training of employees on
housekeeping techniques for those plant areas where the potential exists for BMP incidents
reduces the possibility of incidents caused by mishandling of chemicals or equipment.
Examples of good housekeeping include neat and orderly storage of bags, drums, and
piles of chemicals; prompt cleanup of spilled liquids to prevent significant runoff to navigable
waters, sweeping, vacuuming, or other cleanup of accumulations of dry chemicals as
necessary to prevent them from reaching receiving waters; and provisions for storage of
containers or drums to keep them from protruding into open walkways or pathways.
Maintaining employee interest in good housekeeping is a vital part of the BMP plan.
Methods for maintaining good housekeeping goals could include housekeeping inspections by
supervisors and higher management; discussions of housekeeping at meetings; and publicity
through posters, suggestion boxes, bulletin boards, slogans, incentive programs, and
employee publications.
Elements of “Good Housekeeping,” listed below, should be considered in developing a
BMP plan:
• Neat and orderly storage of chemicals
• Prompt removal of spillage
• Maintenance of dry and clean floors by use of brooms, vacuum cleaners, etc.
14-25

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
• Proper pathways and walkways and no containers and drums that protrude onto
walkways
• Minimum accumulation of liquid and solid chemicals on the ground or floor
• Stimulation of employee interest in good housekeeping.
6. Preventive Maintenance
An effective preventive maintenance (PM) program is important to prevent BMP
incidents. A PM program involves inspection and testing of plant equipment and systems to
uncover conditions which could cause breakdowns or failures with resultant significant
discharges of chemicals to receiving waters. The program should prevent breakdowns and
failures by adjustment, repair, or replacement of items. A PM program should include a
suitable records system for scheduling tests and inspections, recording test results, and
facilitating corrective action. Most plants have existing PM programs which provide a degree
of environmental protection. It is not the intent of the BMP plan to require development of a
redundant PM program. Instead, the objective is to have qualified plant personnel (e.g., BMP
Committee, maintenance foreman, environmental engineer) evaluate the existing plant PM
program and recommend to management those changes, if any, needed to address BMP
requirements.
A good PM program should include the following: (1) identification of equipment or
systems to which the PM program should apply (2) periodic inspections or tests of identified
equipment and systems; (3) appropriate adjustment, repair, or replacement of items; and (4)
maintenance of complete PM records on the applicable equipment and systems.
The BMP plan documentation on PM may include a list of procedures, examples of
recordkeeping, a list of the principal systems to which the PM program is applicable, and
directions for obtaining the records for any particular system included or referenced in the
BMIP plan. In general, it will be adequate to reference in the BMP plan the scope and location
of existing PM procedures and records applicable to the PM specific requirements.
Elements of “Preventive Maintenance,” listed below, should be considered in
developing a BMP plan:
• Identification of equipment and systems to which the PM program should apply
• Periodic inspections of identified equipment and systems
• Periodic testing of such equipment and systems
14-2

-------
160A/Disk#1 - 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
• Appropriate adjustment, repair, or replacement of parts
• Maintenance of complete PM records on the applicable equipment and systems.
7. Inspections and Records
The purpose of the inspection and records system is to detect actual or potential BMP
incidents. The BMP plan should include written inspection procedures and optimum time
intervals between inspections. Records to show the completion date and results of each
inspection should be signed by the appropriate supervisor and maintained for a period of three
years. A tracking (follow-up) procedure should be instituted to assure that adequate
response and corrective action have been taken. The recordkeeping portion of this system
can be combined with the existing spill reporting system in the plant.
While plant security and other personnel may frequently and routinely inspect the plant
for BMP incidents, these people are not necessarily capable of assessing the potential for
such incidents. Thus certain inspections should be assigned to designated qualified
individuals, such as maintenance personnel or engineering staff.
The inspection and records system should include those equipment and plant areas
identified in the “Risk Identification and Assessment” portion of the BMP plan as having the
potential for significant discharges. To determine the inspection frequency and inspection
procedures, competent environmental personnel should evaluate the causes of previous
incidents, and assess the probable risks for incident occurrence. Furthermore, the nature of
chemicals handled, materials of construction, and site-specific factors including age,
inspection techniques, and cost effectiveness, should be considered.
Qualified plant personnel should be identified to inspect designated equipment and plant
areas. Typical inspections should include examination of pipes, pumps, tanks, supports,
foundations, dikes, and drainage ditches. Records should be kept to determine if changes in
preventive maintenance or good housekeeping procedures are necessary. Each of the
ancillary sources should have “Inspection and Records” programs designed to meet the
needs of the particular facility.
Material storage areas for dry chemicals should be inspected for evidence of, or the
potential for, windblowing which might result in significant discharges. Liquid storage areas
should be inspected for leaks in tanks, for corrosion of tanks, for deterioration of foundations
14-27

-------
l6OAJDisk #1 - 10/18 /91 - 1:51 PM
or supports, and for closure of drain valves in containment facilities. Inspections could include
the examination of seams, rivets, nozzle connections, valves, and connecting pipelines.
Storage tanks should be inspected for evidence of corrosion, pitting, cracks, abnormalities,
and deformation and such evidence should then be evaluated.
For in-plant transfer and materials handling of liquids, inspections should include visual
examination for evidence of deterioration of pipelines, pumps, valves, seals, and fittings. The
general condition of items such as flange and expansion joints, pipeline supports, locking
valves, catch or drip pans, and metal surfaces, also should be assessed.
For loading and unloading operations, inspections during transfer of materials would
permit immediate response if an incident occurred. The conditions of pipelines, pumps,
valves, and fittings for liquid transfer systems and pneumatic conveying systems used for
transferring dry chemicals should be inspected. Inspections (together with monitoring)
should be used to ensure that the transfer of material is complete before flexible or fixed
transfer lines are disconnected prior to vehicular departure. Before any tank car or tank truck
is filled, the lower-most drain valve and all outlets of such vehicles should be closely
examined for evidence of leakage and, if necessary, tightened, adjusted, or replaced. Before
departure, all tank cars or tank trucks should be closely examined to ensure that all transfer
lines are disconnected and that there is no evidence of leakage from any outlet.
For plant runoff, inspections should be used for examining the integrity of the
stormwater collection system and the diversion or overflow structures, and for ensuring the
drain valves and pumps for diked areas are properly closed. The plant sewer and storm
sewer system should be periodically surveyed to ensure that toxic and hazardous pollutants
are not discharged in significant amounts. Inspections also should include diked areas to
ensure that hazardous and toxic chemicals are not discharged from inside diked areas to
waterways. Any liquid, including rainwater, should be examined, and where necessary,
analyzed, before being released from the diked areas to a receiving water.
For sludge and hazardous waste disposal sites, visual inspections should include
examinations for leaks, seepage, and overflows from land disposal sites such as pits, ponds,
lagoons, and landfills. Other procedures and inspection techniques should be considered on a
site-specific basis. Any inspections made or records kept to comply with RCRA may be
included in the BMP plan by reference.
14-28

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18191 - 1:51 PM
Elements of “Inspections and Records,” listed below, should be considered in
developing BMP plan:
Inspection of:
— Storage facilities
— Transfer pipelines
— Loading and unloading areas
— Pipes, pumps, valves, and fittings, tank corrosion (internal and external)
— Windblowing of dry chemicals
— Tank support or foundation deterioration
— Seams along drainage ditches and old tanks
— Deterioration of primary or secondary containment
— Housekeeping
— Drain valves on tanks
— Damage to shipping containers
— Conveying systems for dry chemicals
— Integrity of stormwater collection system
— Leaks, seepage, and overflows from sludge and waste disposal sites.
• Records of all inspections
• Tracking procedures to assure adequate response and corrective actions have been
taken when inspections reveal deficiencies.
8. Security
A security system is needed to prevent accidental or intentional entry to a plant which
might result in vandalism, theft, sabotage, or other improper or illegal use of plant facilities
that could possibly cause as BMP incident. Most plants have security systems to prevent
unauthorized entry leading to theft, vandalism, sabotage, and the like. The BMP plan should
describe those portions of the existing security system which ensure that the pertinent
chemicals are not discharged to receiving waters in significant quantities. Documentation of
the security system may require separate filing from the BMP plan documents to prevent
unauthorized individuals from gaining access to confidential information.
The BMP Committee, plant security manager, plant engineer, or other qualified plant
personnel should evaluate the coverage of the existing security system for those areas of the
plant and the equipment identified by the “Risk Identification and Assessment” specific
requirement as having the potential for significant discharges. They should recommend to
plant management any changes necessary to improve the security system.
14-29

-------
160A/Disk #1 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
Examples of security measures include: routine patrol of the plant by security guards in
vehicles or on foot; fencing to prevent intruders from entering the plant site; good lighting;
vehicular traffic control; a guardhouse or main entrance gate, where all visitors are required to
sign in and obtain a visitor’s pass; secure or locked entrances to the plant; locks on certain
valves or pump starters; and television surveillance of appropriate plant sites, such as plant
entrance, and loading and unloading areas.
Whenever possible, security personnel should be instructed to observe leaks from
tanks, valves, or pipelines while patrolling the plant and also be informed of the procedures to
follow when a spill or other discharge is detected. Many plants use contractor or plant
security personnel who may not be qualified or may not have time to carry Out such
surveillance. In such cases, the surveillance can be incorporated in the “Inspection and
Records” specific requirement and should be conducted by production or environmental staff.
Elements of “Security,” listed below, should be considered in developing a BMP plan:
• Routine patrols of plant by security personnel
• Fencing
• Good lighting
• Vehicular traffic control
• Controlled access at guardhouse or main entrance gate
• Visitor passes
• Locked entrances
• Locks on certain drain valves and pump starters
• Television monitoring.
9. Employee Training
Employee training programs should instill in personnel, at all levels of responsibility, a
complete understanding of the BMP plan, the processes and materials with which they are
working, the safety hazards, the practices for preventing discharges, and the procedures for
responding properly and rapidly to toxic and hazardous materials incidents. Employee
training meetings should be conducted at least annually to assure adequate understanding of
the objectives of the BMP plan and the individual responsibilities of each employee.
Typically, these meetings could be a part of routine employee meetings for safety or fire
protection. Such meetings should highlight previous spill events or failures, malfunctioning
14-30

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
equipment components, and recently developed BMP precautionary measures. Training
sessions should review the BMP plan and associated procedures. Just as fire drills are used
to improve the employee’s reaction to a fire emergency, spill or environmental incident drills
may serve to improve the employee’s reactions to BMP incidents. Plants are encouraged to
conduct spill drills on a quarterly or semi-annual basis. Spill drills serve to evaluate the
employees’ knowledge of BMP-related procedures and are a fundamental part of employee
training.
Of particular importance is the strong commitment and periodic input from top
management to the employee training program to create the necessary climate of concern for
a successful program. A plant manger might accomplish more in a brief, face-to-face,
appearance than an elaborate, impersonal training program would accomplish.
Adequate training in a particular job and process operation is essential for
understanding potential discharge problems. Knowledge of specific manufacturing operations
and how discharges could occur, or have occurred in the past, is important in reducing human
error that can lead to BMP incidents.
The training program also should be aimed at maldng employees aware of the protocol
used to report discharges and notifying the people responsible for response so that immediate
countermeasures can be initiated. In addition, personnel involved in BMP-incident response
would be trained to use cleanup materials such as sorbents, gelling agents, foams, and
neutralizing agents. As appropriate, they should be educated in safety precautions, in the
side effects of the chemicals they are working with, and in possible chemical reactions.
Operating manuals and standard procedures for process operations should include
appropriate sections of the BMP plan and the spill control program and should be readily
available for reference. Spill response drills, suggestion boxes, posters, and incentive
programs, can be used to motivate employees to be alert to the potential for discharges and
to their prevention.
The employee training program should include records of the frequency, and names and
positions of the employees trained as well as the lesson plans, subject material covered, and
instructors’ names and positions. BMP-related training may be combined with other forms of
training, such as safety and fire prevention at the discretion of the plant.
14-31

-------
160A/Disk #1 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
In addition to permanent personnel, contractors or temporary personnel should be
trained in procedures for preventing BMP incidents since these individuals may be unfamiliar
with the normal operating procedures or location of equipment (pipelines, tanks, etc.) at the
facility. Adequate supervision of contractor maintenance personnel should be provided to
minimize the possibility of BMP incidents resulting from damaging equipment such as buried
pipelines.
Elements of “Employee Training,” listed below, should be considered in developing the
BMP plan:
• Meetings held at least annually to assure adequate understanding of program goals
and objectives
• Environmental Incident (Spill) drills used at least semiannually
• Periodic input from management
• Adequate training in particular job and process operation and the effect on other
operations
• Transmission of knowledge of past incidents and causes
• Making employees aware of BMP plans and incident reporting procedures
• Training in the use of sorbents, gelling agents, foams, and neutralizing agents for
cleanup or mitigation of incidents
• Operating manuals and standard procedures
• Making employees aware of health risks of chemicals handled through both the
plant’s BMP plan and safety program
• Motivating employees concerning incident prevention and control
• Records of the personnel who were trained, and of the dates, instructors, subject
matter, and lesson plans of the training sessions
• Training and supervision of contractors and temporary personnel.
14-32

-------
160A/Disk #1 - 10/18/91 - 1:51 PM
BIBLIOGRAPHY
TECHNICAL GUIDANCE ON BMPs IN THE NPDES PROGRAM
Form of Guidance Title Date
Technical Paper Best Management Practices for Control of Toxic and 5iW79
Hazardous Materials; Thron, H.M. et al., presented at the
34th Purdue Industrial Waste Conference, Lafayette,
Indiana
Report EPA No. NPDES Best Management Practices Guidance Document; 12/79
600/9-79-045 Hydroscience Inc., EPA Contract Number 68-03-2568
Report NPDES Best Management Practice Guidance Document 6/81
(Revised); NPDES Technical Support Branch
Technical Paper Best Management Practices; Useful Tools for Cleaning Up, 4120/82
Thron, H.M. and Rogoshweski, P.J., presented at the 1982
Hazardous Material Spills Conference, Milwaukee,
Wisconsin
Case Histories NPDES Best Management Practices; Case Histories; JRS 1129/83
Associates, Inc., EPA Contract Number 68-01-5052
Technical Technical Guidance on Best Management Practices (BMPs) 4/15/83
Memorandum No. 1 in NPDES Permits; Jordan, J.W. to Regional Permit Branch
Chiefs
Technical Technical Guidance on Best Management Practices (BMPs) 3i23/84
Memorandum No. 2 in NPDES Permits; Jordan, J.W. to Regional Permit Branch
Chiefs
Information Best Management Practices (BMPs) in NPDES Permits; 6/3/85
Memorandum Grubs, Geoffrey to Regional Permit Branch Chiefs
Information Best Management Practices (BMPs) in NPDES Permits; 8129/86
Memorandum Gallup, James to Regional Permit Branch Chiefs
Information Best Management Practices (BMPs) in NPDES Permits; 8/11/87
Memorandum Gallup, James to Regional Permit Branch Chiefs
Information Best Management Practices (BMPs) in NPDES Permits; 8/19/88
Memorandum Gallup, James to Regional Permit Branch Chiefs
14-33

-------
PART LV
Permit No. VA 0005215
Page 1 of 3
BEST MANAGE NT PRACTICES CONDITIONS
A. General Condjtjo
1. BMP Plan
For purposes of this part, the terms “pollutant” or “pollutants” refer
to any substance listed as toxic under Section 3 0 7 (a)(j) of the Clean
Water Act, oil, as defined in Section 3 11(a)(1) of the Act, and any
substance listed as hazardous under Section 311 of the Act. The
permittee shall develop and implement a Best Management Practices
(BMP) plan which prevents, or minimizes the Potential for, the release
of pollutants from ancillary activities, including material storage
areas; plant site runoff; in—plant transfer, process and material
handling areas; loading and unloading operations, and sludge and waste
disposal areas, to the waters of the United States through plant site
runoff; spillage or leaks; sludge or waste disposal; or drainage from
raw material storage.
2. Implementation
The plan for General Conditions shall be developed within 12 months of
the effective date of this permit. An approval plan for General
Conditions shall be implemented within 24 months of the effective
permit date. Specific Conditions of this plan shall be implemented
within 24 months of the effective permit date.
3. General Requirements
The BMP plan shall:
a. Be doc .nnented in narrative form, and shall include any necessary
plot plans, drawings or maps.
b. Establish specific objectives for the control of pollutants.
(1) Each facility component or system shall be examined for its
potential for causing a release of significant amount of
pollutants to waters of the United States due to equipment
failure, improper operation, natural phenomena such as rain
or snowfall, etc.
(2) Where experience indicates a reasonable potential for
equipment failure (e.g., a tank overlfow or leakage), natural
condition (e.g., precipitation), or other circumstances to
result in significant amounts of pollutants reaching surface
waters, the plan should include a prediction of the direc-
tion, rate of flow and total quantity of pollutants which
could be discharged from the facility as a result of each
condition of circumstance.
c. Establish specific best management practices to meet the
objectives identified under paragraph b of this section,
14-34

-------
PART IV
Permit No. VA 0005215
Page 2 of 3
addressing each component or system capable of causing a release
of significant amounts of pollutants to the waters of the United
States, -and identifying specific preventative or remedial measures
to be implemented.
d. Include any special conditions established in Section B of this
Part.
e. Be reviewed by plant engineering staff and the plant manager.
4. Documentation
The permittee shall maintain a description of the BMP plan at the
facility and shall make the plan available to the permit is8uing
authority upon request.
5. BlIP Plan Modification
The perinittee shall amend the BlIP plan whenever there is a change in
the facility or change in the operation of the facility which
materially increases the potential for the ancillary activities to
result in a discharge of significant amounts of pollutants.
6. Modification for Ineffectiveness
If the BMP plan proves to be ineffective in achieving the general
objective of preventing the release of significant amounts of pol-
lutants to surface waters and the specific objectives and requirements
under paragraphs b and c of Section 3, the permit and/or the BlIP plan
shall be subject to modification to incorporate revised BlIP require-
ments.
B. Specific Conditions
The following Specific Conditions shall be implemented within 12 months of
the effective date of the permit.
1. Measures shall be taken to control potential discharges at the
folloving sites:
Building 1341 — Provide containment for freon and
hydrochloric acid tanks
Incinerator — Direct quench recycle overflow to a
treatment facility
Building 1329 — Control spills at the acid cleaning
facility
St. Juliens Building 332 — Control spills from drummed liquids.
Implement controls to ensure proper
operation of the oil transfer valve (Ply)
14-35

-------
1 1

-------
PRACTICAL EXERCISE
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
(1) What are the two basic ways that BMPs appear in NPDES permits?
(a)
(2) What is the legal authority for imposing BMPs in permits considering the
fact that no BMPs have been promulgated for specific .r dustries pursuant
to Section 304(e) of the Clean Water Act? _____________________________
(3) GIVEN TUE FOLLOWING SITUATION :
Luster Glass Inc. manufactures auto tempered and laminated glass in
Morris, Illinois. A recent compliance inspection revealed storage tank
number 42 containing 12,000 gallons of gasoline was leaking into the
Illinois River. The State compliance inspector, I. M. Curious, also
noticed generally poor housekeeping at Luster, including retired pumps and
miscellaneous pipes and fittings scattered throughout the plant area,
unidentified solid and liquid spills on roadways and a storage area near
the stream bank consisting of about fifty, S5 gallon drums in various
positions and states of deterioration. When questioned about the nature
and contents of the drums by the State compliance inspector, the Luster
plant manager, Wood U. Leave, replied, “They’re some old supplies we
discontinued.., some contain.. . nitric acid or some other acid. . . (cough
cough)... how about some lunch Mr. Curious?” As he was abruptly spun 180
degrees by Mr. Leave, Mr. Curious managed to scribble a note at the bottom
of his inspection report “may be a candidate for BMPs in reissued permit.”
DETERMINE :
You are the permit writer assigned to draft Luster Glass Inc. s NPDES
permit. After reading the compliance inspection report, you sketch your
approach for using BMPs in the reissued permit:
BMP Plan — Conditions at the facility, especially poor housekeeping,
warrant a BMP plan to be developed within six months and implemented
within twelve months of permit reissuance. The SM? ?lan should address
each of the nine specific requirements described in the June 1981, N?DES
BMP Guidance Document with emphasis on _________________________________
Site—Specific BMPs
(1) Tank Number 42 : _______________
(2) Drum Storage Area : ____________
14-37

-------
POLLUTION PREVENTION

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Orientation to Pollution Prevention
• Implementation
• Tools and Resources
NOTES:
15—1

-------
HIERARCHY OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
PRACTICES
• Source reduction
• Environmentally sound reuse and recycling
• Treatment
• Disposal
NOTES:
J 52

-------
POLLUTION PREVENTION ACT 1990
“Source reduction means any practice which reduces the
amount of any hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant
entering any waste stream or released into the environment
prior to recycling, treatment or disposal . . .
EPA POLICY STATEMENT
Pollution prevention is the
“Use of processes, practices, or products that reduce or
eliminate the generation of pollutants and wastes, including
those that protect natural resources through conservation
-
or more efficient utilization.”
NOTES:
15-3

-------
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITIES AFFECTING
THE LIFE CYCLE OF A CHEMICAL
SARA
SARA
“CA
___
Fesdstocks — . - Underground
— --- - (RCRA)
W at — —
—- -:_-_-_-_- _-_ 1
SDWA
1i
Industrial Products
OSHA, FIFRA
Consumer Products (RCRA)
CPSA, FFDCA,
FIFRA
(RCRA)
ClssnAlrAct
• Consumer Product Safety Act
• Clean Water Act
• Federal Food, Diug & Cosmetic Act
Federal insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act
• Hazardous Materials Trsnspoiiatlon Act
• Occupational Safety & Heafth Act
• Resource Sonservstlon & Recovery Act
• Safe Drinking Water Act
• Toxic Substances Conttol Act
• Superfund Amendments & Reauthorization Act
Tanks
W W WdW CWA ______
•KEY.
CAA
cP$A
CWA
FFDCA
F1FRA
HUTA
OSHA
RCRA
SDWA
TSCA
SARA
15-4

-------
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPPORTUNITIES IN THE
NPDES PERMITTING PROCESS
• Application review
• Site visit
• BMP plan requirement
• Monitoring conditions
NOTES:
15-5

-------
PERMIT ISSUANCE PROCEDURES

-------
The issuance process
Documenting development
EPA/State coordination
Public participation
Permit appeals
Modification/termination
S
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
.
S
S
S
NOTES:
16-i

-------
COMMON ELEMENTS OF THE ISSUANCE PROCESS
Permit Application
Filed
_______1
Site Visit Conducted
Permit Appealed
H
Judicial Review
Permit Issued
(Process Repeats Itself)
Additional
Data Requested
Draft Permit
Publicly Noticed
Application Review
for Completeness and
Accuracy
Permit Denied; or Permit
Limits Drafted and Other
Conditions Developed
Draft Permit Reviewed
by Applicant
Comments Considered and
Draft Permit Revised
CompliancelMonitoring -
Enforcement During
Effective Period of Permit
Permit Renewal
Application Filed
16-2

-------
CONTENTS OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
• Application and supporting data
• Draft permit
• Statement of basis or fact sheet
• Items cited in statement of basis or fact sheet
• Other items supporting permit development
NOTES:
16-3

-------
CONTENTS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
A brief explanation follows of the xpress statutoiy or reguiatory precision on which permit requirements are based,
induding appropriate supporting references to the Administrative Record reqwred by 40 CFR S 124.9:
The following items are used to establish the basis of the draft permit:
(1) NPDES Permit No. LA0002933, effective date 2/17/80, expiration date 3/31/81.
(2) Consolidated Permit Application Forms No. 1 and 20 received 4/3/82.
(3) Louisiana Water Quality Criteria, LSCC, 1977.
4) Louici np Water Quality Management Plan, Department of Natural Resources, induding Appendix D
(Ponchartrain Basin) and Appendix F kci cc ppi River), Phase [ 1, Vols. 1.
(5) 40 CFR Part 415 Subpart F, [ 47 28260, 6/29/83J.
(6) 40 CFR Part 415.65(b) [ 39 f , X16, 3/12/74].
(7) Letter White (EPA) to Viacos (Vulcan) dated 3/29/76.
(8) Letter White (EPA) to Campbell (Vulcan) DAted 6/9/76.
(9) ROC Hale (EPA) to Leonard (Vulcan) dated 11/10/76.
(10) 4OCFR Part 122.29 (d)(1) [ 48fE, 14146, 4/1/831.
(11) Letters Gordon (Vulcan) to McHam (EPA) dated 5/17/82 and 7/19/82.
(12) 40 CFR Part 401.17,6/4/82.
(1.3) Letters Gordon (Vulcan) to Hale (EPA) dated 1/30/81.
(14) Discharge Monitoring Reports 1980-1982.
(15) 40 CFR Part 1.22.62(a)(3) [ 48 fE 14146,4/1/83].
(16) 40 CFR Part 122.44(1)(2)(1) [ 48 fE 1 14146, 4/1/83).
(17) 40 CFR Part 413.65(b) [ 47 fE 28260,6/29/82).
(18) 40 CFR Part 415.62(b) [ 47 f , 28260,6/29/82].
:19) Final Development Document for Inorganic Chemicals,
EPA 440/1-82/0c17, June 1982.
(20) Letter Gordon (Vulcan) to Ferguson (EPA) dated 10/30/79.
(21) 40 CFR Part 125.3(a)(2)(v) [ 44 32948,6/7/89, as amended at 45EE, 33512, 5/19/80).
(22) 40 CFR part 413.63(b) [ 47 f 28260,6/29/82).
(23) 40 CFR Part 1.fl.29(d)(2) [ 48 EE 14146,4/1/83].
(24) 40 CFR Part 141.12 [ 40 fE, 59570,12/24/75, as amended at 44 f 68641, 11/29/79.
(25) Preamble to Inorganic Chemical Effluent Limitations Guidelines 47 f 28263,6/29/82, Column 3].
(26) ROC McHam (EPA) to Gordon (Vulcan) dated 5/25/83.
(27) EPA Treatability Manual, EPA 600/2-82/001, September 1982 (Revised).
(28) Work Book for Determining Economic Achievabilitv for NPDES Permits : prepared for Hap Thron, Permits
Division; prepared by Purn, m . Hayes & Bartlett; Inc . August 1982.
(29) Moody’s Industrial Manual . 1982, pp. 4602-4605
(30) CE Plant Cost Index . Chemical Engineering Magazine, 6/1.3/83, page 7.
16-4

-------
REASONS FOR GOOD DOCUMENTATION
• Streamlines reissuance/compliance-monitoring process
• Permanent record of the basis for the permit
• Explanation of basis of permit for public, management, permittee,
and attorneys, if appealed
• Provide sound basis for modifications and future permits
• Requires permit writer to be organized and logical, resulting
in better permits
ELEMENTS OF A GOOD FACT SHEET
• Identify party being permitted
• Bring forward background and history of permit
• Develop rationale for all pertinent permit decisions
• Display all calculations and document sources of data
• Keep accessible to permitting authority personnel and the public
NOTES:
16—5

-------
SUGGESTED OUTLINE FOR A FACT SHEET
A. Reason for permit
B. Basic facility information
C. Draft permit effluent limitations and conditions
1. Specific comments:
a. Discuss each pollutant limited by permit
1. Flow
2. BOD 5
3. pH
4. Ammonia
5. Metals
6. Others
D. Monitoring conditions
1. Reason for type and frequency
2. Analytical methods
3. Reporting frequency
E. Special conditions
1. Compliance schedules
2. Additional monitoring
3. BMP requirement
NOTES:
16-6

-------
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT
FACT SHEET
Perinittee Name: Luster Glass, Inc.
NPDES Permit
Number: 1L0654321
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 319
Morris, IL 60123
Location: 1 River Ridge Drive
Morris, IL 60123
Contact Person: Mr. John Baker, Vice President
Telephone: (312) 834—4536
I. Status of Permit
NPDES Permit No. 1L0654321 was issued on August 5, 1984, became
effective on August 31, 1984, and expired on August 31, 1989. The
permittee submitted art NPDES permit application for the renewal of
the permit on March 1, 1989.
II. Facility Description
Luster Glass Inc. operates a manufacturing facility in Morris, IL.
The facility specializes in manufacturing auto glass. On average,
40,000 sq. ft./day of auto tempered glass, and 275,000 sq. ft./day
of auto laminated glass is produced at the facility.
III. Description of Discharge
All wastewater generated at this facility is discharged through
Outfall 001 to the Illinois River. The primary waste streams
discharged through Outfall 001 are process and rinse waters from
the glass manufacturing processes and cooling tower blowdown. The
glass manufacturing process wastewaters from auto glass tempering
(cutting, grinding, polishing edges, bending, and tempering) and
auto glass lamination (cutting, bending, washing, and laminating)
are routed through a wastewater treatment system consisting of oil
and water separators and settling basins. The cooling tower
blowdown is not treated prior to discharge.
IV. Receiving Water
The receiving water for Outfall 001 is the Illinois River, Segment
16 of the Northern Illinois River Basin. Downstream of the
facility, the Illinois River flows approximately 3 miles to Segment
15 of the Northern Illinois River Basin. Following is a summary of
flow data for Segment 16 of the Illinois River:
16-7

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 2 of 21
Average Flow - 446.7 cfs
Harmonic Mean Flow — 245.5 cfs
7Q 10 — 70.9 cfs
1Q10 — 58.8 cfs
The use designations for the Illinois River are given below:
Indigenous Aquatic Life
The applicable water quality standards to protect these uses are
specified the State Water Pollution Control Rules in Part 302
(State Administrative Code, Title 35 — Environmental Protection;
Subtitle C — Water Pollution, Chapter 1; adopted March 17, 1989).
The effluent standards are found in Part 304.
V. Description of Discharge
a. Permit Application Summary
The following table summarizes the discharge characteristics of
Outfall 001 as reported in the NPDES permit application dated March
1, 1989:
Long-Term Daily
Parameter Average Maximum
Flow (MCD) 4.563 4.591
TSS (mg/i) 18.8 50.0
COD (mg/i) ND 50.0
pH (S.U.) 6.6 mm. 9.0 max.
Oil & Grease (mg/l) 12 22
Phosphorus (lbs/day) 19 29
Zinc (mg/i) 0.036 0.07
Lead (mg/i) 0.025 0.047
Note: Only data for parameters reported above detection limits are
shown above.
b. Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Data
A summary of DMR data is given in Table 1. This data was taken
from March 1988 through February 1989.
Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) testing performed during the last
year of the permit term (March 1988 to February 1989) demonstrated
acute toxicity at Outfall 001. Test results indicated a fathead
minnow LC5O of 8 percent and a Ceriodaphnia LC5O of 15.8 percent.
Chronic Toxicity tests also demonstrated toxicity at Outfall 001.
Chronic toxicity test results indicated a fathead minnow NOEC of
1.3 percent and a Ceriodaphnia NOEC of 2.7 percent. A summary of
WET data for Luster is also presented in Table 1.
16-8

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 3 of 21
VI. Proposed Technology-Based Effluent Limitations
Regulations promulgated at 40 CFR §122.44(a) require technology—
based effluent limitations to be placed in NPDES permits based on
National effluent limitations guidelines and standards, best
professional judgement (BPJ), or a combination of the two.
Discharges from Outfall 001 are subject to effluent limitations
given in 40 CFR Part 426 for the Glass Manufacturing Point Source
Category, and State effluent and water quality standards.
Limits were developed for Luster Glass Inc. based on an evaluation
of the permit application and DMRs. Lead and zinc were detected in
significant concentrations in the discharge as reported in DMRs.
While the previous permit did not contain limits for lead and zinc,
monitoring was required. Thus, technology-based effluent limits
were set for zinc found in the cooling tower blowdown. Technology—
based limits were also established for lead which is found in the
process wastewater, however water quality-based limits were found
to be more limiting (see Section VII of this Fact Sheet).
Effluent mass limits for total suspended solids (TSS), phosphorus,
and oil and grease are based on the best practicable control
technology currently available (BPT) limitations specified for the
Automotive Glass Tempering Subcategory in 40 CFR S426.62 and for
the Automotive Glass Laminating Subcategory in 40 CFR §426.72.
These limitations are shown below:
Automotive Glass Tempering Subcategory
Effluent Limits
Monthly Av . Daily Max.
Pollutant ( lb/l000ft ) ( 1b/1000ft 2
TSS 0.25 0.40
Oil and Grease 0.13 0.13
pH shall be within the range of 6.0 to 9.0 standard units.
Automotive Glass Laminating Subcategory
Effluent Limits
Monthly Avg. Daily Max.
Pollutant ( lb/l000ft 2 ) ( lb/ l000ft 2 )
TSS 0.90 0.90
Oil and Grease 0.36 0.36
Phosphorus 0.22 0.22
pH shall be within the range of 6.0 to 9.0 standard units.
16-9

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 4 of 21
Effluent limitations for oil and grease, TSS, phosphorus, and pH
from the process wastewater contribution to Outfall ooi are
calculated using the above effluent limits and the production rates
of 40,000 square feet per day of tempered glass and 275,000 square
feet per day of laminated glass. The TSS effluent limitations for
cooling tower blowdown are based on State Effluent Standards for
TSS in non-process wastewaters, including cooling tower blowdown.
Calculations of the effluent limitations are shown below. It
should be noted that both mass and concentration limits will be
applied to Outfall 001 for oil and grease, TSS, and phosphorus.
Oil and Grease
Mass Limitations (Monthly Average and Daily Maximum)
Oil & Grease = (40,000 ft 2 /day (tempered) x 0.13 lb/bOo ft 2 ) +
(275,000 ft 2 /day (laminated) x 0.36 lb/boo ft 2 ) = 5.2 + 99 = 104.2
lbs/day
Concentration Limitations - Outfall 001 (Monthly Average and Daily
Maximum)
Oil & Grease = (104.2 lbs/day) (454 g/ 1 lb) (1000 mg/ 1 g) (1 gal/
3.785 1) (1 day/ 4.563 106 gal) = 2.74 mg/i
TSs
Mass Limitations - Process Wastewater (Monthly Average)
T = [ (40,000 ft 2 /day (tempered) x 0.25 lb/bOO ft 2 ) + (275,000
ft’ ay (laminated) x 0.9 lb/bOO ft 2 )]/l000 = 257.5 lbs/day
Mass Limitations — Process Wastewater (Daily Maximum)
TSS = [ (40,000 ft 2 /day (tempered) x 0.4 lb/bOo ft 2 ) ÷ (275,000
ft 2 /day (laminated) x 0.9 lb/bOO ft 2 ))/1000 = 263.5 lbs/day
Mass Limitations - Cooling Tower Blowdown (Monthly Average)
TSS = (25 mg/i) (0.45 106 gal/day) (1 lb/454,000 mg) (3.785 1/gal) =
93.8 lbs/day
Mass Limitations - Cooling Tower Slowdown (Daily Maximum)
TSS = (50 mg/l) (0.45 106 gal/day) (1 lb/454,000 mg) (3.785 1/gal) =
187.6 lbs/day
Mass Limitations - Outfall 001 (Monthly Average)
TSS = 257.5 lbs/day + 93.8 lbs/day = 351.3 lbs/day
16-10

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 5 of 21
Mass Limitations - Outfall 001 (Daily Maximum)
TSS = 263.5 lbs/day + 187.6 lbs/day = 451.1 lbs/day
Concentration Limitations - Outfall 001 (Monthly Average)
TSS = (351.3 lbs/day) (454,000 mg/lb)(l gal/3.785 l)(day /4.563 106
gal) = 9.23 mg/i
Concentration Limitations - Outfall 001 (Daily Maximum)
TSS = (451.1 lbs/day) (454,000 mg/lb) (1 gal/3.785 1) (day /4.563 106
gal) = 11.86 mg/i
PhosDhorus
Mass Limitations — Outfall 001 (Monthly Average and Daily Maximum)
Phosphorus = 275,000 ft 2 /day (laminated) x 0.06 lb/bOO ft 2 ) = 16.5
lbs/day -
Concentration Limitations - Outfall 001 (Monthly Average and Daily
Maximum)
Phosphorus = (16.5 lbs/day)(454,000 mg/ib)(1 gal/3.785 1)(day
/4.563 106 gal) = 0.43 mg/i
pH limits are based on State effluent standards, as follows:
State Effluent Standards
Monthly Avg. Daily Max.
Pollutant/Parameter Range ( mg/i) ( Tng/1 )
pH 6.0 — 9.0 N/A N/A
16-11

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 6 of 21
Toxic Pollutants
Zinc and lead were detected in the effluent discharge when the
previous permit was issued. At that time no limits were set, but
a requirement was made to monitor for zinc and lead. Significant
concentrations of zinc (used as a corrosion inhibitor in cooling
water) and lead (from lead soldering of products) have been found,
as reported in DMRs. Therefore, technology—based effluent
limitations are being established and will be included in the draft
permit.
Technology-based effluent limitations for the toxic pollutant zinc
present in the cooling tower blowdown are based on the transfer of
the best available technology economically achievable (BAT)
limitations specified in the Steam Electric Effluent Guidelines and
Standards at 40 CFR §423.13(d)(1). These limitations are shown
below:
BAT Effluent Limitations
Monthly Avg. Daily Max.
Pollutant ( mg/U ( mg/U
Zinc (total) 1.0 1.0
Using the average blowdown flow from the cooling towers (0.45 mgd),
monthly average and daily maximum mass limitations are calculated
as follows:
Zinc = (1.0 mg/i) (0.45 106 gal/day) (1 lb/454,000 xng)(3.785 1/gal)
= 3.75 lbs/day
Equivalent end-of-pipe concentration effluent limitations are also
being established in the draft permit. Using the total Outfall 001
flow (4.563 mgd), monthly average and daily maximum concentration
limitations are calculated as follows:
Zinc = (3.75 lbs/day) (454,000 mg/lb) (1 gai/3.785 1) (day /4.563 106
gal) = 0.10 mg/i
Technology-based effluent limitations for lead found in the process
wastewaters are based on transfer of BAT limitations specified in
the Metal Finishing Effluent Guidelines and Standards at 40 CFR
§433.14(a). These limitations, which are based on the performance
of lime precipitation and sedimentation, are shown below.
BAT Effluent Limitations
Monthly Avg. Daily Max.
Pollutant ( mg/i) ( mg/i )
Lead (total) 0.43 0.69
16—12

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 7 of 21
Due to the potential for dilution of the treated process
wastewaters by the cooling tower blowdown wastewaters, both mass
and concentration limitations are established. Using the average
process flow (4.113 mgd), mass limitations are calculated as
follows:
Monthly Average
Lead = (0.43 mg/i) (4.113 106 gal/day) (1 lb/454,000 mg) (3.785 1/gal)
= 14.74 lbs/day
Daily Maximum
Lead = (0.69 mg/i) (4.113 106 gal/day) (1 lb/454,000 mg) (3.785 1/gal)
= 23.66 lbs/day
Equivalent end—of-pipe concentration effluent limitations are also
being established in the draft permit. Using the total Outfall 001
flow (4.563 mgd), concentration limitations are calculated as
follows: -
Monthly Average
Lead = (14.74 lbs/day) (454,000 rng/lb) (1 gal/3.785 1) (day /4.563 106
gal) = 0.38 mg/l
Daily Maximum
Lead = (23.66 lbs/day) (454,000 mg/lb) (1 gal/3.785 1) (day /4.563 106
gal) = 0.62 mg/l
VII. Proposed Water Oualjty-Based Effluent Limitations
The State water quality standards require that point source
discharges shall not cause a violation of any applicable water
quality standards nor interfere with the attainment or maintenance
of that water quality which assures the protection and propagation
of a balanced indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and
wildlife and allows recreational activities in and on the water.
In addition, a requirement of the State water quality standards is
that no effluent shall, alone or in combination with other sources,
cause a violation of any applicable water quality standard.
Temperature
Temperature limits are based on State water quality standards as
follows:
16-13

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 8 of 21
State Water quality Limits
Pollutant/parameter Range
Temperature Not greater than 2.8°C above ambient, or
1.7°C above the following maximum limits:
in December through March, 16°C (60°F)
and in April through November, 32°C (90°F)
Toxic Pollutants
Based on evaluation of the NPDES permit application and DMR data
submitted by Luster Glass Inc., the following pollutants and
parameters for which applicable State water quality standards are
available are present in Outfall 001: lead and zinc. Based on the
fact that no other toxic pollutants are expected to be present in
Outfall 001 at significant concentrations, evaluation for
compliance with water quality standards will only be performed for
lead and zinc.
The State water quality regulations require that water quality
standards be achieved under the following critical receiving water
flow conditions:
Chronic water quality standards:
7 day, 10 year return frequency flow (7Q10)
Acute water quality standards:
One-third (1/3) of the 7Q] .0 flow
The 7QlO for the Illinois River is 70.9 cubic feet per second (Cf s)
The facility provided a study of the outfall which showed that the
outfall quickly achieved complete mixing across the width of the
river. Dilution at the edge of the mixing zone can therefore be
characterized by the complete mixing equation:
Cr = (Cd) (Qd) + (Cs) (Qs)
(Qd + Qs)
where Cr = the receiving water concentration,
Cd = the effluent concentration,
Qd = the effluent flow,
Cs = the receiving water background concentration, and
Qs = the appropriate receiving water flow.
The receiving water concentrations (Cr) expected in the Illinois
River are calculated using the equation described above, and the
following data:
16-14

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 9 of 21
Effluent Receiving Water
Concentration (Cd)* Concentration (Cs)**
Pollutant ( mg/i) ( mg/i )
Lead 0.38 0
Zinc 0.2]. 0.07
* - Maximum daily concentration reported in the application Form 2C
** - Source U.S.G.S. STORET
For comparison with acute water quality standards, receiving water
concentrations are calculated as follows:
Cr (lead) = ((0.38 mg/i) (7.06 cfs) + (0mg/i) (23.6 cfs))/(7.06 cfs
+ 23.6 cfs)
= 0.088 mg/i
Cr (zinc) = ((0.21 mg/i) (7.06 cfs) + (0.07 mg/i) (23.6 cfs)]/(7.06
cfs + 23.6 cfs)
= 0.102 mg/i
For comparison with chronic water quality standards, receiving
water concentrations are calculated as follows:
Cr (lead) = ((0.38 mg/i) (7.06 cfs) + (0mg/i) (70.9 cfs))/(7.06 cfs
+ 70.9 cfs)
= 0.034 mg/i
Cr (zinc) = [ (0.21 mg/i) (7.06 cfs) + (0.07 mg/i) (70.9 cfs)]/(7.06
cfs + 70.9 cfs)
= 0.083 mg/i
The foliowing table compares each receiving water concentration
calculated above with the State Water Quality Standard for aquatic
life protection:
State Receiving Water
Standard Concentration
Pollutant jjig/l) ( hg/i)
Zinc
Chronic 110 83
Acute 120 102
Lead
Chronic 3.2 34
Acute 82 88
16—15

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 10 of 21
Since the calculated receiving water concentrations are less than
the criterion for zinc and greater than the criterion for lead,
water quality limits will be necessary for lead, but not for zinc.
It should be noted that the procedure used above does not account
for the variability of the pollutant concentrations in the
effluent. The EPA Technical Support Document for Water Quality-
based Toxics Control recommends accounting for this variability by
calculating the reasonable potential for pollutants to cause
exceedances of water quality standards. Specifically, the
reasonable potential is calculated using the maximum expected
effluent concentration, which is estimated by using a
multiplication factor (F) that incorporates both the coefficient of
variation (CV) and the number of effluent samples collected. If
this methodology were used with the existing data for Luster Glass,
Inc., there would be a reasonable potential for the concentration
of zinc in the discharge to exceed both the acute and chronic water
quality standards, and thus water quality permit limits will also
be calculated for zinc.
The following equation is used to calculate the effluent
concentrations [ which is commonly referred to as the waste load
allocation (WLA)] for lead and zinc that will ensure protection of
the State water quality standard.
Cd = WLA = Cr (Qd + Qs) - (Cs) (Qs)
Qd
where Cd = WLA = waste load allocation
Cr = the applicable water quality standard
Qd = the effluent flow = 7.06 Cf s
Qs = the appropriate receiving water flow
Cs = the receiving water background concentration
Based on the following information, the waste load allocations for
lead and zinc are calculated.
Cr = Acute State Water Cs Upstream
Pollutant quality Standard Concentration
Lead 0.082 mg/i o mg/i
Zinc 0.12 mg/i 0.07 mg/i
Cr = Chronic State Water Cs = Upstream
Pollutant Quality Standard Concentration
Lead 0.0032 mg/i 0 mg/l
Zinc 0.11 mg/i 0.07 mg/l
16-16

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 11 of 21
Lead (acute) Cd = [ (0.082 mg/l)(7.06 cfs + 23.6 cfs) — (0
mg/i) (23.6 cfs) ] / 7.06 cfs
= 0.36 mg/i
Lead (chronic) Cd = ((0.0032 mg/1)(7.06 cfs + 70.9 cfs) — (0
mg/i) (70.9 cfs)]/ 7.06 cfs
= 0.04 mg/i
Zinc (acute) Cd = ((0.12 lng/i)(7.06 cfs + 23.6 cfs) — (0.07
mg/i) (23.6 cfs)] / 7.06 cfs
= 0.29 mg/i
Zinc (chronic) Cd = ((0.11 mg/l)(7.06 cfs + 70.9 cfs) — (0.07
mg/i) (70.9 cfsfl/ 7.06 cfs = 0.51 mg/i
Given that all State water quality standards are expressed as never
to be exceeded (i.e., water quality-based limits must be protective
of the most stringent waste load allocation), a maximum daily
limitation (MDL) and a average monthly limitation (ANL) for lead
and zinc are calculated using the waste load allocations calculated
above. It should be noted that the ratio of daily maximum to
monthly average for the technology-based effluent limitations for
lead and zinc are used to derive the MDL and ANL. Specifically,
these ratios are 1.6 for lead and 1.0 for zinc.
Lead - Since the chronic WLA is more limiting than the acute WLA
(i.e., 0.04 mg/i < 0.36 mg/i), it will be used as the basis for
limitations. Since the chronic WLA can never be exceeded, 0.04
mg/i is used as the MDL. The AML is calculated as follows:
0.04 mg/i
_________ = 0.03 mg/i
1.6
Zinc — Since the acute WLA is more limiting than the chronic WLA
(i.e., 0.29 mg/i < 0.51 mg/i), it will be used as the basis for
iimitatjons. Since the acute WLA can never be exceeded, 0.029 mg/i
is used as the MDL. The ANL is calculated as follows:
0.29 mg/i
__________ = 0.29 mg/i
1.0
Comparing the chemical specific water quality-based limits
calculated above with the technology-based effluent limitations
calculated for Outfall 001 (see Section VI above), the water
quality-based limits for lead are more stringent than the
technology—based limits, so they will be used as the basis for
effluent limits in the permit. Since the technology—based effluent
limits for zinc are more stringent than the water quality-based
16-17

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 12 of 21
limits, the technology-based effluent limits will be used.
Equivalent end—of—pipe mass effluent limitations are also being
established in the draft permit. Using the total Outfall 001 flow
(4.563 mgd), mass limitations for lead are calculated as follows:
MDL = (0.04 mg/i) (4.563 106 gal/day) (1 lb/454,000 mg) (3.785 1/gal)
= 1.52 lbs/day
AML = (0.03 mg/i) (4.563 106 gal/day) (1 lb/454,000 mg) (3.785 1/gal)
= 1.14 lbs/day
Whole Effluent Toxicity
The previous NPDES permit issued to the Luster Glass facility
contained a requirement for conducting monthly acute and chronic
toxicity tests during the fourth and fifth year of the permit
(March 1988 through February 1989). The test species selected by
the facility was the fathead minnow, based on an initial comparison
of species sensitivity performed in February 1988. The results of
these toxicity tests were reviewed to determine whether an effluent
limit on toxicity should be developed for the permit.
The concentration of acute and chronic toxicity in the receiving
water is calculated and is then compared to the State water quality
standards. The receiving water concentrations for acute and
chronic toxicity were calculated using the following formula:
Cr = (Cd) (Qd) + (Cs) (Qs)
(Qd + Qs)
Where
Cr = receiving water concentration
Cd = effluent concentration
Qd = effluent flow
Cs = receiving water background concentration
Qs = appropriate receiving water flow
The following summarizes the toxicity data submitted by Luster
Glass for the period from March 1988 to February 1989:
16-18

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 13 of 21
Toxicity Data (Fathead minnows)
LC 50 NOEC
(% effluent) (% effluent)
58.0 50
25.2 3
55.0 10
46.3 30
44.8 25
5.9 1
67.8 10
3.9 1
50.1 30
52.0 10
32.1 3
41.7 30
All toxicity testing by Luster Glass involved the use of upstream
ambient water for the control and diluent, so that in all
calculations, the upstream toxicity is assumed to be zero. The
highest result of chronic toxicity measured was an NOEC equal to 1%
effluent. By dividing 1 into 100, the NOEC is converted to chronic
Toxic Units (TUe). Similarly for acute toxicity, the highest acute
toxicity was measured at an LC 50 equal to 3.9 % which converts to
25.6 TU 1 .
The resultant receiving water concentration (Cr) in toxic units for
both acute and chronic toxicity are calculated using the following
data:
Cs = 0
Qs = 23.6 cf S (one third the 7QlO for acute protection)
Qs = 70.9 cf S (the 7Ql0 for chronic protection)
Qd = 7.06 cfs
Acute
Cr = (25.6 TU 1 ) (7.06 cfs)/(7.06 cfs + 23.6 cfs)
= 5.9 TU
Chronic
Cr = (100 TUC) (7.06 cfs)/(7.06 cfs + 70.9 cfs)
= 9.1 TU
16-19

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 14 of 21
The State water quality standards for acute and chronic protection
are summarized below:
State Water Quality Standard for Acute Protection = 0.3 TU 1
State Water Quality Standard for Chronic Protection = 1.0 TU
WET limits would be necessary since the calculated receiving water
concentrations exceed the state water quality standards for both
acute and chronic protection:
For acute protection 5.9 TU 1 > 0.3 TU 1
For chronic protection 9.1 TU > 1.0 TTJC
Using steady state assumptions, the WLAs were calculated using the
following formula:
Cd = [ Cr(Qd + Qs)-(Cs)(Qs)] / Qd
where:
Cd = Concentration of the pollutant in the discharge, or waste
load allocation
Cr = State Water Quality Standard
for chronic protection = 1.0 TU
for acute protection = 0.3 TU 1
Qd = Discharge flow = 7.06 cfs
Qs = Appropriate receiving water flow
chronic flow (7Q10) = 70.9 cfs
acute flow = 23.6 cfs
Cs = Receiving water or upstream concentration = 0
Assuming zero background toxicity, the limits are calculated as
follows:
WLA (acute) = [ (0.3 TU 1 ) (7.06 cfs + 23.6 cfs)] — ((0) (23.6 cfs))
7.06 cfs
= 1.3 TU 1
WLA (chronic) = [ (1.0 TUG) (7.06 cfs + 70.9 cfs)) — [ (O)(70.9 cfs)]
7.06 cfs
= 11.0 TtJ
An acute to chronic ratio (ACR) was calculated from the toxicity
data by taking the average ACR from each data set as follows:
16—20

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 15 of 21
LC 50 NOEC
( % effluent) ( % effluent ) ACP.
58.0 50 1.16
25.2 3 8.40
55.0 10 5.50
46.3 30 1.54
44.8 25 1.79
5.9 1 5.9
67.8 10 6.78
3.9 1 3.9
50.1 30 1.67
52.0 10 5.20
32.1 3 10.7
41.7 30 1.’39
Average 4.5
The acute WLA (in TU 1 ) are converted to TU using the acute to
chronic ratio (ACR) as follows:
WLA (in TUac) = 1.3 TU 1 * ACR
= 1.3 TUa * 4 5
= 5.9 TU,
Given that all State water quality standards are expressed as never
to be exceeded (i.e., water quality-based limits must be protective
of the most stringent waste load allocation), a maximum daily
limitation (MDL) and a average monthly limitation (AML) for WET
were calculated using the waste load allocations calculated above.
A ratio of daily maximum to monthly average of 1.6 is assumed for
WET based upon technolgy-based effluent limits for lead.
Since the acute WLA is more limiting than the chronic WLA (i.e.,
5.9 TUac < 11.0 TUC), it will be used as the basis for limitations.
Since the acute WLA can never be exceeded, 5.9 TU is used as the
MDL. The AML is calculated as follows:
5.9 TU 1
________ = 3.7 TU
1.6
The permittee shall conduct chronic toxicity tests according to
methods outlined in “Short Term Methods for Estimating the Chronic
Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms”
(EPA 600/4—89 001)
16-21

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 16 of 21
VIII. Proposed Effluent Limitations
Table 2 summarizes the proposed ffluent limitations for Outfall
001. Proposed effluent limitations for zinc are based on BPJ. The
limitation for temperature is based on State water quality
standards. The proposed limitations for lead were calculated above
as chemical specific water quality-based limitations. The
remainder of the effluent limitations are based on BPT/BAT effluent
guidelines at 40 CFR Part 426 and State effluent standards.
IX. Monitoring Reguirementg
Monitoring for those pollutants expected to be present in Outfall
001 (i.e., TSS, oil and grease, phosphorus, lead, and zinc) will be
required once per week. Except for oil and grease, for which a
grab sample is required, 24—hour composite samples are required.
Temperature is to be monitored continuously during discharge.
Whole effluent toxicity testing for chronic toxicity shall be
conducted 2/month on a 24-hour composite sample of the final
effluent.
X. Special Conditions
Luster Glass Inc. will be required to update their existing Best
Management Practices (BMP) plan to address the potential for
leakage of gasoline from Tank Number 42 and nitric acid from the
drum storage area. Specifically, Luster Glass Inc. should
undertake the following two site-specific BMPs and incorporate them
into their plan. First, remedial action must be taken on Tank
Number 42 to repair the damaged tank. The gasoline must be
transferred to another vessel (e.g., tank truck) while the tank is
cleaned, repaired, welded or holes plugged. To prevent
environmental damage at this site in the future, the following BMPs
should be incorporated into the plan: visual inspection, secondary
containment, preventative maintenance, or some combination thereof.
Secondly, the drum storage area must be cleaned up by following
procedures such as the following: inventory the drums to identify
the contents and amounts of chemicals therein; inspect the drums
for deterioration or leaks, and segregate and adequately dispose of
the leaking or deteriorating drums; remove and adequately dispose
of any contaminated soil; neatly stack the remaining drums in a
manner to eliminate hazards to humans or the environment by
isolating the drums from walkways or roadways, placing them on an
impervious pad, covering the storage area, diking the area, moving
the storage area away from the stream or some combination thereof.
16-22

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 17 of 21
XI. Information Sources
While developing effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and
special conditions for the draft permit, the following information
sources were used:
(1) EPA NPDES Application Forms 1 and 2C dated October 1980 and
February 1985, respectively.
(2) State Effluent Standards, Part 304 of the State Administrative
Code, Title 35 — Environmental Protection; Subtitle C - Water
Pollution, adopted March 17, 1980.
(3) Division files related to the Luster Glass Inc. NPDES Permit
No. 1L0654321.
(4) State Water Quality Standards, Part 302 of the State
Administrative Code, Title 35 — Environmental Protection;
Subtitle C - Water Pollution, adopted March 17, 1980.
(5) EPA Technical Support Document for Water Quality-Based Toxics
Control.
(6) 40 CFR Parts 423, 433, and 426.
16-23

-------
TABLE 1
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT
LUSTER GLASS INC.
March 1988 through February 1989
Fact Sheet
Page 18 of 21
Date
03—88
Mon.
4.575
Flow
Avg.
(mgd)
Daily Max.
TSS
( lb/d)
180.4
Grease
(lb/d)
19
Phosphorus
( lb/d)
14
4.583
04—88
4.554
4.567
05—88
4.552
4.569
06—88
4.568
4.573
245.2
27
18
07—88
4.585
4.589
08—88
4.588
4.591
09—88
4.571
4.581
429.3
88
29
10—88
4.568
4.572
11—88
4.553
4.573
12—88
4.551
4.541
308.7
22
15
01—89
4.550
4.561
02—89
4.560
4.570
16-24

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 19 of 21
TABLE 1 (Continued)
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT
LUSTER GLASS INC.
March 1988 through February 1989
pH Temperature Zinc Lead COD
Date ( S.U.) ( degrees F) mg/i ) ( mg/i) 1mg/i )
03—88 6.6 80 0.21 0.10 50
04—88
05—88
06—88 7.1 83 0.08 0.17
07—88
08—88
09—88 9.0 78 0.09 0.12
10—8 8
11—88
12—88 8.1 61 0.06 0.38
01—8 9
02—89
16-25

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 20 of 21
TABLE 1 (Continued)
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT
LUSTER GLASS INC.
March 1988 through February 1989
Toxicity Test Data: Unless otherwise indicated, acute toxicity
tests were conducted using fathead minnow and
reported as 48 hr. LC 50 ; chronic toxicity tests
were conducted using fathead minnows and
reported as 7 day NOEC.
LC 50 NOEC
DATE (% effluent) (% effluent)
3/88 58.0 50
4/88 25.2 3
5/88 55.0 10
6/88 46.3 30
7/88 44.8 25
8/88 5.9 1
9/88 67.8 10
10/88 3.9 1
11/88 50.1 30
12/88 52.0 10
1/89 32.1 3
2/89 41.7 30
* Toxicity tests using Ceriodaphnia dubia 48 hour survival
(acute) and 7 day reproduction (chronic)
16-26

-------
Fact Sheet
Page 21 of 21
TABLE 2
PROPOSED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NPDES PERMIT NO. 1L0654321
DAILY MAXIMUM MONTHLY AVERAGE
PARAMETER LBS/DAY MG/L LBS/DAY MGIL
Flow (mgd) Report Report
TSS 451.1 11.86 351.3 9.23
Oil & Grease 104.2 2.74 104.2 2.74
Phosphorous 16.5 0.43 16.5 0.43
pH
Temperature -
Total Lead 1.52 0.04 1.14 0.03
Total Zinc 3.75 0.10 3.75 0.10
Whole Effluent
Toxicity (WET)
/ pH shall be within the range of 6.0 — 9.0 standard units
b/ Not greater than 2.8 degrees Centigrade above ambient, or
1.7 degrees Centigrade above the following maximum
limits:
December 1 through March 31 16 deg C (60 deg F)
April 1 through November 30 32 deg C (90 deg F)
g/ Discharges of effluent with toxicity greater than the
following amounts are prohibited: Maximum Daily Chronic
Toxicity of 5.9 TU, and Average Monthly Chronic Toxicity
of 3.7 TUG.
16-2 7

-------
EPA REVIEW OF STATE PERMITS
• Major municipal and industrials
• General permits
• Class I sludge facilities
• Other (minor) permits which:
- Discharge to territorial seas
- Affect another State’s waters
- Cooling water discharges> 500 MGD
- Process discharges >0.5 MGD
- Primary industry’s categories
NOTES:
16-28

-------
PUBLIC NOTICE
• Purpose of public notice
• Types of actions requiring public notice
- Tentative denial of application
- Preparation of draft NPDES permit
- Scheduling of hearing
- Formal appeal of permit
• Methods applicable to public notice process
- Publication in newspaper
- Direct mailing: who receives
• Contents of public notice
- Name and address of regulatory authority
- Name and address of permittee
- Brief description of facility
- Name, address, and telephone number of contact
- Additional information (EPA-issued permits)
• Timing of public notice
- After EPA/State review
- EPA/State MOA should address
• Significant comments must be responded to in writing
• Public hearing is always optional
NOTES:
16-29

-------
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
FINAL PERMIT DECISION
This is our response to comments received on the subject draft permit Ln
accordance with regulations promulgated at 40 CFR Part 124.17.
Permit No. LA0006 181
Applicant: Allied Chemical Corporation
P.O. Box 226
Geismar, Louisiana 70734
Issuing Office: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733
Prepared By: Edward C. McHam, Engineer
Industrial Permits Section (6W-PI)
Permits Branch
Water Management Division
(214) 655-7180
Permit Action: Final permit decision and response to comments -
received on the draft permit publicly noticed ott
7/7/84.
Date Prepared: 9/5/84
Unless otherwise stated, citations to 40 CFR refer to promulgated regulacLons
listed at Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, revised as of 7/1/83.
The following comments have been received on the draft permit:
Letter Dessert (Allied) to Caldwe].l (EPA) dated 7/30/84
ISSUE NO. 1
The draft permit establishes biomonitorii -tg requirements at Outfall 004. The
company requests deletion of these requirements.
RESPONSE NO. 1
The request is denied.
The permitte. states that biomonitoring will be duplicative and unnecessary
because:
(1) EPA has identified the toxic pollutants of concern.
(2) The proposed permit places BAT limits and monitoring requirei’encs
on these pollutants.
16-30

-------
PERMIT NO. LA0006181 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
(3) The BAT limits are more restrictive than water quality-based
limitations.
(4) Biomonitoring results could be distorted and masked by the osrnoti.c
stress on test organisms exerted by the salts present in an rF
plant effluent.
The biomonitoring method is a standardized method used throughout EPA Regton 6
to measure the toxicity of various effluents which contain toxic componerts
The test is not based on water quality impacts of a specific receiving stream
Under Section 308 of the Clean Water Act, EPA Region 6 has the authority to
require permittees to support development of data bases such as those
associated with toxics. Therefore, biomonicoring requirements as establLshed
in the draft permit are retained in the final permit.
16—31

-------
Chevron
         Chevron Chemical Company
         PO Boi 78 Si James LA 70086 • Phone i504| 473 7946
                                  January 12, 1990
0 P Teichman
"am Manager
S. .ar.j PIJHI
             CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT # P 965 729 397
 Ms. Ellen Caldwell
 Permits Branch  (6W-PS)
 U.S. EPA Region VI
 1445 Ross Avenue
 Dallas, TX  75202-2733

 SUBJECT:    CHEVRON CHEMICAL COMMENTS
             NPDES PERMIT NO. LA0029963

 Dear Ms. Caldwell:

 We  have  reviewed  draft  NPDES  Permit  No.  LA0029963  for  Chevron
 Chemical's St.  James  Plant issued  for public comment  by the  EPA  on
 December 16,  1989.  We have the following comments:

   1.   As represented  in  the  Fact Sheet  (Part VIII.Section C  1) ,  we
        understand an  administrative order will  be  issued  concurrent
        with  the   final   permit   decision.     We   understand   the
        administrative order will  establish interim  limits  which  will
        be in  effect until  2/1/91,  when  our upgraded effluent treatment
        plant  will be operational.   As a result, we have not reviewed,
        and are not providing comments on  the draft permit relative  to
        it being in effect  during  the interim period  (i.e.  from final
        permit issuance to 2/1/91).

   2.   we want to clarify  that  the  discharge description included  in
        Part V  of the  Fact Sheet is  representative of our  current
        facility  discharge.   Following  completion   of  our  ongoing
        facility expansion,  the concentration of  pollutants  in  our
        discharge will significantly decrease and the discharge flowrate
        will   increase  from  current  levels.   These changes  to  our
        discharge were detailed  in our  submittals to the EPA and  have
        been properly recognized in development of  the proposed  permit
        limits.

   3.   We request that you change the  pH  of the Outfall 002 from 9.0
        to 10.0.  The plant's clarified water and firewater is purchased
        and is lime softened with a pH of 10. This  water has a  high  pH
        but a  low alkalinity and is not hazardous to  personnel  nor to
        the environment.
        In the last  6  months we have  had 2 permit
        these  water systems.  In the first instance, b
        the paved areas of the plant with firewater, we
         u^ j:a-
        'ashiTig
ceeded the 9 . 0
        pH  limit.    In the second  instance,  a number of clarified .water
                                16-32

-------
+
and firewater lines failed due to the hard December freeze.
This water overflowed the retention pond and again we had a
permit exceedence.
We have developed and have begun implementing a plan to
eliminate continuous sources of high pH water currently
discharged to our retention pond. This work will be completed
by the 1/1/91. we therefore feel that a change of the pH limit
on Outfall 002 from 9.0 to 10.0 would not endanger people nor
the environment and would eliminate nuisance excursions.
We appreciated receiving the well-organized and readable fact sheet
which clearly established the basis for the permit requirements.
Although the proposed permit limits are substantially lower than those
in our previous permit, we expect to be able to achieve and maintain
compliance once our upgraded effluent treatment plant is fully
operational.
If you have any questions or wish to discuss our comments further,
please do not hesitate to contact me or my staff.
Very truly yours,
P. Teichman
LLR/vho
16—33

-------
16—34

-------
PRACTICAL EXERCISE
The Administrative Process
DIRECTIONS :
You are a permit writer and have issued an NPDES permit for Luster Glass Inc.,
a glass manufacturer located on the Illinois River. Luster Glass Inc., unhappy
with your work, seeks an administrative appeal of the permit and in so doing,
raises the following issues:
• The permit is improperly based on the provisions of 40 CFR Part 426
(Glass Manufacturing Point Source Category);
• The effluent limitations for zinc and lead are calculated
incorrectly;
• Luster Glass Inc. s request to delete permit conditions requiring
the company to comply with Coast Guard regulations regarding the
transportation, handling and storage of pollutants was improperly
ignored;
• The weekly monitoring requirements for lead and zinc are excessive;
and
• The Agency violated its regulations and established policy by
refusing to hold a hearing as requested by Luster Glass Inc.
Q JEST IONS :
(1) Assuming Luster Glass Inc. ’s appeal is granted, what effect will this have
on the effectiveness of the NPDES permit?
(2) What standard should the Hearing Officer use to evaluate the permit?
(3) You have been called upon to testify on behalf of the Permit Authority.
How do you respond to each of the issues raised by Luster Glass Inc.?
(a) The improper use of regulations:
(b) The calculation of limitations:
(C) The use of the Coast Guard regulations:
(d) The excessive monitoring requirements:
(e) The failure to hold a hearing:
(4) In addition to this logically organized and undeniably scientific
testimony concerning your actions in developing this permit, what other
assistance might you be asked to lend to your attorney?
(5) Once the Hearing Officer has made a decision, what is the next step in the
process of getting the Luster Glass permit final and effective?
16-35

-------
16-36

-------
PERMIT WRITERS ON APPEAL
• Witness for permit authority
• Source of technical knowledge for attorney
• Assist in developing cross-examination questions
NOTES:
16—3 7

-------
MAJOR MODIFICATIONS
1. Reopener condition
2. Correct technical and legal mistakes
3. Failure to notify interested State
4. New information
5. Alterations justifying new/different conditions
6. New regulations
7. Modification of a compliance schedule (> 120 days)
8. Require POTW to develop pretreatment programs
9. Unsuccessful BPJ treatment installed
10. Address non-limited pollutants
11. Variance request
12. Adjust limits to reflect net pollutant treatment
13. Insert 307(a) toxic or Part 503 sludge use/disposal
14. Establish notification levels
NOTES:
16-38

-------
MINOR MODIFICATIONS
1. Typographical errors
2. More frequent monitoring
3. Change in interim compliance date (<120 days)
4. Change in ownership
5. Change in construction schedule for new source
6. Deletion of point source outfall
7. Incorporate approved local pretreatment program
PERMIT TERMINATIONS
• Suspend effectiveness in emergency
• Terminate for falsifications, recalcitrants or changed conditions
• Must public notice intentions and offer permittee a hearing
NOTES:
16-39

-------
APPLICABLE EFFLUENT STANDARDS
REVIEW EXERCISE
1. Industrial facilities are subject to: _____________________________________
2. POTWs are subject to: _________________________________________
3. Federal facilities are subject to: ____________________________________
4. Industrial storm water is subject to: ________________________________
5. Municipal storm water is subject to: ________________________________
6. Combined sewer overflows are subject to: _________________________
7. New sources are subject to:
8. New dischargers are subject to: ____________________________________
NOTES:
16-40

-------
Permit No.: 1L0654321
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act, as amended, (33
U.S.C. S1251 et seq; the “Act”),
LUSTER GLASS, INC.
is authorized to discharge from a facility located in Morris, Illinoie
to receiving waters named the Illinois River
in accordance with discharge point(s), effluent limitations, monitoring
requirements and other conditions set forth herein. Authorization for discharge
is limited to those outfal].s specifically listed in the permit.
This permit shall become effective
August 31, 1989
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight,
August 31, 1994.
Signed this day of
Authorized Permitting Official
Director
Water Management Division
Title
16—41

-------
PART I
Page 2 of 19
Permit No.: 1L065432].
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover Sheet——Issuance and Expiration Dates
I. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
A. Definitions
B. Description of Discharge Points
C. Specific Limitations and Self—Monitoring Requirements
(Includes Compliance Schedules as Appropriate)
II. Monitoring, Recording and Reporting Requirements
A. Representative Sampling
B. Monitoring Procedures
C. Penalties for Tampering
D. Reporting of Monitoring Results
E. Compliance Schedules
F. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee
G. Records Contents
H. Retention of Records
I. Twenty—four Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting
J. Other Noncompliance Reporting
K. Inspection and Entry
III. Compliance Responsibilities
A. Duty to Comply
B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions
C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense
D. Duty to Mitigate
E. Proper Operation and Maintenance
F. Removed Substances
G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
H. Upset Conditions
I. Toxic Pollutants
J. Changes in Discharge o.f Toxic Substances
IV. General Requirements
A. Planned Changes
B. Anticipated Noncompliance
C. Permit Actions
D. Duty to Reapply
E. Duty to Provide Information
F. Other Information
G. Signatory Requirements
H. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
I. Availability of Reports
J. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
K. Coast Guard
L. Property Rights
M. Severability
N. Transfers
0. State Laws
P. Water Quality Standard Requirements-Reopener Provision
Q. Toxicity Reopener Provision
V. Special Requirements
A. Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan
B. BMP Implementation
C. Site—Specific BMPs
16-42

-------
k Ar(T I
Page 3 of 19
Permit No.: 1L0654321
I. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
A. Definitions .
1. The “30-day (and monthly) average,” other than for fecal coliform
bacteria and total coliform bacteria, is the arithmetic average
of all samples collected during a consecutive 30—day period or
calendar month, whichever is applicable. Geometric means shall
be calculated for fecal coliform bacteria and total coliform
bacteria. The calendar month shall be used for purposes of
reporting self—monitoring data on discharge monitoring report
forms.
2. The “7—day (and weekly) average,” other than for fecal coliform
bacteria and total coliform bacteria, is the arithmetic mean of
all samples collected during a consecutive 7—day period or
calendar week, whichever is applicable. Geometric means shall be
calculated for fecal coliform bacteria and total coliform
bacteria. The 7-day and weekly averages are applicable only to
those effluent characteristics for which there are 7—day average
effluent limitations. The calendar week which begins on Sunday
and ends on Saturday, shall be used for purposes of reporting
self-monitoring data on discharge monitoring report forms.
Weekly averages shall be calculated for all calendar weeks with
Saturdays in the month. If a calendar week overlaps two months
(i.e., the Sunday is in one month and the Saturday in the
following month), the weekly average calculated for that calendar
week shall be included in the data for the month that contains
the Saturday.
3. “Daily Maximum” (“Daily Max.”) is the maximum value allowable in
any single sample or instantaneous measurement.
4. “Composite samples” shall be flow proportioned. The composite
sample shall, as a minimum, contain at least four (4) samples
collected over the compositing period. Unless otherwise
specified, the time between the collection of the first sample
and the last sample shall not be less than six (6) hours nor more
than 24 hours. Acceptable methods for preparation of composite
samples are as follows:
a. Constant time interval between samples, sample volume
proportional to flow rate at time of sampling;
b. Constant time interval between samples, sample volume
proportional to total flow (volume) since last sample. For
the first sample, the flow rate at the time the sample was
collected may be used;
C. Constant sample volume, tune interval between samples
proportional to flow (i.e., sample taken every “X” gallons
of flow); and,
d. Continuous collection of sample, with sample collection rate
proportional to flow rate.
5. A “grab” sample, for monitoring requirements, is defined as a
single “dip and take” sample collected at a representative point
in the discharge stream.
16-43

-------
PART I
Page 4 of 19
Permit No.: 1L0654321
6. An “instantaneous” measurement, for monitoring requirements, is
defined as a Single reading, observation, or meaaurement.
7. “Upset” means an exceptional incident in which there is
unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology—based
permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the
reasonable control of the permittee. An upset does not include
noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error,
improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment
facilities, lack of preventive maintenance, or careless or
improper operation.
8. “Bypass” means the intentional diversion of waste streams from
any portion of a treatment facility.
9. “Severe property damage” means substantial physical damage to
property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to
become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural
resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the
absence of a bypass. Severe property damage does not mean
economic loss caused by delays in production.
10. “Director” means Director of the United States Environmental
Protection Agencys Water Management Division.
11. “EPA” means the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
12. ‘Sewage Sludge” is any solid, semi—solid or liquid residue that
contains materials removed from domestic sewage during treatment.
Sewage sludge includes, but is not limited to, primary and
secondary solids and sewage sludge products.
13. “Acute Toxicity” occurs when 50 percent or more mortality is
observed for either test species (See Part I.C.) at any effluent
concentration. Mortality in the control must simultaneously be
10 percent or less for the effluent results to be considered
valid.
14. “Chronic Toxicity” occurs when the survival., growth, or
reproduction, as applicable, for either test species, at the
effluent dilution(s) designated in this permit (see Part I.C.),
is significantly less (at the 95 percent confidence level) than
that observed for the control specimens.
16-44

-------
PART I
Page 5 of 19
Permit No.: 1L0654321
B. Description of Discharge Points
The authorization to discharge provided under this permit is limited to
those outfalls specifically designated below as discharge locations.
Discharges at any location not authorized under an NPDES permit is a
violation of the Clean Water Act and could subject the person{o}
responsible for such discharge to penalties under Section 309 of the Act.
Knowingly discharging from an unauthorized location or failing to report an
unauthorized discharge within a reasonable time from first learning of an
unauthorized discharge could subject such person to criminal penalties as
provided under the Clean Water Act.
Outfall
Serial Number Description of Discharge Point
001 Discharge of effluent from the wastewater treatment
oil/water separator and settling basins, and cooling
tower blowdown to the Illinois River.
16-45

-------
PART I
Page 6 of 19
Permit No.: 1L06 54321
C. pecifjc Limitations and Self—Monitoring Regujremen g
1. Effluent Limitations (Outfall 00].)
Effective immediately and lasting through the life of the permit, the
permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall. 001. Such
discharges shall be limited by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent 30—Day Daily /
Parameter Average Maximum
Flow, MGD N/A N/A
Total Suspended Solids,
lb/day 35 ] . 3 451.1
mg/i 9.23 11.86
Oil and Grease,
lb/day 104.2 104.2
mg/i 2.74 2.74
Total Phosphorus,
lb/day 16.5 16.5
mg/i 0.43 0.43
Total Zinc,
lb/day 3.75 3.75
mg/i 0.1 0.1
Total Lead,
lb/day 1.14 1.52
mg/i 0.03 0.04
Whole Effluent Toxicity
(WE ), TU, / 3.7 5.9
pH, s.u.
Temperature
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace
am: ints.
a, See Definitions, Part l.A. for definition of terms.
/ The perulittee shall demonstrate compliance with WET requirements specified
in Part I.C.3 of this permit.
c/ pH shall not be less than 6.0 s.u. nor greater than 9.0 s.u.
d/ Temperature shall not be greater than 2.8 degrees Centigrade above ambient,
or 1.7 degrees Centigrade above the following maximum limits: from
December 1 through March 31, 16 degrees Centigrade (60 degrees Fahrenheit)
and from April 1 through November 30, 32 degrees Centigrade (90 degrees
Fahrenheit).
16-46

-------
PART I
Page 7 of 19
Permit No.: 1L0654321
C. Specific Limitations and Self-Monitoring Requirements (Cant. )
2. Self—Monitoring Requirements (Outfall 001)
As a minimum, upon the effective date of this permit, the following
constituents shall be monitored at the frequency and with the type of
measurement indicated; samples or measurements shall be representative
of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge. If no discharge
occurs during the entire monitoring period, it shall be stated on the
Discharge Monitoring Report Form (EPA No. 3320—1) that no discharge or
overflow occurred.
Effluent
Parameter Frequency Sample Type a/
Flow, MGD Daily Instantaneous or Continuous
Temperature Daily Continuous
Total Suspended Solids Weekly 24-Hour Composite
Oil and Crease Weekly Grab
Total Phosphorus Weekly 24-Hour Composite
Total Zinc Weekly 24—Hour Composite
Total Lead Weekly 24—Hour Composite
Whole Effluent Toxicity
(WET), Chronic 2/Month 24-Hour Composite
pH Daily Continuous or Crab
Sampling by the permittee for compliance with the monitoring requirements
specified above shall be performed at the following locations(s): within
100 feet of Outfall 001 to the Illinois River.
a/ See definitions, Part l.A.
b/ Flow measurements of effluent volume shall be made in such a manner that
the permittee can affirmatively demonstrate that representative values are
being obtained.
16-4 7

-------
PA RT I
Page 8 of 19
Permit No.: 11.0654321
C. Specific Limitations and Self—Monitoring Requiremen g (Cont. )
3. Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing - Chronic Toxicity
Starting the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall
conduct biweekly chronic toxicity tests on a 24 hour composite sample
of the final effluent. If chronic toxicity is detected, the permittee
shall conduct a Toxicity Reduction Evaluation, according to
specifications in Part I.C.4 of this permit. Test species shall
consist of P.irnephales p.romelas (Fathead minnows). The chronic
toxicity tests shall be conducted in general accordance with the
procedures set out in the latest revision of “Short—Term Methods for
Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to
Freshwater Organisms”, EPA/600—4—89-O01. If control mortality exceeds
20 percent, the test shall be considered invalid. Chronic toxicity
occurs when the No Observed Effect Concentrations (NOECB) (calculated
within a 95 percent confidence interval) exceed(s) the permit
limit(s). Test results shall be reported along with the Discharge
Monitoring Report (DMR) submitted for the end of the calendar period
during which the whole effluent test was run. The report shall
include all the physical testing as specified and shall report test
conditions, including temperature, pH, conductivity, mortality, total
residual chlorine concentration, control mortality, and statistical
methods used to calculate an NOEC.
If the results for one year (26 consecutive weeks) of whole effluent
testing indicate no chronic toxicity, the permittee may request. the
permit issuing authority to allow the permittee to reduce testing
frequency. The permit issuing authority may approve, partially
approve, or deny the request based on results and other available
information.
4. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE)
If the permittee fails to meet toxicity requirements specified in this
permit, the permit issuing authority shall determine that a TRE is
necessary. The permittee shall be so notified and shall initiate a
TRE immediately thereafter. The TRE shall include a TR.E Test Plan
that must be submitted to the permitting authority within 60 days
after notification of a TRE requirement. The permitting authority
will then establish a deadline for compliance. The purpose of the TR.E
will be to establish the cause of the toxicity, locate the source(s)
of the toxicity, and control or provide treatment for the toxicity
prior to the deadline.
If acceptable to the permit issuing authority, this permit may be
reopened and modified to incorporate any additional numerical
limitations, a modified compliance schedule if judged necessary by the
permit issuing authority, and/or a modified whole effluent protocol.
Failure to conduct an adequate TRE, or failure to submit a plan or
program as described above, or the submittal of a plan or program
judged inadequate by the permit issuing authority, shall in no way
relieve the permittee from the deadline for compliance contained n
this permit.
16-48

-------
PART II
Page 9 of 19
Permit No.: 1L065432 1
II. MONITORING, RECORDING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A. Representative Sampling . Samples taken in compliance with the
monitoring requirements established under Part I shall be collected
from the effluent stream prior to discharge into the receiving waters.
Samples and measurements shall be representative of the volume and
nature of the monitored discharge.
B. Monitoring Procedures . Monitoring must be conducted according to test
procedures approved under 40 CFR Part 136, unless other test
procedures have been specified in this permit.
C. Penalties for Tampering . The Act provides that any person who
falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate, any
monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this
permit shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than
$10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years
per violation, or by both.
D. Reporting of Monitoring Results . Effluent monitoring results obtained
during the previous month(s) shall be summarized for each month and
reported on a Discharge Monitoring Report Form (EPA No. 3320—1),
postmarked no later than the 28th day of the month following the
completed reporting period. If no discharge occurs during the
reporting period, “no discharge” shall be reported. Until further
notice, sludge monitoring results may be reported in the testing
laboratorys normal format (there is no EPA standard form at this
time), but should be on letter size pages. Legible copies of these,
and all other reports required herein, shall be signed and certified
in accordance with the Signatory Requirements (see Part IV ) , and
submitted to the Director, Water Management Division and the State
water pollution control agency at the following addresses:
original to: United States Environmental Protection Agency
Attention: Water Management Division
Compliance Branch
copy to: State Department of Health
Attention: Permits and Enforcement
E. Compliance Schedules . Reports of compliance or noncompliance with, or
any progress reports on interim and final requirements contained in
any Compliance Schedule of this permit shall be submitted no later
than 14 days following each schedule date.
F. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee . If the permittee monitors any
pollutant more frequently than required by this permit, using test
procedures approved under 40 CFR 136 or as specified in this permit,
the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation
and reporting of the data submitted in the 0MB. Such increased
frequency shall also be indicated.
G. Records Contents . Records of monitoring information shall include:
1. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements;
2. The initials or name(s) of the individual(s) who performed the
sampling or measurements;
3. The date(s) analyses were performed;
4. The time(s) analyses were initiated;
16—49

-------
PART II
Page 10 of 19
Permit No.: 1L0654321
5. The initials or name(s) of individual(s) who performed the
analyses;
6. References and written procedures, when available, for the
analytical techniques or methods used; and,
7. The results of such analyses, including the bench sheets,
instrument readouts, computer disks or tapes, etc., used to
determine these results.
H. Retention of Records . The permittee shall retain records of all
monitoring information, including all calibration and maintenance
records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous
monitoring instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this
permit, and records of all data used to complete the application for
this permit, for a period of at least three years from the date of the
sample, measurement, report or application. This period may be
extended by request of the Director at any time. Data collected on
site, copies of Discharge Monitoring Reports, and a copy of this NPDES
permit must be maintained on 8ite during the duration of activity at
the permitted location.
I. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting .
1. The permittee shall report any noncompliance which may seriously
endanger health or the environment as soon as possible, but no
later than twenty—four (24) hours from the time the perrnittee
first became aware of the circumstances. The report shall be
made to the EPA Emergency Response Branch at (312) 293—1788 and
the State at (312) 370—9395.
2. The following occurrences of noncompliance shall be reported by
telephone to the EPA Compliance Branch at (312) 293—1589 and the
State at (312) 331—4590 by the first workday (8:00 a.m. — 4:30
p.m.) following the day the permittee became aware of the
circumstances:
a. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent
limitation in the permit (See Part III.G.. Bypass of
Treatment Facilities.) ;
b. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the
permit (See Part III.H.. Upset Conditions.) ; or,
c. Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of
the pollutants listed in the permit to be reported within 24
hours.
3. A written submission shall also be provided within five days of
the time that the permi.ttee becomes aware of the circumstances.
The written subm .ssion shall contain:
a. A description of the noncompliance and its cause;
b. The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and
times;
c. The estimated time noncompliance is expected to continue if
it has not been corrected; and,
d. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent
reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
16-50

-------
PART II
Page 11 of 19
Permit No.: 1L0654321
4. The Director may waive the written report on a ca8e—by—case basis
if the oral report has been received within 24 hours by the
Compliance Branch, Water Management Division by phone, (312) 293—
1589.
5. Reports shall be submitted to the addresses in Part II.D..
Reporting of Monitoring Results .
J. Other Noncompliance Reporting . Instances of noncompliance not
required to be reported within 24 hours shall be reported at the tune
that monitoring reports for Part II.D. are submitted. The reports
shall contain the information listed in Part 11.1.2.
K. Inspection and Entry . The perrnittee Bhall allow the Director, or an
authorized representative, upon the presentation of credentials and
other documents as may be required by law, to:
1. Enter upon the permittees premises where a regulated facility or
activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept
under the conditions of this permit;
2. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that
must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
3. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including
monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations
regulated or required under this permit; and,
4. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purpose of
assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Act,
any substances or parameters at any location.
16-51

-------
PART III
Page 12 of 19
Permit No.: IL065432l
III. COMPLI CE RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Duty to Comply . The permittee must comply with all conditions of this
permit. Any permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Act
and is grounds for- enforcement action; for permit termination,
revocation and reissuance, or modification; or for denial of a permit
renewal application. The permittee shall give the Director advance
notice of any planned changes at the permitted facility or of an
activity which may result in permit noncompliance.
B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions . The Act provides that
any person who violates a permit condition implementing Sections 301,
302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act is subject to a civil
penalty not to exceed $25,000 per day of such violation. Any person
who willfully or negligently violates permit conditions implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, or 308 of the Act is subject to a fine of
not less than $5,000, nor more than $50,000 per day of violation, or
by imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both. Except as
provided in permit conditions in Part III.C., Bypass of Treatment
Facilities and Part III.H., Upset Conditions , nothing in this permit
shall be construed to relieve the permittee of the civil or criminal
penalties for noncompliance.
C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense . It shall not be a
defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would have
been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to
maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit.
D. Duty to Mitigate . The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to
minimize or prevent any discharge in violation of this permit which
has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the
environment.
E. Proper Operation and Maintenance . The permittee shall at all times
properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of treatment
and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by
the permi.ttee to achieve compliance with the conditions of this
permit. Proper operation and maintenance also includes adequate
laboratory controls and appropriate quality assurance procedures.
This provision requires the operation of back-up or auxiliary
facilities or similar systems which are installed by a permittee only
when the operation is necessary to achieve compliance with the
conditions of the permit. However, the permittee shall operate, as a
minimum, one complete set of each main line unit treatment process
whether or not this process is needed to achieve permit effluent
compliance.
F. Removed Substances . Collected screenings, grit, solids, sludges 4 or
other pollutants removed in the course of treatment shall be buried or
disposed of in such a manner so as to prevent any pollutant from
entering any waters of the state or creating a health hazard. Filter
backwash shall not be directly blended with or enter either the final
plant discharge and/or waters of the United States.
G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities :
1. Bypass not exceeding limitations. The permittee may allow any
bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to be
exceeded, but only if it also is for essential maintenance to
assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject to
the provisions of paragraphs 2. and 3. of this section.
16-52

-------
PART III
Page 13 of 19
Permit No.: 1L0654321
2. Notice:
a. Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of
the need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, if
possible at least 60 days before the date of the bypass.
b. Unanticipated bypass. The perniittee shall submit notice of
an unanticipated bypass as required under Part 11.1..
Twenty—four Hour Reporting .
3. Prohibition of bypass.
a. Bypass is prohibited and the Director may take enforcement
action against a permittee for a bypass, unless:
(1) The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life,
personal Injury, or severe property damage;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass,
such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities,
retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during
normal periods of equipment downtime. Thie condition
is not satisfied if adequate back—up equipment should
have been installed in the exercise of reasonable
engineering judgement to prevent a bypass which
occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime
or preventive maintenance; and, -
(3) The permittee submitted notices as required under
paragraph 2. of this Section.
b. The Director may approve an anticipated bypass, after
considering its adverse effects, if the Director determines
that it will meet the three conditions listed above in
paragraph 3.a. of this section.
H. Upset Conditions .
1. Effect of an upset. An upset constitutes an affirmative defense
to an action brought for noncompliance with technology based
permit effluent limitations if the requirements of paragraph 2.
of this section are met. No determination made during
administrative review of claims that noncompliance was caused by
upset, and before an action for noncompliance, is final
administrative action subject to judicial review (i.e.,
Permittees will have the opportunity for a judicial determination
on any claim of upset only in an enforcement action brought for
noncompliance with technology—based permit effluent limitations).
2. Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset. .A permittee
who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall
demonstrate, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating
logs, or other relevant evidence that:
a. An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the
cause(s) of the upset;
b. The permitted facility was at the time being properly
operated;
c. The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required
under Part 11.1., Twenty—four Hour Notice of Noncompliance
Reporting ; and,
d. The permittee complied with any remedial measures required
under Part III.D., Duty to Mitigate .
16-53

-------
PART III
Page 14 of 19
Permit No.: 1L0654321
3. Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee
seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of
proof.
I. Toxic Pollutants . The permittee shall comply with effluent standards
or prohibitions established under Section 307(a) of the Act for toxic
pollutants within the time provided in the regulations that establish
those standards or prohibitions, even if the permit has not yet been
modified to incorporate the requirement.
J. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances . Notification shall be
provided to the Director as soon as the permittee knows of, or has
reason to believe:
1. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result
in the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, of any toxic
pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if that discharge
will exceed the highest of the following “notification levels”:
a. One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/L);
b. Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/L) for acrolein and
acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/L)
for 2,4-dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4, 6—dinitrophenol;
and one milligram per liter (1 mg/L) for antimony;
c. Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported for
that pollutant in the permit application in accordance iith
40 CFR 122.2l(g)(7); or,
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with 40
CFR 122.44(f).
2. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result
in any discharge, on a non-routine or infrequent basis, of a
toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if that
discharge will exceed the highest of the following “notification
levels”:
a. Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/L.);
b. One milligram per liter (1 mg/L) for antimony:
c. Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported for
that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with
40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or,
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with 40
CFR 122.44(f).
16-54

-------
PART LV
Page 15 of 19
Permit No.: ILO65432j.
IV. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
A. Planned Changes . The permittee shall give notice to the Director as
soon as possi.ble of any planned physical alterations or additions to
the permitted facility. Notice is required only when:
1. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet one
of the criteria for determining whether a facility is a new
source as determined in 40 CFR 122.29(b); or
2. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature
or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged. This
notification applies to pollutants which are subject neither to
effluent limitations in the permit, nor to notification
requirements under Part IV.A.l.
B. Anticipated Noncompliance . The permittee shall give advance notice of
any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which may
result in noncompliance with permit requirements.
C. Permit Actions . This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or
terminated for cause. The filing of a request by the permittee for a
permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or a
notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance, does not
stay any permit condition.
D. Duty to Reapp].y . If the permittee wishes to continue an activity
regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit, the
permittee must apply for and obtain a new permit. The application
should be submitted at least 180 days before the expiration date of
this permit.
E. Duty to Provide Information . The permittee shall furnish to the
Director, within a reasonable time, any information which the Director
may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking
and reissuing, or terminating this permit, or to determine compliance
with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Director,
upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit.
F. Other Information . When the permittee becomes aware that it failed to
submit any relevant facts in a permit application, or submitted
incorrect information in a permit application or any report to the
Director, it shall promptly submit such facts or information.
G. Signatory Requirements . All applications, reports or information
submitted to the Director shall be signed and certified.
1. All permit applications shall be signed as follows:
a. For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer;
b. For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general
partner or the proprietor, respectively;
c. For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency:
by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected
official.
2. All reports required by the permit and other information
requested by the Director shall be signed by a person described
above or by a duly authorized representative of that person. A
person is a duly authorized representative only if:
a. The authorization is made in writing by a person described
above and submitted to the Director, and,
lE -55

-------
PART IV
Page 16 of 19
Permit No.: 1L0654321
b. The authorization specified either an individual or a
position having responsibility for the overall operation of
the regulated facility or activity, such as the position of
plant manager, operator of a well or a well field,
superintendent, position of equivalent responsibility, or an
individual or position having overall responsibility for
environmental matters for the company. (A duly authorized
representative may thus be either a named individual or any
individual occupying a named position.)
3. Changes to authorization. If an authorization under paragraph
IV.G.2. is no longer accurate because a different individual or
position has responsibility for the overall operation of the
facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements of
paragraph IV.G.2. must be submitted to the Director prior to or
together with any reports, information, or applications to be
signed by an authorized representative.
4. Certification. Any person signing a document under this section
shall make the following certification:
“I certify under penalty of law that this document and all
attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in
accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted.
Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the
system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering. the
information, the information submitted is, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware
that there are significant penalties for submitting false
information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment
for knowing violations.”
H. Penalties for Falsification of Reports . The Act provides that any
person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation, or
certification in any record or other document submitted or required to
be maintained under this permit, including monitoring reports or
reports of compliance or noncompliance shall, upon conviction be
punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than two years per violation, or by both.
I. Availability of Reports . Except for data determined to be
confidential under 40 CFR Part 2, all reports prepared in accordance
with the terms of this permit shall be available for public inspection
at the offices of the State water pollution control agency and the
Director. As required by the Act, permit applications, permits and
effluent data shall not be considered confidential.
J. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability . Nothing in this permit shall
be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or
relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or
penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under
Section 311 of the Act.
K. Coast Guard . If the Permittee operates its facility at certain times
as a means of transportation over water, the Permittee shall comply
with any applicable regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the
department in which the Coast Guard is operating, that establish
specifications for safe transportation, handling, carriage, and
storage of pollutants.
L. Property RicThts . The issuance of this permit does not convey any
property rights of any sort, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it
authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of personal
rights, nor any infringement of federal, state or local laws or
regulations.
16-56

-------
P .RT IV
Page 17 of 19
Permit No.: 1L065432 1
H. Severability . The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any
provision of this permit, or the application of ar.y 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.
N. Transfers . This permit may be automatically transferred to a new
permittee if:
1. The current permittee notifies the Director at least 30 days in
advance of the proposed transfer date;
2. The notice includes a written agreement between the existing and
new permittees containing a specific date for transfer of permit
responsibility, coverage, and liability between them; and,
3. The Director does not notify the existing permittee and the
proposed new permittee of his or her intent to modify, or revoke
and reissue the permit. If this notice is not received, the
transfer is effective on the date specified in the agreement
mentioned in paragraph 2. above.
0. State Laws . Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the
institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any
responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established pursuant to
any applicable state law or regulation under authority preserved by
Section 510 of the Act.
P. Reopener Provision . This permit may be reopened and modified
(following proper administrative procedures) to include the
appropriate effluent limitations (and compliance schedule, if
necessary), or other appropriate requirements if one or more of the
following events occurs:
1. Water Quality Standards : The water quality standards of the
receiving water(s) to which the perinittee discharges are modified
in such a manner as to require different effluent limits than
contained in this permit.
2. Wasteload Allocation : A wasteload allocation is developed and
approved by the State and/or EPA for incorporation in this
permit.
3. Water Quality Management Plan : A revision to the current water
quality management plan is approved and adopted which calls for
different effluent limitations than contained in this permit.
16-57

-------
PART IV
Page 18 9 f 19
Permit No.: ILO65432l
Q. Toxicity Limitation—Reopener Provision . This permit may be reopened
and modified (following proper administrative procedures) to include
a new compliance date, additional or modified numerical limitations,
a new or different compliance schedule, a change in the whole effluent
protocol, or any other conditions related to the control of toxicanta
if one or more of the following events occur:
1. Toxicity was detected late in the life of the permit near or past
the deadline for compliance.
2. The TRE results indicate that compliance with the toxic limits
will require an implementation schedule past the date for
compliance and the permit issuing authority agrees with the
conclusion.
3. The TRE results indicate that the toxicant(s) represent
pollutant(s) that may be controlled with specific numerical
limits, and the permit issuing authority agrees that numerical
controls are the most appropriate course of action.
4. Following the implementation of numerical controls on toxicante,
the permit issuing authority agrees that a modified whole
effluent protocol is necessary to compensate for those toxicants
that are controlled numerically.
5. The TRE reveals other unique conditions or characteristics which,
in the opinion of the permit issuing authority, justify the
incorporation of unanticipated special conditions in the permit.
16-58

-------
PART V
Page 19 of 19
Permit No.: 1 1 .065432 ].
V. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
A. Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan
A BMP plan shall be developed within six months of permit reissuance,
addressing each of the nine specific requirements described in the
June 1981 EPA document, NPDES BMP Guidance Document . Emphasis shall
be placed on good housekeeping practices, visual inspection, and
preventative maintenance.
The BMP plan shall be written up and delivered to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency no later than February 5, 1990.
B. BMP Implementation
The OMP plan shall be fully implemented within twelve months of permit
reissuance. An implementation report shall be delivered to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency no later than August 5, 1990.
C. Site—Specific BMPs
The following site—specific EMP8 shall be included:
1. Tank Number 42: Remedial action is required to repair the damaged
tank. This shall include transfer of the contents to another
vessel (e.g., tank truck), cleaning the tank, and repairing,
welding, or plugging the hole. To prevent environmental damage
in the future, secondary containment is required. Monthly visual
inspections and/or preventative maintenance shall be conducted.
2. Drum Storage Area: The drums shall be inventoried to identify
the contents and amounts of chemicals therein. The drums shall
be inspected for deterioration or leaks. They shall be
segregated and any leaking or deteriorating drums shall be
disposed of or repaired. Any contaminated soil shall be removed
and adequately disposed of. The remaining drums shall be neatly
stacked in a manner to eliminate hazards to humane or the
environment by isolating the drums from walkways or roadways,
placing them on an impervious pad, covering the storage area,
diking the area, moving the storage area away from the river, or
some combination thereof.
16—59

-------
COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT

-------
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Common errors in permits
• Data management considerations (PCS)
• Enforcement tools and considerations
• Citizens and enforcement
COMMON ERRORS AND OMISSIONS
Not:
• Issuing permit to correct entity
• Ensuring limits are defensible and compatible with PCS
• Covering all outfalls
• Imposing adequate monitoring or specifying type, frequency
and location
• Using special conditions
• Requiring routine DMRs and specifying signatory
• Including all standard conditions
• Incorporating Federal Regulations without further explanation
• Using precise language
NOTES:
17—1

-------
PCS LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Basic understanding of PCS system
- Development process
- Data elements
- Sources of assistance
• Permit writer’s responsibilities
PCS POLICY
• Adopted - October 1985
• Designates PCS as the official NPDES data system
• Requires EPA Regions to use
Requires NPDES States to use or have interface capability
NOTES:
17-2

-------
- The effluent record types exist on each of the 10 physical Regional files

-------
PCS ASSISTANCE
• Region/State experts
• EPA HQ/PCS hotline [ (202) 260-8529]
• PCS publications
• Other methods
PCS PUBLICATIONS
• General retrieval manual
• Inquiry user’s guide
• Data element dictionary
• Data entry/edit manual
• Manager’s guide to PCS
NOTES:
1 —
j.

-------
PERMIT OUALITY REVIEW CHECKLIST
CHECKLIST A-i
Procedural Requirements; ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS
Questjon
1. List any of the following items that have been omitted
inappropriately from the file.
a. Permit application and any supporting data furnished by
applicant;
b. Draft permit;
c. Statement of basis or fact sheet;
d. All documents cited in statement of basis or fact sheet;
5. If a new source, any environmental assessment,
environmental impact statement, finding of no significant
impact or environmental information document and any
supplement to an EIS that was prepared;
f. All comments received during public comment;
g. Tape or transcript of any hearings held and any written
materials submitted at hearing;
h. Response to significant comments raised during comment
period and/or hearing;
1. Final permit;
j. Explanation of changes from draft to final permit;
Jc. Where appropriate, materials relating to
o Consistency determinations under the CZMA
o Consultation under the Endangered Species Act
o Determination under section 403(c) of the CWA
17-5

-------
CHECKLIST A-2
Procedural Requirements: PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT
u e St ion
1. Was a public notice issued of the preparation of draft
permit and providing an opportunity for comment at least 30
days prior to final permit decision?
2. Was public hearing held?
(If “no”, skip to #4)
3. Was a notice of public hearing issued at least 30 days prior
to hearing?
4. Was a summary response to significant comments raised during
comment period and/or hearing prepared and issued at time of
final permit decision?
CHECKLIST A—3
Procedural Requirements: S TATE CERTIFICATION
Question
1. Was a state certification or waiver of state certification
received?
2. List any conditions in the state certification not included
in the permit. Indicate any reasons provided for omissions.

-------
CHECKLIST A-4
Procedural Requirements: RECORDS OF MODIFICATION
Question
1. Does the permit documentation indicate that the permit was
modified, revoked or reissued?
(If “no”, skip to Checklist A-5)
2. was the permit modified pursuant to 40 CFR 122.62(a)? If
“yes”, specify the basis identified in the permit
documentation: (alteration; new information; new
regulations; compliance schedules; variance request; 307(a)
toxic standard; net limits; reopener; nonlimited pollutants
(level of discharge of any pollutant no limited in permit
exceeds the level which can be achieved by technology-based
treatment); use ore manufacture of toxics (permittee has
begun or expects to begin to use or manufacture a toxic -
pollutant); notification levels (permit has been modified to
establish a “notification level”)
3. Did cause exist for modification or revocation and
reissuance pursuant to 40 CFR 122.62(b)?
Specify cause:
a. Cause exists for termination, as provided in 40 CFR
122.64 (noncompliance: misrepresentation of or failure to
disclose facts; endangerment to human health or
environment; change in condition);
b. Transfer of permit;
c. Other (specify)
4. Does the permit documentation indicate that the procedures
of 40 CFR 124.5 for permit modification, revocation and
reissuance or termination were followed?
CHECKLIST A-5
Procedural. Requirements: ENFORCEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
0ue St lOfl
1. Does the permit documentation indicate that any enforcement
actions have been taken?
Briefly describe (nature of action(s), date(s)): _________
2. Did the Regional Counsel review or sign of f on the permit?
17—7

-------
CHECKLIST B-i
Permit Conditions: BOILERPLATE
Question
1. Identify whether the following general conditions have been
incorporated into the permit, either directly or by
reference to 40 CFR Part 122.41 (or, if permit was issued
prior to April 1983, by reference to 40 CFR Parts 122.7 and
122.60). Identify any variation from the regulation language
in 122.41.
a. Duty to comply;
b. Duty to reapply;
c. Duty to halt or reduce activity;
d. Duty to mitigate;
e. Program operation and maintenance;
f. Permit actions;
g. Property rights;
h. Duty to provide information;
i. Inspection and entry;
j. Monitoring and records;
k. Signatory requirement;
1. Reporting requirements;
m. Bypass; and
n. Upset.
2. If the general Conditions are included by reference, is the
CFR citation, date and copy of the regulations provided? If
“no”, specify missing item(s): (Skip to #5)
3. Does the permit require notification to the Director as soon
as the permittee knows or has reason to believe that any
activity has occurred or will occur which would result in
the discharge of any toxic pollutant, if that discharge will
exceed the “notification levels”, specified in 40 CFR Part
122. 42 (a) ( 1) ?
4. Does the permit require notification to the Director as soon
as the permittee knows or has reason to believe that it has
begun or expects to begin to use or manufacture as an
intermediate or final product or byproduct any toxic
pollutant which was not reported in the permit application?
5. Is the permit effective for a fixed term which does not
exceed 5 years from date of issuance?
17-8

-------
CHECKLIST B-2
Permit Conditions: PECIAL CONDITIONS
Que St ion
1. Are any special conditions requiring kest manageinen
rpctjces (BMPs) included in the permit? Identify and
specify reason for inclusion (part of guideline, substitute
for numeric limitations, etc.).
2. Does the permit application indicate that perniittee does or
expects to use or manufacture any toxic Substance as an
intermediate or final product or byproduct? (See Form 2C,
Item VI—A.) Have any c nditjons for the substances so
indicated been included in the permit? If not, does permit
documentation explain the omission?
3. Does the permit application indicate that there are
intermittent dischar es at the outfall? (See Form 2C, Item
11-C) Are they addressed in the permit? Identify any
unexplained omissions.
4. Does the permit include any bio].ogjcp]. toxicity testjng
requirements? Briefly describe the requirements and their
basis.
5. Does the permit include any limitations or conditions for
tnternaj waste -streams ? Describe the. limitations/conditions
and the circumstances that make them necessary.
17-9

-------
CHECKLIST C-i
Effluent Limitations: TRANSLATING THE PERMIT APPLICATION
TO PERNITLIMITATIONS
Introduction : Question #1 applies to all outfalls. For the
remaing questions, complete one checklist for each individual
outfall selected by the review team for review.
Question
1. Have a set of effluent limitajons or conditions been
included in the permit for every outfall? (See Form 2C, Iter
Ill—B)
2. For which pollutants are limitations or conditions included
in the permit for: (Identify in an attachment)
a. BPT;
b. BAT; and
c. BCT?
3. Are there pollutants for which limitations or conditions are
not included but which might be appropriate to limit?
Identify the pollutants and the reasons for including
limitations.
CHECKLIST C-2
Effluent Limitations: BASIS FOR LIMITATIONS
Introduction : Complete one checklist for each individual outfall
selected by the review team for review.
Question
1. Are the pollutant limitations based on any of the following:
a. BPT;
b. BCT;
C. BAT:
d. NSPS;
e. Water quality standards?
f. Previous permit
g. Other
(Specify) __________________________________
2. Are limitations for all pollutants in continuous discharges
expressed as both maximum daily values and average monthly
values? (If “yes”, skip to #4)
3. List those pollutants for which either limit is omitted,
where the omission is inappropriate.
4. List any pollutants limited by mass or concentration that
should have been limited in the other form and indicate the
reason it should have been listed in the other form.
17—10

-------
CHECKLIST C-3
Effluent Limitations: APPLICABLE EFFLUENT GUIDELINES
Introduction : Complete one checklist for each individual outfall
selected by the review team for review, if effluent guidelines
are applicable.
Que st ion
1. Were promulgated effluent guidelines applicable to the
source category at the time permit was under consideration?
(See Form 1, Items III and XII) (If “no”, skip to Checklist
C-4) If not, does the permit contain a reopener clause?
2. WEre effluent guideline limitations used as a basis for
permit effluent limitations at the outfall.
3. Did the permittee receive a variance based on the presence
of “fundamentally different factors” from those on which- the
guideline was based? (If “yes”, skip to Checklist C-4)
4. Are applicable effluent guidelines limitations based on
production?
(If “no”, skip to #9)
5. Was production basis in the permit a reasonable measure of
average actual production, design production capacity?
(See Form 2C, Items 111—B and C.)
Specify production basis:
a. Maximum production during high month of previous
year;
b. Monthly average for the highest of previous;
C. Other: ____
17—jj

-------
CHECKLIST C-3 (continued)
Effluent Limitations: APPLICABLE EFFLUENT GUIDELINES
Question
6. Does the permit documentation indicate the means used to
determine actual production?
Specify:
a. In permit application;
b. Other:
7. Does the permit documentation indicate that the permit
writer conducted any fellow-up activites to confirm
production estimates?
8. Have alternate permit limitations been included to address
different production levels?
Specify the number of tiers of limits:___________________
9. Are all pollutant limitations in the applicable guidelines
included in the permit? List any that are not.
10. Was the adjustment formula for disposal to wells, POTW’s, or
land application applicable (40 CFR 122.50)? (If “no”, go to
C—4) Was it used?
17—12

-------
CHECKLIST C-4
Effluent Limitations: BEST PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT
Introduction : This checklist is intended to point review team
inquiry toward those questions which can help in determining
whether or not the BPJ analysis was “reasonable”. Review team
should provide a qualitative explanation of the limitation
development process on the evaluation form. Complete one
checklist for each individual outfall selected by the review team
for review.
Question
1. Is a BPJ analysis (for BPT, BAT, or BCT) missing where it
seems to be required? Identify the outfall, pollutant(s),
and type of limitation.
2. Indicate which of the following sources were used in
establishing any BPJ limitations:
a. Promulgated Guideline
b. Proposed Guideline -
c. Development Document
d. Treatability Manual
e. Other (specify)
3. Identify any significant sources not used which should have
been.
4. Indicate what method was used to establish BPJ/BCT for
conventional pollutants.
5. - Bave effluent guidelines been promulgated since the time of
permit issuance? If “yes”, indicate the relative stringency
of guideline limitations in permit:________________________
(Note if unable to determine this.)
17—13

-------
CHECKLIST C-5
Effluent Limitations: WATER qUALITy BASED LIMITATIONS
Introduction : This checklist is intended to point review team
inquiry toward those questions which can help in determining
whether or not the water quality analysis was “reasonable.”
Review team should provide a qualitative explanation of the
limitation development process on the evaluation form. Complete
one checklist for each individual outfall selected by the review
team for review.
Quest ion
1. Is a water quality analysis missing where it seems to be
required? Identify outfalls(s) and pollutants.
2. Identify type of water quality limitation in permit (:free
from”, numerical, or both).
3. Is basis of the water quality based limitation identified in
the permit file?
Specify:
a. State certification
b. Water quality modeling
c. Other:
4. Were water quality standards included in the permit in lieu
of effluent limitations?
5. Have all applicable water quality standards toward which
water quality-analysis is directed been clearly identified?
6. Are current water quality conditions clearly identified?
If possible, specify basis:
a. Actual water quality
b. Estimated water quality
7. Does the permit document that water quality—based
limitations are at least as stringent as BPT, BCT, or BAT
standard?
8. Were water quality modeling and a mixing zone used in
establishing the limitation?
(If “no”, skip to #20)
b. In uts to Ouantitptive Analysis :
9. Has the outfall discharge rate used in analysis been clearly
identified? (See Form 2C, Item II)
a. Average discharge rate
b. Maximum discharge rate
c. Other:
17—14

-------
CHECKLIST C-5 (Continued)
Effluent Limitations: WATER OUALITY BASED LIMITATIONS
10. Has the stream flow rate used in the analysis been clearly
identified? If possible, specify whether:
a. Low flow rate (years of record)
b. Average flow rate
c. Other: ______
11. was the analysis directed toward water quality within a
mixing zone? (If “yes”, skip to #13)
12. Was the analysis directed toward water quality beyond the
mixing zone (i.e., wasteload allocation modeling)
(If “yes”, skip to #17)
c. Ouantitptjve Analysis: Mixing Zone
13. Are the size and configuration of the mixing zone clearly
identified?
14. Has the water quality model used been clearly identified?
Specify:
15. Were the impacts of other major dischargerg taken into
account in the analysis?
16. Does the permit documentation demonstrate that, based on
modeling conclusions, applicable water quality standards
were met in the mixing zone?
(If “yes”, skip to #20)
d. antitatiye Analysis: Wasteload Allocation
17. Has the water quality model used been clearly identified?
Specify:
18. Were th. impacts of other major dischargers taken into
account in the analysis?
19. Does the permit documentation indicate the level of
discharges and limitations assumed for other major sources?
20. Does the permit documentation demonstrate that, based on
modeling conclusions, applicable water quality standards are
met? If not, does the permit documentation explain why the
limitation was used in spite of modeling results?
Specify:_________________________________
17—15

-------
CHECKLIST D-1
Monitoring Requirements: DISCHARGE SAMPLING
Introduction : Complete one checklist for each individual outfall
selected by the review team for review.
Question
1. Does the permit require monitoring for every pollutant for
which limitations are included in the permit? List any
inappropriate omissions.
2. Does the permit stipulate, either in the general conditions
or in the permit limitations, that monitoring for all
pollutants with limitations be conducted according to test
procedures approved under 40 CFR Part 136? Identify any
exceptions.
3. Does the permit require monitoring the volume of effluent
discharged from the outfall? If not, is an explanation
provided?
4. Are effluent sampling frequencies specified for every
pollutant for which monitoring is require? Specify for each
pollutant (e.g., daily, weekly, quarterly, etc.):_________
CHECKLIST D-2
Monitoring Requirements: DISCHARGE REPORTING
Question
1. Are there any pollutants for which discharge monitoring
reports are not required at least once a year? List them.
2. Is reporting on discharge monitoring report (DMR) forms
required?
3. Specify discharge reporting frequency or frequencies
required in permit for the outfall under review (e.g. 1
monthly, quarterly, etc.):
I-, If
.j_ F — 0

-------
CHECKLIST E-].
Compliance Schedules: INCLUSION IN PERNI
Introduction : Complete one checklist for each individual outfall
selected by the review team for review.
Quest ion
1. Does the permit include a compliance schedule(s) for each
outfall which is not in compliance with the limitations
specified in the permit?
2. Does the permit documentation provide an explanation of why
compliance schedules were not included where necessary?
Identify if an explanation was not provided.
CHECKLIST E-2
Compliance Schedules: INTERIM AND FINAL REOUIRENENTS
Question
1.. Are distinct interim requirements -(milestones) with specific. -
dates included in compliance schedule(s)?
2. Does the compliance schedule provide for compliance by
ceasing the regulated activity? If so, is a date certain
identified ’?
3. Does the compliance schedule include:
a. A date certain for the permittee to decide whether or
not to cease the regulated activity;
b. A compliance schedule in the event that the decision is
to continue the regulated activity, a
c. A schedule for cessation of the regulated activity in
the event that the decision is to cease the activity?
4. Is the time between each interim date in the compliance
schedule(s) less than one year? If not, does the permit
specify interim dates for submission of reports?
5. Does the compliance schedule provide for final compliance by
the appropriate time? (7-1-84 in most cases)
6. Has the source received a section 301(k) (innovative
technology) waiver to extend the compliance date up to
7—1—87?
7. Was an ECSL or Section 309(a) (5) (A) order with a compliance
schedule ever issued? If so:
a. Did the facility meet the criteria for issuance of the
ECSL/ order?
b. Was the facility in compliance with the ECSL/order?
c. Was a subsequent enforcement action brought?
17—17

-------
TOOLS TO DETER VIOLATORS
• Informal contacts
• Notice of violation
• Administrative orders
• Civil suit
• Criminal suit
• Termination
CITIZENS AND ENFORCEMENT
• Section 505 allows citizen suits (civil action) after 60-day notice
to EPA/States and permittee
• Penalties to U.S. or State Treasury
• Citizens can recover court costs
• Supreme Court: Gwaltney decision
NOTES:
17—18

-------
EPA ’s PRINCIPLE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
(see § 122.41(a))
Administrative Order
- Schedule for compliance
- Interim Limits
- APO Class I/il ($25,000/$10,000)
Civil Action
- Brought in U. S. District Court
- Injunction
- Judicially enforceable schedule
- Civil penalties (up to $25,00 per day per violation)
Criminal Action
- Negligent violations* ($2,500 - $25,000 and 1 yr. imprisonment)
- Knowing violations* ($5,000 - $50,000 and 3 yrs. imprisonment)
• Imminent endangerment* ($250,000 and 15 yrs. imprisonment)
Doubles for second or subsequent violations
NOTES:
17—19

-------