Un.ied Slates
Environment! PioteicK>n
Agency
Gf'.ce o* Water
Enlorcemen! and Perrnis
WashTigtof DC 2C460
Jv-tv 1986
x'/EPA
Pretreatment Compliance
Monitoring and Enforcement
Guidance
-------
PRETREMMENT COMPLIANCE MONITORING
AND
OFFICE OF mTER ENPORCEMEWT .AND PERMITS
JULY 25, 1986
U.S. OIVIK»»EN1&L PROTECTION
401 H STREET, S.H.
O.C. 20460
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, O.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
JUL 2 5 1986
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT! Pretreataent Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement
Guidance
PROMs Ja9»sTK. Elaer, Director
of Mater Enforcement and Permits (EN-33S)
TO; Water Management Division Directors, Regions I-X
State Pretreatment Program Directors
Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force
The Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force (PIRT) in
its Final Report to the Administrator recommended that the Agency
develop an implementation guidance for Publicly-Owned Treatment
Works (POTWs) with approved pretreatment programs. In response to
that recommendation* the Office of Water Enforcement and Permits
has developed the attached final* "Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring
and Enforcement Guidance*. Draft Guidance was distributed in
January 1986 for review. This final guidance document responds to
extensive coianents received from EPA Regional Offices, States,
several POTWs and PIRT.
POTWs must undertake a variety of new activities to successfully
operate their approved pretreatment programs. This document is
intended to be a comprehensive guide to pretreatment implementation,
particularly on-going compliance monitoring and enforcement
activities. This Guidance provides a detailed discussion of:
1) establishing monitoring requirements for industrial users,
2} sampling and inspecting industrial users,
3J reviewing industrial user reports,
4) determining industrial user compliance status,
5) setting priorities for enforcement actions, and
6) reporting progress to Approval Authorities,
It establishes a definition of Significant Industrial User (SIU)
for use by Control Authorities in targeting primary implementation
activities and recommends a definition of Significant Noncompliance
(SNC) to be applied in evaluating industrial user performance in
complying with effluent and reporting requirements as well as
compliance schedules.
-------
- 2 -
To evaluate and improve the effectiveness of the pretreatntent
program, reporting at all levels—industrial user, POTW and States—
will be an on-going and significant activity. These reports will
be a necessary component towards determining national compliance
with pretreatment standards. As indicated, the Guidance establishes
common definitions which can be used as the basis for consistent
reporting and provides a recommended format for collection of data
from Control Authorities on at least an annual basis.
The reporting system and the definitions of significant
noncompliance and significant industrial user are issued as guidance.
However* Approval Authorities and Control Authorities should under-
stand that it is the goal of the Office of Water Enforcement and
Permits to establish a national reporting system based on the
concepts in this document. A Pretreatment Enforcement Tracking
System is now under development which will be baaed on the Pretreat-
ment Performance Summary found in the Guidance. Approval Authorities
should anticipate such requirements and strongly consider requiring
Control Authorities to begin full implementation of this reporting
system and associated definitions*
To assist Control Authorities in gaining proficiency with
compliance monitoring and enforcement activities, the Regional
Offices and delegated States are encouraged to conduct training
workshops providing practical examples of these activities. The
Office of Water Enforcement and Permits (QWEP) is pr«pared to
jointly develop and conduct such workshops with Regional Offices.
After issuing this Guidance, OWEP plans to work with several
Control Authorities (and their States and Regional Offices) to
implement the concepts identified in the Guidance. W« will care-
fully review the results of these efforts along with the experiences
of other Control Authorities, States and Regions to determine
whether future revisions and/or additions ar* n**d«d in the Guidance.
This Guidance is intended to assist the Control Authority in
translating regulatory requirements into a woekabl*, effective
pretreatment program. Control Authorities may b» unable to implement
all aspects of the Guidance initially, but may adopt the recommended
approaches on a phased basis. EPA may periodically issue additional
guidance which defines annual priorities for pr»treatment
implementation.
If you have questions about this Guidanc*, please call
J. William Jordan, Director, Enforcement Divition, at (202) 475-8304
or Anne Lassiter, Chief, Policy Development Branch, at (202) 475-8307,
Attachment
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.1 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2.1 INDUSTRIAL USER PRETREATMENT REQUIREMENTS 2-1
2.1.1 Pretreatment Standards 2-1
2.1.2 Industrial User Reporting Requirements........ 2-6
2.1.3 Definition of Significant Industrial
User 2-8
2.1.4 Periodic Reports » ,.. 2-10
2.2 INDUSTRIAL USER SELF-MONITORING FREQUENCIES 2-12
2,2.1 Establishing Industrial User Self-
monitoring Frequencies 2-12
3.1 GENERAL CONTROL AUTHORITY IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITIES 3-1
3.1.1 Control of industrial Dischargers Through
Use of Permits, Contracts, etc. 3-1
3.1,2 Procedures to Implement Responsibilities
Cited in the General Pretreatment
Regulations 3-3
3.1.2.1 Maintaining the Industrial User
Inventory 3-3
3.1.2.2 Notification (to Industrial Users) of
Applicable Pretreatment Standards
and Requirements 3-4
3.1.3 Providing Sufficient Resources to
Implement the Program 3-6
3.1.4 Developing and Enforcing Local Limits ........ 3-7
3,1.5 Additional Implementation Responsibilities ... 3-8
3.2 COMPLIANCE MONITORING BY A CONTROL AUTHORITY 3-10
3.2.1 Regulatory Basis for Pretreatment Compliance
Monitoring . 3-10
3.2.2 Compliance Monitoring of Regulated Industrial
Facilities 3-12
3.2.3 Types of inspection and Sampling Activities... 3-14
3.2.3.1 Scheduled Inspection and Sampling
Activities 3-14
3,2.3.2 Unscheduled Inspection and Sampling
Activities 3-15
3.2.3.3 Demand Inspection and Sampling
Activities 3-16
-------
3.2.4 Frequency of Compliance Monitoring
Activities , 3-17
3.2.5 Inspection Procedures 3-19
3.2.6 Control Authority Sampling of Industrial
Facilities , 3-20
. 3,2.6.1 Considerations in Preparing for
Sampling Activities 3-21
3.2.6.2 Guidelines for Approved Analytical
Procedures 3-22
3.2.6.3 Considerations in Sample Collection
and Analysis 3-23
3.2.7 Followup Actions in Response to Inspections
and/or Sampling of Industrial Users ......... 3-26
3.3 ENFORCEMENT PRINCIPLES AND MECHANISMS 3-28
3.3.1 Principles of an Enforcement Management
System 3-28
3.3.1.1 Responsibilities, Procedures, and
Timeframes ......................... 3-29
3.3.1.2 Industrial User Inventory Data 3-30
3.3.1.3 Collect and Dispense Information ..... 3-31
3.3.1.4 Conduct Sampling and Inspection
of lUs ... . 3-33
3.3.1.5 Compliance Screening 3-34
3.3.1.6 Enforcement Evaluation 3-35
3.3.1.7 Formal Enforcement and Followup ...... 3-37
3.3.2 Informal and Formal Enforcement Mechanisms .... 3-38
3.3.2.1 Informal Notice to Industrial User ... 3-40
3.3.2.2 Informal Meetings 3-40
3.3.2.3 Warning Letter 3-41
3.3.2.4 Notices or Meetings to Show Cause .... 3-41
3.3.2.5 Administrative Orders and Compliance
Schedules 3-42
3.3.2.6 Penalties 3-42
3.3.2.7 Termination of Service ............... 3-43
3.3.2.8 Civil Suit for Injunctive Relief
and/or Civil Penalties 3-44
3.3.3.9 Criminal Suit 3-45
3.3.2.10 Approval Authority and Public
Intervention 3-46
3.3.2.11 Resources to Enforce the Program ..... 3-48
3.4 RESPONDING TO INDUSTRIAL USER NONCOMPLIANCE 3-49
3.4.1 Definition of Significant Noncompliance (SNC) . 3-49
3.4.2 Publishing Lists of Industrial Users With
Significant Violations 3-52
3.4.3 Enforcement Response Guide 3-55
3.4.4 Levels of Response 3-62
3.4.5 Factors in Selecting the Appropriate Response . 3-63
3.4.5.1 Duration of the Violation and Compli-
ance History of the Industrial User 3-64
ii
-------
3.4.5.2 Apparent Good Faith of Responsible
Industrial User Personnel ......... 3-65
3.4.5.3 Noncompliance That Causes Interference
or Pass-Through 3-66
3.5 CONTROL AUTHORITY RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING TO
APPROVAL AUTHORITY . 3-67
3.5.1 Recordkeeping Requirements 3-67
3.5.2 Reporting Requirements 3-67
3.5.3 Data for an Annual Pretreatment Program
Report 3-68
LIST OF TABLES
Table
2-1 Industries Subject to Categorical Pretreatment
Standards 2-3
2-2 Recommended Industrial Self-Monitoring Frequencies
During Initial Compliance Period 2-13
3-1 Comparison: Significant Violation to
Significant Noncompliance .................... 3-52
3-2 Enforcement Response Guide 3-57
4-1 Annual Report Elements 3-68
4-2 Pretreatment Performance Summary ............... 3-70
APPENDICES
A. Example Reporting Procedures
B. Procedures for Inspections at Industrial Facilities
C. Average Limitations
D. Reporting Requirements Currently Approved by the
Office of Management and Budget {7/86)
111
-------
SECTION 1,1
INTRODUCTION
The Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force (PIRT), in
its Final Report to the Administrator, recommended that the United
States Environmental Protection Agency CUSEPA) develop implementa-
tion guidance for Publicly Owned Treatment Works (PQTWs) with
approved pretreatment programs. In response to that recommendation,
the USEPA has developed the "Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and
Enforcement Guidance" to provide to POTWs that act as Control
Authorities with information about pretreatment implementation
responsibilities.
This guidance is designed to provide a description of
implementation responsibilities, with particular emphasis on
compliance monitoring and enforcement activities. The guidance
addresses: (1) Industrial User obligations to comply with pollution
control requirements, conduct self-monitoring, and report on their
compliance status? and {2} Control Authority responsibilities to
implement the pretreatment program, sample and inspect industrial
users, determine industrial user compliance status, take enforcement
action, and report to Approval Authorities.
In addition to general descriptions of the various requirements,
this guidance document assists and guides Control Authorities in
implementing the pretreatment program by providing;
0 A definition of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs)
0 Recommended industrial user monitoring frequencies
0 Guidance on semiannual reports by industrial users
1-1
-------
0 A description of EPA's "Enforcement Management System" as
a guide for Control Authorities
0 A definition of Significant Noneompliance (SNC) for
industrial users
0 A Pretreatment Performance Summary, that EPA recommends
Approval Authorities make part of annual report requirements.
While the guidance describes examples of how to implement
various aspects of the program, the usefulness of the processes and
procedures described will vary somewhat, depending on the size of
the Control Authority. A small pretreatment program may need less
structure and may be able to operate less formally than a large
Control Authority. Also, the Pretreatraent Program is continuing to
evolve, and the concepts and procedures recommended here may change
with experience. Specific questions about this guidance or about
implementation of a local pretreatment program should be addressed
to the Approval Authority.
Discussion of specific requirements that must be met in order
to comply with the laws of the State in which a particular Control
Authority is located is beyond the scope of this document. For
example, a neutral inspection plan (see Section 3.2} must meet
Federal constitutional minimum requirements, as well as any specific
State constitutional or statutory provisions. The Control Authority
therefore should consult with its counsel to determine how to
"personalize" its program.
Nothing in this Guidance shall effect EPA's authority to bring
enforcement actions for pretreatment violations of Federal law.
1-2
-------
SECTION 2.1
INDUSTRIAL USER PRETREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
The National Pretreatment Program's primary goal is to protect
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs) and the environment from the
adverse impact that may occur when toxic wastes are discharged into
a sewage system. This protection is achieved by regulating the
nondomestic users of POTWs that discharge toxic wastes or unusually
strong conventional wastes. These regulated sources are called
industrial users. Section 2 of this guidance identifies for the
Control Authority pretreatment standards, Significant Industrial
Users (SIUs), reporting requirements, and self-monitoring frequencies.
2.1.1 Pretreatment Standards
The General Pretreatment Regulations establish general and
specific prohibited discharge standards (40 CFR §403.5(a) and (b))
that apply to all industrial users. These prohibitions apply
whether or not the source is subject to other Federal, State, or
local pretreatment standards. Specific prohibitions protect the
treatment plant and operations by prohibiting the discharge of
pollutants that:
0 Create a fire or explosion hazard
0 Are corrosive (with a pH lower than 5,0)
0 Obstruct flow in the sewer system or interfere with operations
0 Upset the treatment processes or cause a violation of the
POTWs permit
0 Increase the temperature of wastewater entering the treatment
plant to above 104°F (40°C).
General prohibitions protect the treatment plant from any interference
with its operations or any pass-through that would cause violation
of effluent limits or other requirements of the POTWs National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
2-1
-------
Section 403,5{c) requires Control Authorities to develop and
enforce local limits to ensure that the general and specific
prohibitions are met by industrial users. Local limits are the
mechanism by which general and specific discharge prohibitions are
applied in a technically based, defensible manner for individual,
nondoiaestic users of the Control Authority system. Note that
§403.5(d) of the General Pretreatraent Regulations deems local
limits to be pretreatment standards as defined in Section 3Q7(d)
of the Clean Water Act (CWA). As such, these requirements are
federally enforceable,
At a minimum, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
directed each Control Authority to determine the maximum allowable
treatment plant headworks (influent) loading for cadmium, chromium,
copper, nickel, lead, and zinc, to evaluate the need for local
limits (memorandum from Rebecca W. Hanmer, Director of the Office
of Water Enforcement and Permits to Regional Water Management
Division Directors and NPDES State Directors, August 5, 1985). To
aid in evaluating local limits, EPA has developed a computer program,
PRELIM. For further information on this software, contact your
Approval Authority or the EPA Regional Office.
Categorical standards are published by EPA as separate
regulations and contain numerical limits for the discharge of
pollutants from specified industrial categories. Categorical
standards have been or will be developed for categories determined
to be the most significant sources of pollutants. Table 2-1 shows
the industrial categories with pretreatment standards, the date
issued in the Federal Register, the effective date, and the compliance
date for existing facilities. In addition, pretreatment standards
2-2
-------
(Revised 4-22-86)
TABLE 2-1
INDUSTRIES SUBJECT TO CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
FINAL REGULATIONS
IndustryCategory
Timber Products Processing
Electroplating*
Iron & Steel
Inorganic Chemicals-*
-Certain Subparts
-Phase I
-Phase II
Petroleum Refining
Pulp and Paper Mills
Builders' Paper and Board Mills
Steam Electric Power Generating
Leather Tanning and Finishing
Porcelain Enameling
Coil Coating (Phase I)
-Steel Basis Material
-Galvanized Basis Material
-Aluminum Basis Material
Electrical and Electronic
Components (Phase I)
-Semi conductors
-Electronic Crystals
Metal Finishing
Copper Forming
Pharmaceuticals
Coil Coating (Phase II)
(Canmaking)
Electrical and Electronic
Components (Phase II)
-Cathode Ray Tube
-Luminescent Materials
Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing
-Phase I
-Phase II
Battery Manufacturing
Nonferrous Metals Forming
and Metal Powders
Pesticide Chemicals
Metal Molding and Casting
Date Issued PSES1
In Federal Effective Compliance
Register. Date Date
1-26-81 3-30-81 1-26-84
1-28-81 3-30-81 4-27-84
(Nonintegrated)
6-30-84
(Integrated)
7-15-83 8-29-83 7-15-86 (TTO)
5-27-82 7-10-82 7-10-85
7_20-77 7-20-80
6-29-82 8-12-82 6-29-85
8-22-84 10-5-84 8-22-87
10-18-82 12-01-82 12-01-85
11-18-82 1-03-83 7-01-84
11-18-82 1-03-83 7-01-84
11-19-82 1-02-83 7-01-84
11-23-82 1-06-83 11-25-85
11-24-82 1-07-83 11-25-85
12-01-82 1-17-83 12-01-85
4-08-83 5-19-83 7-01-84
11-08-85(As)
7-15-83 8-29-83 6-30-84 (Part 443 TTO)
7-10-85 (Part 420 TTO)
2-15-86 (Final)
8-15-83 9-26-83 8-15-86
10-27-83 12-12-83 10-27-86
11-17-83 1-02-84 11-17-86
12-14-83 1-27-84 7-14-87
3-08-84 4-23-84 3-09-87 (Subparts A-M)
9-20-85 11-04-85 9-20-88 (Subparts N-AE)
3-09-84 4-23-84 3-09-87
8-23-85 10-7-85 8-23-88
10-4-85 11-18-85 11-18-88
10-30-85 12-13-85 10-31-88
2-3
-------
(Revised 04-22-86)
T&BLE 2-1 (continued)
INDUSTRIES SUBJECT TO CATEGORICAL PRETREA1*OIT STANQWttB
PROPOSED REGULATIONS
IndustryCategory
Organic Chemicals and Plastics
and Synthetic Fibers
Plastics Molding ami Forming
(Phthalates)
Date Issued In
Federal __ Register
3-21-83
14-86}
Scheduled
Prcnulgation Date
12-86
(7-87)
*PSES-Pretreat3tient Standards for Existing Sources.
^Existing job shop electroplaters and independent printed circuit board manufacturers
nust comply with only the electroplating regulations. All other electroplating
operations are now covered by the metal finishing standards.
3Final ccwpliance date for Subparts A, B, L, AL, AR, BA» and BC is July 20, 1980.
the compliance date for Subparts AJ, AU, BL, BM, BN, and BO, except for discharges
from copper sulfate or nickel sulfate manufacturing operations* is August 22, 1987,
The compliance date for discharges front copper sulfate and nickel sulfate manu-
facturing operations and for all Subparts in Part 415 not previously specified
is June 29, 1985.
2-4
-------
for the Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers industry
are scheduled to be promulgated in December 1986, and additional
categories may be developed or subject to amendments. Industrial
users required to meet the standards shown in Taole 2-1 are referred
to as categorical industries. In some cases, local limits will be
more stringent than categorical standards, since they are based on
local, site-specific situations. Where the limits can be compared
for equivalence, the more stringent limit applies and is enforceable
as a Federal standard; otherwise, both limits apply and are
enforceable.
When determining whether local limits or categorical standards
are more stringent, the comparison must be made at the same sampling
point. Local limits generally apply to the industrial user's total
discharge to the POTW. Categorical standards generally apply to
specific wastestreams, and may need to be adjusted when applied to
mixtures of regulated, unregulated, and dilution wastestreams. For
example, a local limit for nickel of 3.5 mg/1 (for the total indus-
trial user's discharge) may appear to be more stringent than a
categorical standard of 4.1 mg/1 (for the electroplating wastestreams)
However, if 25 percent of the discharge is noncontact cooling waters
that do not contain nickel, the categorical standard measured at
the discharge to the POTW would be 4.1 x .75 = 3.1 mg/1. In this
example, the categorical standard is more stringent.
If a single maximum local limit is to replace a maximum daily
and a monthly (or 4-day) average categorical standard, the local
limit must be more stringent than both values and must apply each
day that the monthly average would apply. If the single maximum
2-5
-------
local limit is more stringent than the daily maximum contained in a
categorical standard, but less stringent than the applicable long-
term average (4-day or monthly average), the POTW must enforce both
the local limit and the monthly (or 4-day) average.
2.1.2 I|>dustrJ,al JJser Reporting Regylrement,g
General Pretreatment Regulations at 40 CFR 403.12 set forth
five basic reporting requirements that apply to industrial users
subject to specific categorical pretreatment standards. Categorical
industrial users must comply with these Federal reporting require-
ments, even if the Control Authority has determined that the local
limit(s) requirement is more stringent than the categorical standard.
These requirements are as follows:
0 Baseline Monitoring Report (4Q3,12(b)), including a
compliance schedule, when necessary, for meeting categorical
pretreatment standards (403.12(c)).
Within 180 days after the effective date of a categorical
standard or 180 days after a final decision on a category
determination submission, whichever is later, an industrial
user subject to the standard must submit to the Control
Authority a report that indicates whether the industrial
user meets the standard. The specific elements of the
report are contained in 40 CFR 403.12{b)(1-7).
0 Report on Progress in Meeting Compliance Schedules (40 CFR
403.12(c) ).
Categorical industrial users who are required to submit
compliance schedules in conjunction with their baseline
monitoring reports must report their progress to the Control
Authority within 14 days of each date in their schedule.
0 Report on Compliance with Categorical Pretreatment Standard
Deadline (403.12(d».
Within 90 days following the date for final compliance with
the applicable categorical standard (see Table 2-1 on page
2-3), the affected industrial user must submit to the
Control Authority a report indicating the nature and
concentration of all limited pollutants in the regulated
discharges and the average and maximum daily flow for
these discharges. The report also must indicate whether
the pretreatment standards are being met consistently.
2-6
-------
0 Periodic Report on Continued Compliance (403.12 (e».
Categorical industrial users are required to report on
their regulated waste discharges to the Control Authority
at least seraiannually. The regulations [Section 403.12
(e)(l)] state that the reports are to contain information
"indicating the nature and concentration of pollutants in
the effluent which^are limited by such categorical pretreat-
ment standards." For some categorical TTO standards, the
categorical regulation provides for the use of a certifica-
tion as a substitute for sampling and analysis results. In
addition, this report shall include a record of measured or
estimated average daily flows for the reporting period.
0 Notice of Slug Loading (403.12(f)>.
All industrial users must notify the Control Authority
immediately of any slug loading. Slug loading is defined
as any pollutant (including Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD)) released in a discharge at a flow rate or concentra-
tion which will cause interference with the operation of
the treatment works. Slug loads are often defined in the
local ordinance.
As stated earlier, the General Pretreatment Regulations require
that categorical industrial users submit the above reports. (Note
that the Notice of Slug Loading is required of any industrial user
subject to general and specific prohibitions. New sources are
required to submit all of the above reports except the report on
progress in meeting compliance schedules.5 Any request for one of
the above reports should note the Office of Management and Budget
approval number shown in Appendix D.
2.1.3 Definition ofSigjnifleant Industrial User
The substantive requirements of the General Pretreatment
Regulations are applicable to all industrial contributors to POTWs.
While the General Pretreatment Regulations contain very specific
reporting requirements for categorical industries, they are less
clear about the obligations of noncategorical industries—those
industries subject only to locally developed discharge standards
2-7
-------
(local limits) and to general and specific discharge prohibitions.
Proposed changes to the General Pretreatment Regulations may clarify
the need for Control Authorities to set reporting requirements for
significant noncategorical industrial users subject to other
pretreatment standards. Amendments to these regulations are
scheduled to be final in August 1987, This guidance recommends
that Control Authorities impose the same periodic reporting require-
ments (as described in 2.1*2) on all significant industrial users.
For purposes of this guidance, a Significant Industrial User (SIU)
is defined as:
9 All categorical industrial users
8 Any noncategorical industrial user that
- Discharges 25,000 gallons per day or More of process
wastewater ("process wastewater" excludes sanitary,
noncontact cooling and boiler blowdown wastewaters)
- Contributes a process wastestream which makes up 5
percent or more of the average dry feather hydraulic
or organic (BOD, TSS, etc.) capacity of the treatment
plant
- Has a reasonable potential, in the opinion of the Control
or Approval Authority, to adversely affect the POTW
treatment plant (inhibition, pass-through of pollutants(
sludge contamination, or endangerment of POTW workers).
The Control Authority may decide to remove any noncategorical
industrial user from the list of Significant Industrial Users
if the industrial facility has no reasonable potential to violate
any pretreataent standards (general and specific prohibitions or
local limits). The Approval Authority may choose to review deletions
and/or require additional facilities to be listed.
The above definition should also be useful to Control Authorities
for setting priorities for monitoring and enforcement, and for
determining requirements for self~»onitoring. Since the definition
2-8
-------
is designed to identify those users whose contribution is likely to
have the most significant impact on treatment plant operations, it
should provide the Control Authority with a mechanism for identifying
the most effective use of its permitting, monitoring and enforcement
resources. Additionally, the definition identifies the universe of
industrial users that should be carefully evaluated to determine
self-monitoring requirements, and for determining which lUs should
be issued control documents.
In summary, for a Significant Industrial User, this guidance
recommendst
0 Self-monitoring frequencies (see Section 2.2)
0 At least one inspection and/or sampling by the Control
Authority per year (see Section 3.2.4)
0 Industrial user reporting to the Control Authority twice
per year (see Section 2.1.3)
0 Enforcement actions for various types of violations (see
Section 3.4}
0 Annual reporting by the Control Authority summarizing the
compliance status of and enforcement actions taken against
Significant Industrial Users.
2.1.4 Periodic Reports
Section 403.12 of the General Pretreatment Regulations requires
that categorical industries report to the Control Authority at
least semiannually on their regulated wastewater discharges. When
submitting a semiannual report, the industrial user should provide
the following!
* Basic information identifying the industrial user name,
address, and sampling period covered by the report
0 Wastewater pollutant sampling and analysis data, including
all regulated pollutants, concentrations, and sampling dates
2-9
-------
0 Where the industrial user must comply with an "average*
standard (e.g., 4-day, 30-day, or monthly), calculation of
the achieved averages must be made
* A record of measured or estimated average and maximum daily
flow for the reporting period? this should include average
flow data for each flow rate used in calculating the industrial
user's limits (e.g., total flow and dilution flow)
0 Where mass per day requirements are imposed by the Control
Authority, the report must include information on the mass/
day discharged
e When the industrial user is subject to a production-based
standard/ production information must be supplied
0 If an industrial user has certified to a particular condition
of a categorical regulation (e.g., control of TTO), a state-
ment should be included acknowledging the continuing applica-
bility of the certification
0 The signature of an authorized representative that certifies
the validity of the report.
In addition to the above information, the Control Authority may
request other data, including?
8 Identification of all occurrences of noncompliance
* An explanation of violations and corrective action taken
0 Type of sample, sampling location, and analytical method
* Industrial user limits
0 Industrial user code
* Telephone number of contact person
0 Identification of any process or treatment changes
* Wastewater treatment plant receiving the industrial user's
discharge (applicable when the Control Authority is the State
or Region).
Detailed examples of reporting elements are presented in
Appendix A, including a recommended format for recording and
reporting industrial user effluent data for the semiannual report.
2-10
-------
SECTION 2.2
INDUSTRIAL USER SELF-MONITORING FREQUENCIES
2.2.1 Estab l.i sh ing Indus.tria 1User Self-monitori np Frequencies
The General Pretreatment Regulations for Existing and New
Sources of Pollution (40 CFR 403} require industrial users, subject
to categorical pretreatment standards, to periodically report on
the nature of their wastewater effluent. Specifically, Section
403,12(e) requires that any industrial user subject to a categorical
pretreatment standard submit semiannual reports to the Control
Authority indicating the nature and concentration of pollutants in
its effluent controlled by categorical pretreatment standards. The
regulations do not specify how the data for these reports are to be
developed. Monitoring can be performed by the Control Authority or
by the industrial user or a combination of both. However, given
the resource demands of monitoring, most Control Authorities will
choose to require the industrial user to self-monitor (in addition
to Control Authority monitoring), and will establish monitoring
frequencies for the industrial user.
Establishing monitoring frequencies that balance the expense
of self-monitoring with the need for representative sampling data
represents a major task for the Control Authority. In some cases,
the Control Authority has been receiving industrial user self-
monitoring reports or conducting industrial user sampling activities
for several years and will have developed a pattern of monitoring
that accurately reflects the industrial user's discharge. In such
cases, Control Authorities should continue to use those sampling
frequencies as long as the industrial user's discharge remains
2-11
-------
relatively stable and compliance is maintained. However, when the
Control Authority does not have experience with industrial user
monitoring frequencies and industrial compliance data are' not
available, the Control Authority must establish suitable monitoring
frequencies.
While establishing self-monitoring frequencies, the Control
Authority should take into account a number of factors. First, the
Control Authority should decide whether it wishes to perform all
the monitoring for its industrial users. In general, all Significant
Industrial Users should be required to self-monitor and/or be
monitored by the Control Authority.
Major considerations in determining the frequency of monitoring
are the following:
8 Compliance history of the industrial user
° The ability to verify the compliance of the industrial user
with pretreatment standards
0 Impact on the operation of the treatment works, including
sludge disposal options
6 Water quality impact on receiving stream
0 Industrial user discharge flow rate
0 Monitoring expense to both the industrial user and the
Control Authority.
The goal of the Control Authority is to establish a monitoring
frequency that will produce sufficient sampling data to assess
whether an industrial user is complying with discharge requirements.
To assist Control Authorities in setting self-monitoring
frequencies, this guidance provides a table of suggested, flow-based,
2-12
-------
self-monitoring frequencies (fable 2-2) which reflect typical
monitoring frequencies costed by EPA when developing categorical
standards and assessing potential economic impacts. The table,
with recommended frequencies, is provided below:
. TABLE 2-2
INDUSTRIAL FLOW
(GPD)
RECOMMENDED INDUSTRIAL SELF-MONITORING
FREQUENCIES DURING INITIAL COMPLIANCE PERIOD
(FIRST YEAR)
CONVENTIONAL POLLU-
TANTS, INORGANIC
POLLUTANTS, CYANIDE,
AND PHENOL
GC OR GC/MS ORGANICS
0-10,000
10,001-50,000
50,001-100,000
100,001-240,000
>240,000
I/month
2/month
I/week
2/week
3/week
2/year
4/year
I/month
2/month
4/month
(Note: Most industrial users required to meet a TTO requirement
may elect to submit a toxic organic management plan and
periodic certification statements in lieu of performing
analyses.)
For pollutants that are not reasonably expected to be present,
minimum analysis (twice per year) is recommended. For example, a
metal finisher that discharges 150,000 gpd and does not use cadmium
in any raw materials may be given minimal monitoring requirements
for cadmium. Another option for Control Authorities is to require
more frequent monitoring of a single "indicator" pollutant, which
provides an indirect measure of the compliance status for other
regulated pollutants. An example is an electroplater that discharges
chromium, copper, and zinc. If the compliance history demonstrates
that the controlling parameter is chromium (other violations occur
only when chromium is violated), the Control Authority may decide
to require more monitoring for chromium than the other parameters
2-13
-------
(and perhaps require an immediate followup for the other pollutants
each time the results of a chromium analysis indicate a violation).
These frequencies might be used for an initial evaluation
period of 1 year, or as a basis for reevaluating existing monitoring
frequencies. During the first year of use, the Control Authority
and the industrial user would assess the adequacy of the monitoring
program. At the end of the year, the Control Authority might
reevaluate the frequencies in terms of the factors discussed earlier,
and, if necessary, revise the frequencies.
The demonstrated compliance history of the industrial user
should be a major consideration in deciding whether to adjust the
monitoring frequency. If the industrial user has demonstrated
consistent compliance over an extended time period (such as 1
year)r the Control Authority may consider a step decrease in the
required frequency for that industrial user. Industrial users that
have demonstrated frequent noncorepliance over a similar time period
should be considered by the Control Authority for increased
monitoring. As a result, the Control Authority's compliance
monitoring and enforcement program can be focused more on those
industrial users exhibiting continued noncoitpliance.
If the Control Authority has experienced interference, upset,
or pass-through, or has limited sludge disposal options due to the
elevated concentrations of particular pollutants, the Control
Authority may consider increasing the monitoring frequency of those
industrial users discharging these pollutants. Increased data
would facilitate identification of the types and concentrations of
2-14
-------
pollutants that may be causing the problem. In such a case, a
reexaraination of the adequacy of existing local limits may also be
necessary to fully resolve these Control Authority problems.
\f
Whether the Control Authority uses the frequencies recommended
above or establishes different frequencies, 'self-monitoring frequen-
cies should be incorporated into permits or other agreements existing
between the Control Authority and each contributing industrial
user. The permit or other mechanism should also provide for the
opportunity to revise any self-monitoring requirements at the
discretion of the Control Authority.
The recommended flow-based monitoring frequencies of Table 2-2
focus attention on the larger facilities and reduce the monitoring
expense burden for small facilities. As stated earlier* the Control
Authority may choose to reduce the industrial user monitoring
frequency and associated expenses by considering an increase of its
own monitoring activities of the industrial contributors. However,
the combined monitoring effort should equal the level of monitoring
necessary to produce representative samples that will allow the
POTW to reliably determine compliance.
2-15
-------
SECTION 3.1
GENERAL CONTROL AUTHORITY IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES
This section of the guidance document addresses implementation
responsibilities of the Control Authority, with particular emphasis
on the compliance monitoring and enforcement responsibilities.
Section 3.1 identifies and briefly discusses certain of the general
implementation responsibilities of Control Authorities.
3.1.1 Control of Industrial Dischargers ^ Through, JJse_^f Permits,
Contracts,
Section 403.8(f)(l) of the General Pretreatment Regulations
requires- that POTWs control through permit, contract, order, or
similar means, the contribution by each IU to ensure compliance
with applicable pretreatment standards and requirements. This is
essential to the effective implementation of the Control Authority's
pretreatment program and to the smooth operation of the POTW.
However, the existence of control mechanisms such as permits,
contracts, etc., is not enough to ensure compliance by industrial
users with applicable pretreatment standards. Control Authorities
must be willing and able to act upon and effectively enforce the
terms of these control mechanisms.
Most Control Authorities use a system in which they issue
discharge or sewer use permits to industrial users. Some of the
components of control mechanisms that Control Authorities may use
are discussed belows
* A specified, limited period of duration (for comparison
NPDES permits specify 5 years). Industrial users with a
high potential to impact POTW operations or to undergo
significant process and discharge changes could have shorter
periods of permit duration. Limited duration of control
mechanisms can enable the Control Authority to review
3-1
-------
available data and issue control mechanisms that accurately
reflect conditions and changes at the industrial facility.
The Control Authority should require industrial users to
update their control mechanism application (if such applica-
tions are required by the Control Authority) prior to
reissuance of the control mechanism as another means to
identify process and discharge changes.
Applicable pretreatment standards (discharge 1imits)» For
categorical industrial users, thesestandardsmayconsist
of a combination of national prohibited discharge standards,
national categorical pretreatment standards, and more
stringent local pretreatment limits. These limits may be
calculated through the use of the combined wastestream
formula. For noncategorical industrial users, national
prohibited discharge standards and local limits apply.
Sampling protocol, including sampling frequency, sample
type, sampling point, etc.
Reporting requirements (discussed in Section 2 of this
guidance document).
A nontransferability clause, conditioning the applicability
olthecontrol mechanism to the specific owner and facility
to which they were issued. An ownership change would
render the existing control mechanism void for that parti-
cular facility and necessitate issuance of a new control
mechanism applicable to the new owner. Nontransferability
is a mechanism for Control Authorities to issue control
mechanisms that accurately reflect changes under new owner-
ship, such as different processes, different products,
different chemicals used, different applicable limits, etc.
Legal authority by the Control Authority to revoke the
sewer discharge privileges of the industrial user. This
revocation^authority serves as a deterrent to illegal
discharges, falsification of reports, refusal to allow
access, etc.? such conditions for revocation may also be
included in the control mechanism language.
Legal authority by the Control Authority to modify the
control mechanism if: there are significant "p"rooess or
discharge changes, newly promulgated national categorical
standards, or enactment of more stringent local limits.
Compliance schedule, if appropriate. Compliance schedules
(and interim limits) for categorical industrial users
beyond the statutory compliance deadline do not relieve the
industrial users of violating that deadline.
3-2
-------
3.1.2 Pjcoc_e_
-------
effective control mechanisms, and prioritizing industrial users
(e.g.r the identification of Significant Industrial Users - see
Section 2.1.3) to enable Control Authorities to more efficiently
allocate resources and schedule pretreatiaent activities,
The Control Authority may use a variety of methods to identify
and characterize the discharges of new industrial users in the
areai as well as to identify significant process and/or discharge
changes at existing industrial users. To identify new industrial
users, Control Authorities should establish a structured procedure
such as requiring new industrial users to complete applications for
discharge or sewer use permits when they apply for business licenses.
Control Authority procedures for updating information on
existing industrial users should include ongoing sampling and
inspection activities by the Control Authority and permit require-
ments that the industrial user notify the Control Authority of
significant changes in processes, discharge, and ownership.
In some cases, these procedures should also include periodic
re-application of permitted industrial users and periodic completion
of a questionnaire that helps to characterize the wastewater
discharge of the industrial user.
3.1.2.2 Notification (to Industrial Users) ofApplicable
Prettreatment Standards and Requirements
Section 403.8{f)(2)(iii) requires Control Authorities to
notify industrial users of applicable pretreatment (and RCRA)
requirements, including the general and specific prohibitions of
3-4
-------
the General Pretreatment Regulations, local limits, and categorical
standards (see Section 2.1.1 and Table 2-1). In order for the
Control Authority to provide industrial users with timely and
effective notification of applicable pretreatment standards and
requirements, the Control Authority must stay informed of recent
changes or additions to national categorical standards, State
standards, etc.
USEPA will attempt to provide some information about changes
in standards and regulations through bulletins, meetings, and the
trade press. States with authorized pretreatment programs are
expected to transmit such information as well as modifications in
State law requirements to Control Authorities.
Some large Control Authorities may also wish to subscribe to
the Federal Register and assign one staff member to review newly
issued standards and regulations. In many cases, the Code of
Federal Regulations, Title 40, Parts 400 to end, may provide a good
compilation of the requirements. These documents are issued once a
year by the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402 (202-783-3238). Additional sources of
information regarding new regulations include looseleaf daily or
weekly "regulatory reporters" issued by the private sector.
When specific questions concerning implementation of new
regulations and regulatory modifications arise, the Control Authority
should make a request or telephone call to the Approval Authority
to ensure that correct interpretations are made. If a category
determination request needs to be made, procedures specified in
§403.6(a) of the General Pretreatment Regulations must be followed.
3-5
-------
Two roechaeisms that the Control Authority may use to notify
industrial users of applicable pretreatment regulations are:
0 Mailing of such notifications to affected industrial users
by certified mail with return-receipt requested (to confirm
that the industrial user has been notified, in the event
that formal enforcement action is necessary)
0 Timely amendments to the control mechanism (permit, contract,
etc.) usedf such amendments, acknowledged by signature of
a company official, ensure that the industrial user is
aware of new regulations and significant regulatory
modifications.
Although notification by public notice of the general sewer
use ordinance is legally sufficient, for Significant Industrial
Users or those subject to pretreatment standards not contained in
the general sewer use ordinance, individual notification should be
made.
3.1.3 Providing Sufficient Resources to Implement the. _Prggram
Section 403.8(f)(3) of the General Pretreatment Regulations
requires that each Control Authority provide sufficient resources
and qualified personnel to implement the pretreatment program. The
preliminary determination of sufficient budget and staffing alloca-
tions for each Control Authority should be contained in the Control
Authority's final pretreatment program submission to the Approval
Authority to secure program approval. The "Guidance Manual for
POTW Pretreatment Program Development" (EPA, October 1983} contains
a discussion of program organization, costs, and revenue sources,
The Control Authority may find it necessary or desirable to alter
these resource allocations as it gains more experience with imple-
menting the pretreatment program. The Control Authority should
notify the Approval Authority of any significant reductions in
resource allocations for pretreatment.
3-6
-------
3.1.4 Developing and Enforcing Local. ...Limits
Section 403.5(c) of the General Pretreatment Regulations
requires Control Authorities to develop and enforce specific local
limits when necessary to implement the general prohibitions against
pass-through and interference (Section 403.5(an and to implement
the specific prohibitions discussed in Section 403.5(b).
At a minimum, each Control Authority should conduct a technical
evaluation to determine the maximum allowable treatment plant
headworks (influent) loading for each of the following pollutants:
cadmium, chromium, copper* lead, nickel, and zinc, as well as for
any other pollutants of concern (e.g., cyanide) at that facility.
A procedure for performing this analysis is provided in the
"Guidance Manual for PQTW Pretreatment Program Development, USEPA,
October 1983.
One special situation exists with regard to establishing local
limits to which Control Authorities should be alerted. In the
past. Control Authorities may have established user charge rate
structures for conventional pollutant discharges and have allowed
industrial users to discharge conventional pollutants at a level
that exceeded design criteria for the treatment plant. At least
two disadvantages may occur as a result of uncontrolled industrial
contribution: (1) the wastewater treatment plant's future reserve
capacity may be sacrificed in favor of present income from user
charge feesj and (2) protection of the treatment plant from
interference and pass-through may be compromised.
In establishing and implementing local limits, Control
Authorities may wish to establish a maximum conventional pollutant
3-7
-------
limitation that still allows for user charges for concentrations
up to that limit. The raaximura limit could be calculated from a
wasteload allocation based on the plant's ability to treat the
conventional pollutants and the NPDES conventional pollutant
effluent limit. For example, a BOD or TSS maximum limit could be
set at 1000 mg/1 and the range of 300 to 1,000 mg/1 could be used
for application of user charges. The Control Authority could
thus retain its user charge system and simultaneously establish
and enforce any needed maximum concentration limitations.
3.1.5 Additional implementation Responsibilities
The Control Authority's NPDES permit may contain other
requirements for pretreatment program implementation. For example,
the NPDES permit may require the Control Authority to submit to the
Approval Authority annual (or more frequent) reports summarizing
pretreatment program implementation activities, including the rate
of Significant Noncorapliance CSNC) of industrial users. Another
example is a permit requirement specifying frequencies for
inspections and sampling of industrial users.
The General Pretreatment Regulations and Control Authority's
approved pretreatment program submission and NPDES permit also
define the implementation responsibilities of the Control Authority.
The Control Authority is responsible for carrying out all aspects
of its approved pretreatment program,
Additional pretreatment program monitoring and reporting may
be associated with removal credits,* fundamentally different factors
* EPA*s removal credit regulation has been invalidated by an April
1986 court ruling. Until further court action or regulatory
action restores the Agency's ability to provide removal credits,
no removal credit applications will be processed.
3-8
-------
variancesr net/gross pollutant credits, etc. Control Authorities
affected by these special factors should review the General
Pretreatment Regulations and their own NPDES permit carefully to
identify requirements specific to their situation.
3-9
-------
SECTION 3.2
COMPLIANCE MONITORING BY A CONTROL AUTHORITY
Only through an effective pretreatment compliance monitoring
program can the Control Authority evaluate the compliance status of
industrial users in relation to applicable pretreatment standards.
In addition, information obtained through a pretreatment compliance
monitoring program can be of use in evaluating: (1) the quality of
the POTW influent, effluent, and sludge ; (2) the impacts on treatment
processes, the receiving stream, and sludge disposal; and (3) the
need for new or revised local industrial discharge limitations.
This section presents background information concerning
compliance monitoring and general guidance that should be used by
Control Authority personnel when conducting onsite inspection and
sampling activities at industrial facilities. The intent is to
assist Control Authority personnel in planning, collecting, and
documenting sufficient information to determine compliance or
noncompliance, particularly by all Significant Industrial Users,
with all applicable Federal, State, and local pretreatment standards
and requirements.
3.2.1 Regulatory Basis_ for Pretreatment Compliance
The regulatory basis for Control Authorities to establish a
pretreatment compliance monitoring system is set forth in Section
403.8(£) (1) (v) of the General Pretreatment Regulations, which
requires that Control Authorities possess the legal authority to
carry out all inspection, surveillance, and monitoring procedures
necessary to determine compliance independent of information provided
by industrial users.
3-10
-------
Sections 403.8{f)(2)(iv)-(vi) of the General Pretreatment
Regulations require that Control Authorities develop and implement
procedures to:
0 Randomly sample and analyze industrial effluent and conduct
inspections of industrial users to determine compliance
independently from industrial self-monitoring reports
0 Investigate instances of noneompliance, producing admissible
evidence through sampling and inspections as necessary
* Receive and analyze industrial self-monitoring reports.
All of these activities can be characterized as compliance monitoring
activities. The first two monitoring activities are discussed in
the following subsections. Review of self-monitoring reports is
discussed in Section 3.3.1 of this guidance manual in relation to
a Control Authority's Enforcement Management System (EMS). A
discussion of monitoring at the POTW to evaluate the adequacy of
existing local pretreatment standards will be contained in a forth-
coming guidance, which will cover many aspects of developing and
implementing local limits.
Compliance monitoring activities include: (I) sampling of
discharges, (2) receipt and review of self-monitoring reports, and
(3) field inspections. The goals of compliance activities are to:
0 Independently ensure that applicable pretreatment standards
(Federal categorical and prohibited, State, and local) are
being met by affected industrial users
• Independently verify that self-monitoring results reported
by industrial users are representative of the pollutant
concentrations in wastewater from these users
* Ensure that local ordinance provisions and industrial user
permit provisions are being met
0 Ensure that self-monitoring and reporting requirements
(Federal, State, and local) are being met
3-11
-------
0 Maintain accurate knowledge of local industrial processes
including changes/ and the characteristics of industrial
discharges to the POTW
* Identify the need for enforcement action to remedy existing
conditions
0 Accurately report compliance progress to the Approval
Authority
0 Maintain accurate knowledge of the adequacy of pretreatment
equipment including its proper operation and maintenance,
and of the need for additional equipment, etc.
The term "inspections," as used throughout this guidance manual,
does not include sampling activities, although inspections and
sampling activities may be concurrent (e.g., compliance sampling
inspections). Inspections and sampling activities generally are
used to obtain slightly different types of information. Sampling
activities should provide information that can be used to directly
determine compliance with applicable pretreatioent standards and to
confirm the representativeness of the sampling analyses reported in
industrial self-monitoring reports. Inspections may be geared more
towards evaluating compliance with construction schedules, identifying
process changes, updating Control Authority information on the
industrial facility, confirming that sampling points used can
provide representative samples of regulated wastestreams, evaluating
the adequacy of existing pretreatment equipment or need for additional
equipment, etc.
3.2.2 Compliance Monitoring of Regulated Industrial Facilities
The scope and magnitude of a Control Authority compliance
monitoring program will depend on a number of factors, including
size of the Control Authority system, number and type of regulated
industrial users, pollutant concentrations, discharge volumes, and
available resources. A prerequisite to a good compliance monitoring
3-12
-------
program is the accurate identification of industrial sources. This
is usually accomplished initially by using an Industrial Waste
Survey (see Section 3,3.1.2 of this guidance), which gathers infor-
mation from all potential industrial dischargers in the service
area. Once gathered, however, it is important to periodically
update this information to maintain accuracy and permit a proper
allocation of available resources.
The resources available to the Control Authority (including
both personnel and equipment) will influence the type and amount of
monitoring activities that can reasonably be accomplished. Resource
constraints may dictate that monitoring activity focus on Significant
Industrial Users, while only a minimum number of required monitoring
events are initiated for other industrial users. Where resources
allow, the Control and Approval Authorities may wish to conduct
joint inspections of industrial users initially to ensure that
Control Authority personnel develop and use appropriate procedures
for such inspections.
Ultimately, however, a Control Authority must implement a
compliance monitoring program that: (1) meets the requirements and
intent of the General Pretreatraent Regulations, (2) is effective
and timely in determining compliance with categorical and local
discharge limitations, (3) provides representative data required to
meet Control Authority reporting requirements to the Approval
Authority, and (4) provides sampling data that would be admissible
in court, if such an enforcement action were undertaken.
3-13
-------
3,2.3 Types of Inspection and Sampling Activit.ies
Inspection and sampling activities at industrial facilities
may bei (1) scheduled in advance with the industrial useri (2)
unscheduled, with little or no prior notice to the industrial useri
or (3) on demand, usually in response to a specific problem or
emergency, such as a spill at an industrial facility or an upset at
the treatment plant. Control Authorities should develop procedures
to implement a neutral monitoring scheme, if possible, for routine
inspection and sampling activities. A neutral monitoring scheme
provides some objective basis for scheduling inspections and sampling
visits by establishing a system for setting inspection priorities
(whether a complex factor-based system or an alphabetical system)
to ensure that industrial users are not unfairly selected for
inspection.
In cases of demand monitoring, which, by definition, responds
to an unplanned event or problem or where the Control Authority
has a reasonable suspicion of violations, targeted monitoring
should be carried out. This targeted monitoring may include sewer
line and/or discharge monitoring at the industrial facility.
To ensure that all sampling data obtained will be admissible
in court, each POTW must develop and document sampling and chain-
of-custody procedures.
3.2.3.1 S c hedu 1 ed I nspect i. O_TL _a"d Samp 1 ing Ac tivities
The Control Authority may wish to schedule inspections and/or
sampling visits with prior notice to the industrial user. Depending
on the size and type of industrial facility, the date and time of
the planned visit should be mutually agreed upon 1 week to 1 month
3-14
-------
in advance. In generalf by notifying the industrial user in advance
of the date of a pretreatment inspection or sampling visit, a
meeting can be arranged with the industrial facility's management
and/or a knowledgeable employee to:
* Conduct an onsite inspection and become familiar with plant
processes that generate an industrial wastestream and any
pretreatment facilities that may be present
0 Collect information and/or obtain samples to evaluate
compliance by industrial users with Federal, State, and
local pretreatment standards and requirements
* Identify changes in industrial processes or operations that
may affect the quality of the industrial discharges and
subsequent permit limitations
* Maintain a cooperative, as well as a regulatory, presence
with the industrial community
8 Discuss problems and/or concerns of either the Control
Authority or the industrial user related to the pretreatraent
program
0 Update the Control Authority's information on regulated
industrial users
* Verify self-monitoring reports submitted to the Control
Authority by the industrial user.
3.2.3.2 Unscheduled Inspection andSampling Activities
The term "unscheduled monitoring" refers to industrial
inspections or sampling visits that are not scheduled in advance
with the industrial user. Such unannounced monitoring of regulated
industrial users is generally a useful means of determining the
compliance status of these users; instances of noncompliance are
often identified during unscheduled monitoring visits. For
unscheduled monitoring, little or no prior notice is given to the
industrial user except when some minimum notice is necessary to
gain access to the property.
3-15
-------
The Control Authority may have difficulty in ensuring
beforehand, that an industrial facility will be in normal operation
for an unscheduled monitoring visit. If there is strong evidence
that the industrial facility is not in normal operation during an
unscheduled visit, the Control Authority nay wish to consider
planning another unscheduled visit to the same facility. The
advantages of such unscheduled monitoring visits greatly outweigh
the possible difficulties that may be encountered during such
visits.
Unscheduled monitoring visits by the Control Authority typically
include:
0 A confidential schedule known only to the Control Authority
(and possibly to the Approval Authority). If access to the
property of the industrial facility is needed, some minimum
notification or a search warrant may be necessary.
0 Brief inspection of facility operations and pretreatment
activities, as necessary (a more thorough inspection can be
conducted if problems are noted).
0 Sampling of the wastewater effluent from industrial users
performed on an unannounced basis, with the industrial user
at normal operation.
3.2.3.3 Demand InspectionandSampling Activities
Demand monitoring may be initiated in response to a known or
suspected violation discovered as a result of a self-monitoring
report, routine sampling visit or inspection, a public complaint,
or any discharge of prohibited materials, violation of the Control
Authority's NPDES permit requirements, POTW operating difficulties,
unusual influent conditions observed at the waste treatment plant,
or emergency situations (e.g., plant upsets, sewer line blockages,
fires, explosions, etc.).
3-16
-------
Demand monitoring is initiated to accomplish one or more of
the following:
* Identify or verify (possibly through use of sewer line
monitoring and/or onsite monitoring) the source of a discharge
causing problems with treatment plant operations
* Determine the nature, duration, and degree of hazard of the
discharge
* Assist in identifying corrective actions necessary to contain
or halt the discharge
* Initiate corrective actions, If needed
* Gather information needed for followup compliance or
enforcement actions.
In emergency situations, demand monitoring should be initiated
immediately. Once the source is identified, Control Authority
inspectors involved in an emergency situation should consider the
following:
* Notifying other appropriate agencies (e.g., fire department,
State hazardous waste response team, State water department,
EPA, etc.)
* Making information readily available to the other agencies
involved in the response effort
* Maintaining direct contact with the Control Authority managers
in case
- Special equipment is needed (e.g., sampling bottles, safety
equipment)
- Administrative warrants, injunctions, or legal opinions are
needed
— Management decisions are needed (whether service should be
terminated, the extent of Control Authority response, etc.).
3.2.4 Frequency of_.QompJLrance Monitoring Activities
Control Authority personnel must determine the frequency with
which industrial inspections and sampling will occur. Based primarily
on the results of the industrial waste survey, the Control Authority
3-17
-------
established an initial monitoring frequency for all regulated
industrial users during its pretreatment program development. In
most cases, the initial monitoring frequency, for both the whole
community of industrial users and individual industrial users, was
based on one or more criteria, possibly including?
0 Volume of industrial discharge (most common criterion used)
* Type and concentrations of pollutants in the discharge
0 POTW problems known or suspected to have been caused by an
industrial user
0 Past history of noncompliance problems with the industrial
user
0 Production variations, both daily and/or seasonal, at the
industrial facility
0 Type of resources (labor and equipment) available to the
Control Authority.
Modifications to self-monitoring frequencies of regulated
industrial users are discussed in Section 2.2.
In addition to establishing industrial self-monitoring
frequencies, EPA recommends that the Control Authority conduct at
least one inspection and/or one sampling visit {inspections and
sampling visits may occur concurrently) annually to all Significant
Industrial Users. Control Authorities may wish to consider conducting
one unscheduled inspection and/or sampling visit. If the Control
Authority elects to perform all the monitoring (no IU self-monitoring),
then at least two sampling visits per year would be required. For
visits that include sampling/ the dates can generally be arranged
with little notice to the industrial user to make them aware that
compliance could be checked at any time. Samples taken by the
Control Authority during these visits should be analyzed for all
3-18
-------
pollutants for which that industrial facility is regulated (including
local limits). There are many reasons for which more frequent
monitoring of certain industrial users should be conductedr if
possible. For example, if an industrial facility has exhibited a
marked inability to achieve and maintain compliance, additional
saiipling of this facility by the Control Authority may be appropriate
in anticipation of possible enforcement action.
Regardless of the initially planned monitoring frequency, the
implementation phase of the program will provide the Control Authority
with an opportunity to collect useful information concerning each
industrial user. This information will allow the Control Authority
to adjust the frequency of the Control Authority's monitoring of
each industrial user, as well as to adjust the self-monitoring
requirements for each industrial user. Such modifications should
be made as necessary to adequately meet the need to determine
compliance and make the best use of available resources. After a
"compliance history* has been developed for each regulated industrial
user, the Control Authority can re-allocate its own monitoring
resources to focus on problem-causing industrial users, those
industrial users that may be having difficulty with compliance, or
those that are susceptible to variations in their processes or
production cycles.
3.2.5 Inspection Procedures
Industrial inspections, if performed properly, should form the
information base for any subsequent enforcement action against
industrial users. Inspections generally examine information such
as sampling locations, pretreatment equipment, spill control
practices, water flow schematics, process change, etc. In addition,
3-19
-------
industrial inspections serve to familiarize Control Authority
personnel with the industrial facility and its processes, determine
sampling points, and determine the need to use the combined waste-
stream formula for establishing applicable pretreatment standards,
etc.
Appendix B describes recommended procedures for performing
industrial inspections, with or without associated sampling
activities. This appendix:
* Recommends that preinspection planning be conducted*
including reviewing background information, preparing equip-
ment , and notifying the industrial user, if appropriate
* Describes recommended entry procedures
*> Recommends that an opening conference be performed, especially
for the first inspection of the industrial facility by
Control Authority personnel
* Describes the type of information that should be collected
in the course of an industrial inspection
* Briefly describes the development of an inspection report.
3.2.6 Control Authority _Sampling of Industrial Facilities
Sampling and analysis of the wastewater discharge from an
industrial facility is generally conducted to accomplish one or
more of the following objectives:
* Verify compliance with wastewater discharge limitations
* Verify user charges
* Confirm the representativeness of self-monitoring data
9 Verify that parameters specified in the industrial user's
permit are consistent with wastewater characteristics
" Support reissuance and revision of industrial user's permits.
* Support for enforcement action.
The Control Authority's sampling program may consist of any
combination of in-house sampling and analytical capabilities or
3-20
-------
contracted services. However, the Control Authority must ensure
that the sampling program includes properly trained personnel,
accepted entry procedures, accepted sampling procedures, and
accurate recordkeeping to ensure the validity of the sampling
results.
Section 3,2.6 presents guidelines and considerations for
sampling and analysis of industrial dischargers. Industrial sampling
and analysis can be conducted independently or in conjunction with
a compliance inspection and performed by the same or different
Control Authority personnel. If sampling and analysis are performed
both by Control Authority inspection personnel and by other Control
Authority personnel during different sampling visits, it is strongly
recommended that those sampling personnel involved familiarize
themselves with the inspection procedures and guidelines presented
in Appendix B and sample at the same location if possible. Also,
Control Authority personnel should ensure that sampling by the
industrial user is conducted at that same sampling location,
3.2.6.1 Considerationsin Preparing for Sampling Activities
The wide variety of conditions existing at different industrial
users and different sampling locations require that some judgment
be used regarding the methodology and procedure for collecting
representative samples of wastewater.
Some general points to be considered in preparing for a sampling
visit arei
0 The inspectors should know what parameters will be sampled,
what types of sample containers and preservatives are needed,
and what sample volumes are needed for laboratory analyses.
* The inspectors should know what type of samples will be
taken (grab, time-composite, or flow-composite). In general,
composite samples are preferred and should be collected
3-21
-------
during the Industrial facility's normal hours of operation.
Ideally, flow-proportioned composite samples should be
collected? however, time-proportioned composite samples are
acceptable where flow-proportional automatic sampling may
not be feasible (prohibitive costs to install such sampling
equipment, etc.). Time-composite samples should consist of
samples collected preferably every hour or every 15 minutes
if automatic sampling equipment is used* Depending on the
types of analyses to be conducted and the needs of the
Control Authority, the industrial user may be allowed to
collect and report the results of a grab sample. Grab
sampling should be employed where the pollutants being
evaluated have relatively short maximum holding times (e.g.,
cyanide) due to sample degradation. Grab sampling may also
be appropriate for sampling nonrandom sources of variation
(i.e., scheduled batch discharges, etc.). The specific
sample type for each pollutant should be specified in the
permit issued to the industrial user.
* The inspectors should be aware of process and flow variations,
recent shut-downs, etc. (i.e., weekends, holidays, seasonal
production).
* Sampling equipment should be calibrated and tested to ensure
that it functions properly and that the inspectors are
familiar with its operation.
* All sampling "paperwork" should be filled out and all
containers properly marked. This would include laboratory
sheets, sample tags, marked containers, etc.
0 The laboratory doing the analysis should be notified in
advance of the number and type of samples expected in order
to prevent extended holding times before samples are analyzed
and to assist in overall laboratory planning.
* Chain-of-custody tags, sheets, etc., must be readied.
3.2.6.2 Guidelines for ApprovedAnalytical Procedures
Amendments to the Agency's "Guidelines Establishing Test
Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants," 40 CFR 136, were
published in the Federa_3^Regist_er on October 26, 1984, and amended
on January 4, 1985* These guidelines, as amended and corrected,
now includes
0 Lists of approved test procedures for:
- coliform and fecal streptococci
- inorganic chemicals
- nonpesticide organic chemical',
- pesticides
- radiological parameters
3-22
-------
(These lists reflect the withdrawal of approval for
outdated test procedures that had previously been
approved for 30 conpounds, as well as the inclusion
of newly approved test procedures for these 30
compounds plus an additional 32 compounds for
which there had not previously been approved test
procedures.J
* References, sources, and costs for these approved test
procedures
* Required containers, preservation techniques, and maximum
holding times
* Appendices providing detailed descriptions of approved test
procedures for a variety of organic chemicals.
For the pesticide industry* EPA has approved analytical methods
for certain pesticides in the final pesticide regulations (§0 FR
40672, October 4, 1985). EPA strongly recommends that each Control
Authority and contract laboratory obtain and implement the most
recent version of these guidelines for all sampling and analysesf
including those related to the pretreatment program.
3.2.6.3 Considerations in Sample Collection, and Analysis
Accurate sample collection and analysis are essential to
determine an industrial user's compliance status with applicable
pretreatment regulations. However, sample collection is the most
likely area in which errors are made leading to analytical results
that are not representative of the wastestreara in question. Labora-
tory analyses can be conducted with a degree of accuracy that is
generally not possible in field sampling.
Industrial users and Control Authorities are referred to the
following publication for a comprehensive discussion of wastewater
samplings
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Handbook for Samplino
and Sample Preservation of Water and ganstewat'er". (EPA Publica-
tion No. 600/4-82-029).Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, September 1982. (MTIS Order Ho. PB83-124SQ3)
3-23
-------
This handbook is available from:
National Technical Information Service
U.S. Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Control Authorities may also find the following publication
useful as a guide in developing general inspection and sampling
procedures:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, HPDBS Compliance
Inspection Manual. Washington, DCs U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, June 1984.
General principles can be suggested for both self-monitoring
and Control Authority monitoring, as follows:
* A permanent sampling location(s) should be identified for
use by both the Control Authority and the industrial user.
This is typically accomplished during a Control Authority
inspection of the industrial facility so that both parties
agree and are familiar with the location(s).
* The sampling location should be easily accessible and provide
a well-mixed representative sample of the wastestream being
monitored. Caution should be exercised in selecting the
best sampling point in recognition that local limits are
generally end-of-pipe limits, whereas categorical standards
are generally end-of-process limits. Rather than have
separate sampling points for local limits versus categorical
standards for one industrial facility subject to some
combination of both types of limits, it is advisable to use
one sampling point. This may necessitate the modification
of the categorical standards to account for other wastestreams
present at the end-of-pipe, or to determine local limits at
the end-of-process. In any event, such calculations are
necessary to determine whether local limits or categorical
standards are more stringent for any one parameter. Section
3.4.5 of the "Guidance Manual for the Use of Production-Based
Pretreatment Standards and the Combined Wastestream Formula"
(U.S. EPA, September 1985) provides a detailed example of
the process for comparing categorical standards to local
limits for a facility.
* All samples must be properly collected and preserved until
they are analyzed. It is important to use the right container
for sample collection and storage (e.g., do not use a metal
container to collect or store a sample that will later be
analyzed for metals). Large samples should be divided for
appropriate pollutant preservation as soon as possible, but
no longer than 24 hours.
3-24
-------
0 Accurate records should be required indicating the time,
date, location, type of sample, method of collection and
preservation name of person who collected the sample, and
any pertinent comments. These records should be retained
for at least the 3 year period required by Section
403.12(n)(2) of the General Pretreatment Regulations.
After an accurate sample has been obtained, several steps
should be taken to ensure that the validity and objectivity of the
monitoring operations are maintained. The sample should be properly
preserved and promptly delivered to the laboratory to prevent
sample degradation.
The industrial user will often be required to monitor its
wastestream for several pollutant parameters, sometimes requiring
different preservatives and/or storage conditions for each. There-
fore » it may be necessary to take a relatively large sample so that
adequate amounts are available for the various laboratory analyses.
The recommended minimum sample volumes for different pollutant
parameters can be found in the current edition of "Standard Methods.
As discussed previously, there is a definite need to obtain
representative samples and analytical data that are admissible in
court. Therefore, for laboratory analyses of industrial self-
monitoring samples and samples collected by the Control Authority,
the Control Authority should verify that* (1) the most recently
approved sampling techniques used by EPA and State laboratories are
also used by Control Authorities and (2) all individual analyses
are performed according to the Federal requirements of 40 CFR 136.
Direct dischargers classified as majors in the NPDES program are
in the DMR Quality Assurance (QA) program! therefore, major PQTW's
with laboratories are currently subject to a QA review. Outside
laboratories used for analyses should be certified {if a formal
3-25
-------
certification program exists in your State) or should be checked by
a knowledgeable Control Authority person. If the State does not
have a laboratory certification program, the USEPA Regional Office
may be able to provide some assistance in evaluating laboratory
services to ensure that proper methods and techniques are being
employed. Control Authorities may wish to split samples with the
industry. (fiotes Be sure that samples are well-mixed prior to
splitting.) Comparing the analytical results from split samples
could serve as a good check of quality assurance and quality control.
3.2.7 Followup Actions in Response to Inspections and/or Saropling
of_._Ihdus trial Users
Control Authority personnel should be aware that there are a
wide range of possible results of inspections and/or sampling of
industrial facilities. Among the possible findings of industrial
inspections and sampling are:
0 Complete compliance with applicable pretreattient effluent
standards, reporting requirements, monitoring requirements,
analytical procedures, permit conditions, etc.
e Minor or major violations of pretreatment effluent standards,
reporting requirements, monitoring requirements, analytical
procedures, permit conditions, etc., or any combination of
these violations
* Evidence of negligence or intent associated with any of these
violations
* Identification of significant changes in processes, pollutants
discharged, discharge volumes, etc.
Unless inspections and sampling activities indicate that
criminal offenses exists, the Control Authority should transmit the
results of the inspections or sampling to the industrial facility.
Where violations are identified, the Control Authority should
require corrective action within a specified time period. In some
3-26
-------
cases, the identified violation will indicate the need for a formal
enforcenent action by the Control Authority. Section 3.4 addresses
the appropriate response to identified violations.
3-27
-------
SECTION 3.3
ENFORCEMENT PRINCIPLES AND MECHANISMS
3.3.1 Principles of _an_Enforcement Management_ System
As indicated in Section 3.1» the Control Authority should
establish requirements for industrial user pollution control,
monitoring, and reporting, and incorporate these requirements into
control mechanisms. Pollution control requirements should reflect
Federal categorical standards, general pretreatment standards, and
local limitations. The control mechanism should enable the Control
Authority to monitor and control discharges to its sewer system, to
implement its pretreatment program, and to meet the goals of the
General Pretreatment Regulations. In order to administer the
pretreatment program efficiently, the Control Authority should have
a system to determine whether industrial users are complying with
pretreatment standards and requirements in the control mechanisms
and to determine how and when to respond to noncompliance by
industrial users.
USEPA and approved States have similar responsibilities under
the NPDES program for direct dischargers. EPA has developed a
general system to plan, administer, and evaluate its enforcement
program. The general system is known as the Enforcement Management
System (EMS). The system is based on principles of management and
internal controls that have been used successfully in the NPDES
program, and the use of those principles should be transferable to
the Control Authority's pretreataent program. This section describes
the components of that enforcement system as it might be translated
for use by the Control Authority. Each Control Authority is
encouraged to develop its own written management system.
3-28
-------
The principles identified below describe a process for obtaining
and evaluating information on industrial user compliance? identifying
noncompliance; selecting an appropriate enforcement action; and
resolving noncompliance in a timely, fair, and consistent manner.
The principles establish a framework for managing an enforcement
process, while providing the flexibility for each Control Authority
to develop management procedures that best suit its operations and
resources. The principles are as follows:
0 Establish responsibilities, procedures, and tiraeframes to
provide information to all levels of the organization
0 Maintain an industrial user inventory that is complete and
accurate
0 Collect and dispense information
0 Conduct inspections and sampling of industrial users based
on a systematic plan
0 Ensure compliance screening of all relevant data
* Perform an enforcement evaluation, where appropriate
0 Institute a formal enforcement action and followup, where
necessary.
3.3.1.1 Responsi bilities,Procedures, and Timeframes
Throughout the enforcement process, it is important for all
levels of management to be able to assess the effectiveness of the
program and identify progress or deficiencies. Consequently, the
Control Authority's enforcement procedures should give management
the information it needs to ensure that the program makes timely
decisions and successfully implements its local program. For
internal management control, an enforcement management system
should provide fors
0 The identification of the individuals or unit responsible
for each element of the system.
3-29
-------
* Procedures for collecting and disseminating information.
This could include developing standardized reporting forms,
computerizing data, and notifying industrial users of
violations.
0 A method of tracking program activities at any given time,
including issuance of control mechanisms, compliance reviews,
and enforcement actions.
0 A system of evaluating specific activities in terms of
their quality, timeliness, results, and accomplishment of
program objectives.
3.3.1.2 Industrial User Inventory Data
The foundation of a compliance tracking and enforcement system
is a complete and accurate compilation of the pertinent data on all
industrial dischargers to the Control Authority. For this system,
the Control Authority must maintain a current inventory of industrial
users (403.8(f} (2)(i)}. This inventory should include the name,
location, identification number, effluent limits, basis for the
limit (categorical standards, local limits, etc.), volume of discharge,
control mechanism status, compliance dates and other special require-
ments, industrial category, and significant industrial user classi-
fication for each industrial user. The Industrial Waste Survey
should provide most of the information required to develop the
inventory, although some supplementary information might be required
from other sources, such as the permit application or monitoring
data.
A routine schedule and an identified process for updating the
inventory of industrial users should be implemented, including the
specific data available concerning each user. Sources of information
that might be used in the process include data developed through
inspections of the facility, a review of water use records and/or
3-30
-------
building permit applications, and information on changes reported
by the industrial user. Responsibility for maintenance of the
inventory should be assigned to one specific individual or group,
such as the data management staff, and the flow of information
within the Control Authority should be organized to ensure that all
relevant data are directed to that group.
The data inventory should provide an index of the nature and
type of industrial users in the Control Authority system. The list
can be used to plan monitoring, enforcement, and permitting activi-
ties. For each industrial user on the list, a separate backup file
should be maintained to include descriptions of the facility,
monitoring data, inspection reports, summaries of violations and
enforcement actions, and other detailed, relevant information.
This historical information should be maintained to evaluate the
performance of industrial users and the success of enforcement
actions.
3*3.1.3 Collect and _Dispense_Information
In order to ensure that its system has the needed information
and that this information is current, the Control Authority should
actively manage the flow of information into its system. For each
industrial user, the Control Authority must determine what data are
legally required or needed, as well as when and how they can be
obtained. The original, signed self-monitoring report or compliance
schedule report indicating noncompliance is usually sufficient
evidence of a violation, if signed by an authorized signatory or
corporate official. In some cases, photocopies may also be adequate
to prove a violation occurred.
3-31
-------
The Control Authority should specify reporting requirements
for the industrial user in the permit or other control mechanism
used. The Control Authority then must track the submission of
reports. If the information submitted is deficient or latef the
industrial user should be notified and required to complete the
•ubmission within a fixed time period.
Other sources of information exist that should be consulted
routinely to update or add information. The Control Authority may
monitor water and sewer usage, issuance of building permits, viola-
tions of other local ordinances, and local news outlets to identify
changes that have occurred or are planned for an industrial user
and may affect its wastewater contribution to the Control Authority.
The Control Authority should plan the receipt, processing, arid
retaining routine and nonroutine data to ensure that they are
available when needed to make decisions on compliance activities
(such as inspections or meetings) and, if necessary, as evidence
in enforcement proceedings.
Under any circumstances, the Control Authority must retain
baseline monitoring reports, 90-day compliance reports, compliance
schedule response reports (if required}» and (semiannual) continuing
compliance reports that it has received for at least 3 years (see
40 CFR 403.12(n)).
In addition to collecting data, the Control Authority needs to
dispense certain information. Industrial users must be notified of
applicable pretreatment standards and hazardous waste disposal
requirements under the Solid Waste Disposal Act (40 CFR 260 et
sequences). Feedback should be provided to the industrial user on
3-32
-------
its compliance status* changes in pretreatment requirements, the
results of inspections* and other pertinent information or guidance!
and industrial users should be informed of enforcement principles
and the general responses to noncompliance.
The Control Authority should also make a concerted effort to
inform the public of the progress of its pretreatment program. As
required by regulation <(4G CPR 403,8(f)(2)(vii)) and discussed in
Section 3.4.2 of this guidance* it must publish a list of industrial
users with significant violations in the newspaper. In addition,
it might undertake public education efforts in such areas as proper
disposal of household chemicals or used engine oil.
3,3.1.4 Conduct ^Sampling and .Inspection _of :IPs
The Control Authority should have an inspection plan for
scheduling field investigations, which may include site visits,
sample collection, facility inspections, and flow monitoring. The
Control Authority should use field investigations to verify the
compliance status determined from industrial user self-monitoring
activities, collect samples, initiate emergency or remedial actions,
and gather additional information. Field investigations may be
routine compliance monitoring or special monitoring in response to
violations, technical proble»sf or support for permit modifications.
As discussed in Section 3.2, the Control Authority should plan
routine field investigations, and/or collection of wastewater
samples, of each Significant Industrial User at least once a year.
The Control Authority should develop checklists and procedures for
these routine visits and ensure that the results of each visit are
documented and that industrial users are advised of any deficiencies
3-33
-------
found during an inspection. Special onsite investigations may
require warrants (which must be obtained under State or Federal
law), specialized sampling equipment, and additional resources.
These investigations should be conducted according to established
procedures. Warrants should be obtained with advice from legal
counsel. The Control Authority should advise the Approval Authority
of its routine and special field investigation activities each
year. The Control and Approval Authorities inspectors should
conduct some joint investigations of industrial users to promote
consistency and technical understanding of the inspection activities.
3,3.1.5 CoapMance Screening
The compliance screening process involves reviewing of all
available information to sort out noncomplying dischargers for
appropriate enforcement response. This initial review should
assess, as appropriate, compliance with schedules, reporting
requirements (including "slug* discharge notices), and applicable
pretreatment standards. Since this step is designed primarily to
identify apparent violations and not to determine the appropriate
enforcement response, this review can usually be handled by non-
technical personnel. In any case, the person responsible for
screening should be clearly specified.
The screening process should verify that the reports are
submitted on schedule, that they cover the proper time period,
include ail information required, and are properly signed. The
reviewer should compare the parameters reported, the number of
measurements for each parameter, the method of analysis, the sampling
procedures, the discharge concentration Cor mass per day), and
3-34
-------
other information supplied by the industrial user with the
requirements in the industrial user's permit or other control
mechanism. Any discrepancy is a violation that the IU should be
required to correct. If a report lacks a required signature, it is
incomplete. All alleged violations {including those arising from
inspections and private complaints) should be identified by the
Control Authority and recorded in a Violation Summary specific to
each industrial user. This summary will serve as a log for the
compliance history of the industrial user and the enforcement
responses of the Control Authority.
The compliance screening process may also include notifying
an industrial user when certain types of obvious noncompliance are
found. For example, the Control Authority might establish procedures
for routinely notifying the industrial user when a report is not
received. This notification should include a deadline by which the
industrial user must respond. The Control Authority should have a
tlmeframe for followup by screening personnel to ensure that the
industrial user has complied.
3.3.1.6 Enforcement Evaluation
The violations and discrepancies that were identified during
the compliance screening process should be reviewed to evaluate the
type of enforcement response needed. This review should normally
be conducted by technical personnel, although legal consultation
may be necessary in some cases. USEPA uses an Enforcement Response
Guide to assist in this evaluation for HPDES cases. The guide
identifies types of responses that are appropriate, based on the
nature of the violation (effluent—average or maximum limit;
reporting—late or deficient; or compliance schedule—begin or
3-35
-------
complete construction); the duration of the violation? the frequency
of the violation (isolated or recurring)i the potential impact of
the violation (such as interference, pass-through, or POTW worker
safety)? and the attitude of the violator. These factors are
discussed in more detail in Section 3.4.3.
Control Authorities are encouraged to develop a similar type
of guide for use in managing enforcement against violating industrial
users. An example of an Enforcement Response Guide that the Control
Authority might use has been developed and is included in Section
3.4. The responses available will vary among Control Authorities
depending on legal authority, but will normally include informal
responses such as telephone contacts or written notices of violation,
and formal responses such as administrative orders with or without
penalties, judicial actions, and termination of sewer service. The
guide should reflect the following concepts:
0 All violations of requirements must be reviewed by the
Control Authority.
* Generally, the Control Authority should notify the industrial
user when a violation is found.
" If the industrial user repeats the analysis for an effluent
violation, and no further noncompliance is identified, no
further Control Authority response may be necessary.
0 For most violations, the Control Authority should receive an
explanation and, as appropriate, a plan from the industrial
user to correct the violation within a specified time period.
0 If the violations persist or the explanation and the plan
are not adequate, the Control Authority response should
become more formal and commitments (or schedules, as appro-
priate) for compliance should be established in an enforceable
document.
* The enforcement response selected should be related to the
seriousness of the violation, and enforcement response should
be escalated if compliance is not achieved expeditiotisly
after taking the initial action. A serious initial violation
may require a formal enforcement action, as described in
Section 3.3.2.
3-36
-------
The Control Authority should set deadlines for the industrial
user to respond to notification of violations and should ensure
that unfulfilled due dates are noted in Violation Summaries.
Frequently direct contact with the industrial user may appear to
resolve the problem. However, such contacts and commitments should
be confirmed in correspondence between the parties and noted in the
Violation Summary, Otherwise! there is no permanent record that
would be necessary to enforce the commitment.
3.3.1.7 Formal Enforcement and Pollowup
A decision to seek formal enforcement is generally triggered
by a failure to achieve compliance in a specified time period
through less formal means, a review of the violation records* and
in some cases, the advice of counsel. Formal enforcement should
be considered for each violation or group of violations that meets
the definition of Significant Noncompliance (SNC) (Section 3.4).
The decision to pursue formal action should be supported by a
well-documented record of the violations by the industrial user and
any prior efforts to obtain compliance on the part of the Control
Authority. The Control Authority should review all records to
assure that proper procedures were used to collect the information
and that all contacts with the industrial user are recorded. If
the industrial user has received conflicting information regarding
its compliance status, that status should be clarified in writing.
The Control Authority should consider a special onsite review or
inspection to verify the data available, including a review of
original analysis records to confirm the accuracy of information
contained in periodic reports, or a "show cause8 meeting with the
industrial user, before commencing formal enforcement action. This
verification should be completed quickly (usually within 1 or 2
weeks}.
3-37
-------
The Control Authority should specifically designate
responsibility for preparing a formal enforcement action or providing
the necessary information to legal counsel and should develop
guidance covering the form and substance of the formal enforcement
action for use by the staff. Additionallyf the guidance should
cover procedures for escalating the action if compliance is not
achieved expeditiously. The Control Authority needs to coordinate
closely with the city solicitor or other counsel in developing and
processing the action.
3.3.2 Informal and Formal Enforcement Mechanisms
In order to achieve a maximum degree of compliance by industrial
users. Control Authorities will need to use a range of enforcement
mechanisms. The range of enforcement mechanisms available to the
Control Authority will depend on the specific legal authorities it
has been given by city, county, or State legislatures. These
mechanisms may range from a simple reminder call to imposing
significant criminal penalties. In decisionmaking, the Control
Authority should recognize that some egregious or intentional
violations may constitute criminal violations of Federal (and State)
law, and that under such circumstances, the Control Authority may
seek the assistance of the Approval Authority. The purpose of this
section is to describe the range of available enforcement mechanisms.
The specific enforcement mechanisms that will be available to
a Control Authority will vary depending on whether the Control
Authority is OSEPA, a State, or a local authority. These mechanisms
will also vary depending on State law and the legal authorities
(e.g., city ordinance) on which a pretreatment program was approved.
The mechanisms listed below are examples of activities that are
3-38
-------
generally available to an approved pretreatment program. These
responses should be used when needed, consistent with the provisions
or limitations of State law and local ordinances or contracts that
apply-
Informal Actions
* Informal notice to industrial user (i.e., telephone call or
meeting with industrial user representatives)
0 Informal meetings
" Warning letter
0 Notices or meetings to show cause.
Formal Actions
0 Administrative orders and compliance schedules
8 Civil suit for injunctive relief and/or civil penalties
0 Criminal suit
0 Termination of service (revoke permit)
* Establishment of specific contract requirements.
Each of these categories of enforcement activity will be
discussed in the following subsections.
3.3.2.1 InformalNotice to Industrial User
Informal notice is the least coercive of the enforcement
mechanisms and rarely requires specific authority. Informal notice
may consist of a telephone call or "reminder* letter to an appro-
priate official (e.g., plant manager, environmental coordinator) of
an industrial user. Such a call or letter may be used to notify
officials of a minor violation (e.g., a report submitted a few days
late) and to seek an explanation, suggest the exercise of more due
care, and/or notify the "violator" that subsequent violations of
the same type may be dealt with more severely. Such informal notice
3-39
-------
•ay be used to correct minor, inadvertent noncompliance and to
demonstrate that the Control Authority will note and followup all
Instances of noncompliance.
3.3.2.2 Informal Meetings
If a telephone call does not produce compliance or an adequate
explanation of the reason for the noncompliancef a meeting between
officials of the Control Authority and the industrial user may
produce the desired results. At such a meeting. Control Authority
officials might emphasize the importance of maintaining compliance.
If informal meetings are unsuccessful in obtaining the firm's
commitment to complying with its pretreatment obligations, the
Control Authority might inform the industrial user representatives
of stronger enforcement mechanisms that are available. The
Control Authority should record all informal contacts, notices,
and meetings with representatives of industrial users on its
Violation Summary.
3.3.2.3 Warning Letter
The warning letter is a written notice to the industrial user
that the Control Authority has observed a violation of pretreatment
standards or requirements and expects the noncompliance to be
corrected and explained. The warning letter, consistent with State
law, also can require specific corrective actions and schedules to
which the Control Authority expects the industrial user to adhere
and a statement that additional enforcement action may be pursued
if corrective actions are not accomplished as scheduled. The
letter should also make it clear that compliance with the requirements
of the letter does not excuse previous violations.
3-40
-------
Such warning letters should be sent by certified mail with
return receipt requested. Copies should be maintained in the
industrial user file. Certified mail will more likely bring the
notice to the serious attention of appropriate officials. Moreoverf
the return receipt will serve as proof that the industrial user
received the notice in the event that more formal enforcement
proceedings are necessary.
3.3.2,4 Notices or Meetings toShow Cause
The Control Authority may wish to consider meeting with the
industrial user or issue a notice to "show cause* by the industrial
user prior to taking formal enforcement action and/or discontinuing
service. Generallyt the industrial user would be presented with
the facts that the Control Authority believes demonstrate non-
compliance and asked to "show cause" to the Control Authority as
to why it should not initiate formal action or discontinue sewer
service. Boweverr this action is not a prerequisite to taking a
formal enforcement action or to discontinue sewer servicef as
described in the following sections.
3.3.2.5 Admin i^strative Orders and Compliance Schedules
Section 309{a)(3) of the Clean Water Act authorizes EPA to
issue orders without notice or opportunity for prior hearing, known
as Administrative Orders (AOs), requiring compliance with standards
or other requirements developed under the authority of the Act. To
the extent that their legal authorities allow, some Control
Authorities may issue similar orders under Section 403.8(f){1)(iii)
of the General Pretreatment Regulations. Although the exact nature
of these orders will vary among Control Authorities, they can be
used to place an industrial user on an enforceable schedule to
3-41
-------
comply with pretreatment standards (e.g., install treatment, operate
and maintain facilities), including appropriate interim limits. If
your Control Authority has such authority, materials prepared by
EPA Headquarters on preparing §309(a) Clean Water Act orders may be
of value to you or your counsel. Copies of such materials may be
obtained through your Approval Authority.
3.3.2.6 Penalties
Penalties and fines are tools that the Control Authority may
us© to enforce its local pretreatment program, in addition, fee
schedules for surcharges and delinquent payments are often published
as part of the sewer use ordinance. Civil penalty amounts are
generally limited through State or raunicipal laws. EPA's "Guidance
Manual for POTW Pretreatment Program Development," pp. 3-7, October
1983 recommends that local programs have the ability to assess
penalties of at least §300 per day of violation. However, this
limit may be inadequate for some spills and other short-terra viola-
tions that interfere with treatment or passthrough the POTW. Here
again, as with possible criminal prosecution, appropriate action
may involve seeking the assistance of the Approval Authority for
obtaining penalties under State or Federal law. Fines may be used
in conjunction with billing procedures for minor violations that
nay be detected during inspections or compliance review of self-
monitoring data. Such fines should appear as a separate item on a
bill with the violation identified. Surcharges should generally
recover the. Control Authority's cost of treatment, but they should
not be used to allow discharges of toxic pollutants that cause
interference or pass-through. The amount of civil penalty imposed
will depend on the specific authority available to the Control
3-42
-------
Authority and the nature of the violation. The Control Authority
should consider the range of options available under State authority
to collect penalties, including small claims court.
3.3.2.7 Termination of Service
Approved pretreatment programs must have the authority to halt
immediately any actual or threatened discharge to the Control
Authority that may represent an endangerraent to the public health,
the environment, or the POTW, upon notifying the industrial user
of a violation (see 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(vi)(B)). Additionally, the
Control Authority can deny or condition new or increased discharges
by an industrial user or changes in the nature of pollutants
discharged to the Control Authority by the industrial user if the
discharge does not meet applicable pretreatment standards or will
cause the Control Authority to violate its NPDES permit. Use of
these remedies can be effective in bringing recalcitrant users
into compliance. Without sewer service, a firm may have to obtain
an NPDES permit to discharge wastes directly to the waters of the
United States, and thus be required to install treatment to achieve
direct discharge limitations. However, for many facilities, it
will not be practical to discharge directly and they may face
closure.
3.3.2.8 CivilSuit forInjunctiye Reliefand/or Civil Penalties
Most approved pretreatment programs should have authority to
file a civil suit against alleged violators of applicable pretreatment
standards seeking injunctive relief and/or civil penalties. In a
civil suit for injunctive relief, the Control Authority collects
pertinent information sufficient to prove the violations at issue
and turns the information over to the city solicitor (or appropriate
3-43
-------
Control Authority counsel) for case filing. The city solicitor (or
appropriate Control Authority counsel) asks the court to order a
discharger to take specific actions (e.g., comply with pretreatroent
requirements) or refrain from specific actions (e.g., cease prohibited
discharge). The civil suit for injunctive relief is used when the
industrial user is unlikely to execute successfully the steps that
the Control Authority believes are necessary to achieve or maintain
compliance, when the violation is serious enough to warrant court
action to deter future similar violations, or when the danger
presented by an industrial user's noncompliance does not permit
lengthy negotiation of a settlement. If the Control Authority is
able to show irreparable harm to the POTW operation, its workers,
or the receiving stream, as a result of an ongoing industrial user
violation and is likely to succeed on the merits of the case, a
court may issue a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunc-
tion restraining the industrial user from violating standards
pending the outcome of the suit. Injunctive court relief may
require such actions as installation of facilities needed to come
into compliance or a court order cessation of prohibited discharges.
3.3.2.9 Criminal Suit
Section 309(c) of the Act authorizes the Federal Government
to seek criminal punishment for any person who willfully or negli-
gently violates pretreatment standards, among other standards, or
any person who knowingly makes a false statement regarding any
report, application, record, or other document required by the
General Pretreatment Regulations. Approved pretreatroent programs
may contain similar authority for the Control Authority, and State
3-44
-------
Approval Authorities have this option, A PQTW with insufficient
authority may seek the assistance of the Approval Authority in this
matter.
USEPA considers several factors to determine when violations
should be addressed through criminal actions. Control Authorities
should review similar Minds of information. These factors include
the willfulness of the violation, knowledge of the violation,
nature and seriousness of the offense, need for deterrence, compliance
history of the subject, adequacy of the evidence, and the adequacy
of penalties and sanctions available through civil or administrative
enforcement actions. For criminal cases, the United States must
provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the violation occurred
through "willful or negligent action" of the discharger. A sentence
containing penalties would be assessed by the court based on, among
other considerations, its perception of the harm, damage, or potential
threat, attributable to the violation.
Examples of criminal violations include falsification of data,
tampering with results or equipment, willful or negligent failure
to provide notice of slug discharges, or willful violation of the
discharge agreements. All suspected instances of criminal violation
should be evaluated. Criminal action could be used, if needed, to
deter future violations by the individual or the industrial user
community at large. Parallel criminal and civil actions are usually
possible for a set of violations, especially where immediate injunc-
tive relief is needed. However, criminal actions require additional
evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt of knowledge and
intent of the violator to conceal a violation or fact. In some
cases, criminal action may be needed to recover the cost of damages
and tine associated with the violation.
3-45
-------
Many cases of willful or negligent noncompliance (e.g., late
night dumping of toxic substances into the collection system) could
seriously damage the Control Authority treatment system and the
environment. Such acts should be punished severely when adequate
proof exists. In considering the development of criminal cases,
the Control Authority should work closely with the local prosecutor
and the Approval Authority to obtain guidance.
3.3.2.10 Approval^Author!ty and Public Intervention
The NPDES permit of the POTW typically requires that the
Control Authority implement its approved pretreatment program. The
Approval Authority and USEPA, if the Approval Authority is the
Statei have a responsibility to ensure that the Control Authority
is effectively implementing its approved pretreatment program,
including timely and appropriate enforcement of pretreatment
requirements. In this role, the Approval Authority will routinely
review the overall performance of the Control Authority in monitoring
industrial users and in enforcing where violations are identified.
The Approval Authority will evaluate performance based on POTW
self-monitoring, written enforcement response procedures, audits,
inspections, and pretreatment program reports. The Approval Authority
will discuss the evaluation with the POTW. If the industrial user's
noncompliance persists after notification, the Approval Authority
may proceed to enforce directly against the industrial user and/or
Control Authority, particularly if requested to do so by the Control
Authority. The Approval Authority may take its own enforcement
action where the Control Authority has not taken timely action or
has failed to impose adequate sanctions. Timeframes for appropriate
enforcement responses to violations are discussed in Section 3,4.
3-46
-------
The Control and Approval Authorities may jointly decide that action
by the Approval Authority is preferable in a given situation.
Also, EPA retains authority to take its own enforcement action even
where the State is the Approval Authority if neither the Control or
Approval Authority is willing to take timely or appropriate
enforcement.
Finally, Section 505 of the Act permits citizens to file suit
against a PQTW that has failed to implement its approved pretreatment
program as required by its HPDES permit, A citizen may sue the
Control Authority to obtain judicial enforcement of that approved
program. Thus, the Control Authority may be required to apply
standards to industrial users, enforce violations of pretreatment
standards, or otherwise implement its approved program by a court
order.
3.3.2.11 Resourcesto Enforce the. .Program,
Informal enforcement mechanisms require relatively few resources
and, in many cases, can be effective. Formal judicial action, by
contrast, can be very resource-intensive. In Section 3.4, factors
are discussed that should be considered in determining the appropriate
enforcement response to a particular noncompliance event.
3-47
-------
SECTION 3.4
RESPONDING TO INDUSTRIAL USER NONCOMPLIANCE
The Enforcement Management System (Section 3.3.1) describes
principles that can be applied by local Control Authorities to
track the compliance of industrial users and enforce their local
pretreatment program requirements. This section describes how the
Control Authority should respond to violations. Legal authorities
for enforcement may differ on specifics among PQTWs. This discussion
presumes that a Control Authority has an adequate legal basis to
enforce the pretreatraent regulations.
Section 3.4.1 provides a definition of Significant Noncompliance
that can be used by the Control Authority to set priorities for
enforcement and to report to the Approval Authorities on the perfor-
mance of industrial users. Section 3,4.2 explains the need to
publish a list in the newspaper of industrial users with Significant
Violations. Unresolved instances of Significant Honcorapliance
deserve formal enforcement action and are highlighted in the sample
Enforcement Response Guide presented in Section 3.4.3. The Guide
describes a range of enforcement responses for different types of
noncompliance. Section 3.4.4 describes the relationship between
different levels of enforcement response, EMS, and penalties.
Section 3.4.5 discusses aspects of the violation that should be
considered in selecting the specific enforcement response from
among the range identified in the Enforcement Response Guide.
3.4.1 Definition of Significant (SMC)
Any violation of pretreatment requirements (limits, sampling,
analysis, reporting and meeting compliance schedules, and regulatory
3-48
-------
deadlines) is an instance of noncompllance for which the industrial
user is liable for enforcement, including penalties. However*
there is a need to identify violations or patterns of violations by
industrial users that are instances of Significant Nonco»pliance.
This classification allows the Control Authority to establish
priorities for formal enforcement actions. It is also the basis
for reporting on Significant Industrial User performance in the
Pretreatment Performance Summary. This Guidance establishes a
definition of Significant Noncompliance patterned after criteria
used in the NPDES program (40 CFR 123.45). Instances of SNC are
industrial user violations which meet one or more of the following
criteria:
1. Violations of wastewater discharge _limits.
a. Chronic violations. Sixty-six percent or more of the
measurements exceed the same daily maximum limit or the
same average limit in a 6-month period (any magnitude of
exceedance).
b. Technical Review Criteria (TRC) violations. Thirty-three
percent or more of the measurements exceed the same daily
maximum limit or the same average limit by more than the
TEC in a 6-month period.
There are two groups of TRCs:
Group I for conventional pollutants
{BOD, TSSf fats, oil* and grease) TRC - 1.4
Group II for all other pollutants TRC « 1.2
c. Any other violation(s) of an effluent limit (average or
daily maximum) that the Control Authority believes has
3-49
-------
caused, alone or in combination with other discharges,
interference (e.g., slug loads) or pass-through} or endangered
the health of the sewage treatment personnel or the public.
d. Any discharge of a pollutant that has caused imminent
endangerment to human health/welfare or to the environment
and has resulted in the POTWs exercise of its emergency
authority to halt or prevent such a discharge.
2* Violations of compliance schedule milestones, contained in a
local control mechanism or enforcement order, for starting
construction, completing construction, and attaining final
compliance by §0 days or more after the schedule date.
3. Failure to provide reports for compliance schedules, self-
monitoring data, or categorical standards (baseline monitoring
reports, 90-day compliance reports, and periodic reports)
within 30 days from the due date.
4. Failure to accurately report noncompliance,
5. Any other violation or group of violations that the Control
Authority considers to be significant,
Appendix C provides guidance on how to evaluate compliance
with categorical standards that contain 4-day or monthly average
standards.
For an industrial user is in SNC, the Control Authority is
directed tos (1) report information to the Approval Authority as
part of the Pretreatment Performance Summary of industrial user
noncompliance (see Section 3.5.3 of this guidance)! (2) list the
3-50
-------
industrial user in the newspaper as having significant violations
{see Section 3.4.2 of this guidance); and (3) address Significant
Noncompliance through appropriate enforcement action (and consider
seeking penalties or contract damages), or document in a timely
manner their reasons for withholding enforcement.
3.4.2 Publishing. Lists of Industrial Users With Significant
Violations
Section 403.8{f)(2)(vii) of the General Pretreatment Regulations
requires that the Control Authority publish, at least annually, in
the largest daily newspaper located in the municipality serviced
by the Control Authority, a list of industrial users that were
significantly violating applicable pretreatment standards and
requirements during the previous 12 months. This section of the
regulations defines a Significant Violation ass
*...a violation which remains uncorrected 45 days
after notification of noneorapliance; which is part
of a pattern of noncompliance over a twelve month
period* which .involves a failure to accurately
report noncorapliancei or which resulted in the
POTW exercising its emergency authority under
Section 403.8(f)(1)(vi)(B]."
Despite the regulatory requirement to publish lists of
industrial users with Significant Violations* many Control Authori-
ties have not complied with this requirement. This regulatory
requirement, which subjects the violator to public scrutiny, should
be used by the Control Authority as an effective deterrent to
continued noncompliance.
Although the definition of Significant Noncompliance differs
from that for Significant Violation, there are some similarities.
3-51
-------
TABLE 3-1
COMPARISON; SIGNIFICANT VIOLATION TO SIGNIFICANT NONCOMPLIANCE
Significant Violation
A violation that remains
uncorrected 45 days after
notification of noncompliance.
Signif_icant Noncompliance
That is part of a pattern
of noncompliance over a
12 month period.
Chronic Violations. Sixty-
six percent or more of the
measurements exceed the same
daily maximum limit or the
same average limit in a 6-
roonth period.
Technical Review Criteria (TRC)
Violations. Thirty-three
percent or more of the measure-
ments exceed the same daily
maximum limit or the same
average limit by more than
the TRC in a 6-month period.
That involves a failure to
accurately report noncompliance,
Failure to provide reports
for compliance schedules,
self-monitoring data, permit
application data, or categorical
standards (baseline monitoring
reports, 90-day compliance
reports, and periodic reports)
within 30 days from the due
date.
That resulted in the POTW
exercising its emergency
authority under Section
403.8(£)(l)(vi)(B).
Any discharge of a pollutant
that has caused imminent
endangerment to human health/
welfare or to the environment
and has resulted in the POTWs
exercise of its emergency
authority to halt or prevent
such a discharge*
Any other violation(s) of an
effluent limit (average or
daily maximum) that the Control
Authority believes has caused,
alone or in combination with
other discharges, interference
(e.g., sludge loads} or pass-
through, or endangered the
health of the sewage treatment
personnel or the public.
3-52
-------
Significant Violation
Significant Ngncompl_iance
Violations of compliance
schedule milestones, contained
in a local control mechanism
or enforcement order, for
starting construction,
completing construction, and
attaining final compliance
by 90 days or more after the
schedule date.
Any other violation or group
of violations that the POTW
considers to be significant.
As guidance, EPA recommends that any violation(s) during the
previous 12 months that resulted in an industrial user being in
Significant Noncompliance, should be considered a Significant
Violation,
EPA would prefer to use the single definition of Significant
Noncompliance for both establishing enforcement principles and
publishing a list of noncompliant industrial users in the newspaper.
However, Significant Violation is defined in the General Pretreatment
Regulations and must be used for the purpose of newspaper publica-
tions. This definition, which uses the activities of an Industrial
User over a full year, is not usable in defining the violators to
receive priority attention. In the future, EPA plans to propose to
amend the General Pretreatment Regulations to remove the term
Significant Violation and simply require publication of those
industrial users in Significant Noncompliance.
EPA recommends that the published list of industrial users
with Significant Violations include additional information such as
duration of violation, parameters and/or reporting requirements
violated, compliance action taken (if any), whether the industrial
user is currently complying with a compliance schedule, and whether
3-53
-------
the industrial user has returned to compliance. At the discretion
of the Control Authority, the type of enforcement action undertaken
»«y also be reported. Appendix A contains an example of a published
listing of industrial users with Significant Violations. The
Approval Authority may require that a copy of the published listing
accompany an annual (or more frequent) report from the Control
Authority regarding pretreatment program implementation activities.
3.4.3 Enforcement Response Guide
This guide was developed as an example for Control Authority
officials to use who are responsible for determining the appropriate
enforcement response to a specific violation of pretreatment require-
ments and related sections of the Clean Water Act. The guide is
intended to serve two main purposesi
1. It covers enforcement responses that may be appropriate
in relation to the nature and severity of the violation
and the overall degree of noncompliance
2. It provides a guide to encourage a uniform application of
enforcement responses to comparable levels and types of
violations, and it can be used as a mechanism to review
the appropriateness of responses by an enforcement agency.
This Guidance strongly recommends that each Control Authority
develop an Enforcement Response Guide to include the types of
violations that may be expected and tailored to include a range of
enforcement responses available to the Control Authority. In any
particular case, these factors may lead to a response that differs
from that contained in a guide. When making determinations on the
level of the enforcement response, the technical and legal staff
3-54
-------
should consider the degree of variance from the pretreatment
standards or legal requirement, the duration of the violation,
previous enforcement actions taken against the violator, and the
deterrent effect of the response on the similar facility in the
regulated community. Equally important are considerations of
fairnessf equity, consistency, and the integrity of the pretreatment
program.
A key element in all enforcement responses is the timeliness
with which they are initiated and affect compliance. Given many
types of violations, applicable legal enforcement procedures, and
the variance in resources available to the Control Authorities, no
specific timefraiae is established in which to initiate and complete
a given response. However, specific timefraraes to initiate a
response should be developed by the Control Authority. For example,
within 30 days of the identification of any violation, the appro-
priate response should be determined, and any action taken (or not
taken) should be documented. If Significant Noncompliance continues
beyond what is considered to be a reasonable time period, appropriate
formal enforcement action should be initiated.
This sample guide (Table 3-2> addresses a broad range of
pretreatment violations. It is not intended to cover all types of
violations. The responses in this guide are suggested responses;
Control Authorities nay have alternative enforcement responses that
are equally effective. The measure of the effectiveness of an
enforcement response includess
0 Whether the noncomplying source returns to compliance as
expeditiously as possible
* Whether the enforcement response establishes the appropriate
deterrent effect for the particular violator and for other
potential violators
3-55
-------
* Whether the enforcement response promotes fairness of
government treatment as between comparable violators, as
well as between complying and noncomplying parties.
This guide has been developed for guidance and is not int«nded
to create legal rights or obligations, or to limit the enforcement
discretion of any of the administering agencies.
3-56
-------
TABLE 3-2
ENFORCEMENT RESPONSE GUIDE
SAMPLING, MONITORING, AND REPORTING
NONCOMPLIANCE
Failure to simple* monitor*
or report C routine reports ,
BMR's).
Isolated or infrequent.
Failure to sample, monitor*
report, or notify.
Failure to notify of
effluent limit violation
or slug discharge.*
Failure to notify of
effluent limit violation
or slug discharge.*
Failure to notify of
effluent limit violation
or slug discharge.*
Minor sampling, monitoring,
or reporting deficiencies
(computational or typo-
graphical errors 5.
Major or gross sampling,
monitoring• or reporting,
deficiencies (missing
information, late reports).
Major or gross reporting
deficiencies.
ID does not respond to
letters* does not follow
through on verbal or
written agreement, or
frequent violation—SNC.**
Isolated or infrequent.
No known effects.
Frequent or continued
violation—SNC.
Known environmental or
POTW damage results—
SNC.
Isolated or infrequent.
Isolated or infrequent.
Continued. Remains
uncorrecbed 30 days
or more—SNC.
RANGE OF RESPONSE
Phone call or written
letter of violation
(U3V) requiring a
report within 10 days.
If no response is
received* issue an
Administrative Order
(AO).
AO or judicial action,
including penalties if
no response is received*
Request criminal
investigation.
Phone call or LOV. If
no response within 10
days* issue an AD.***
Show cause meeting, AO,
or judicial actions,
including penalties.
Judicial action and
penalties. Sewer ban.
Phone call or WV.
Corrections to be made
on the next submittal.
AO if continued.
LOV or AD. Corrections
to be made on the next
submittal.
AD or judicial action.
3-57
-------
TABLE 3-2 (continued)
ENFORCEMENT RESPONSE GUIDE
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES (Construction phases or planning)
ISONCOMPLIANCE CIRCUMSTANCES
Reporting false
information.
Missed interim date.
Missed interim date.
Missed interim date.
Missed final date.
Missed final date.
Failure to install
monitoring equipment.
Any instance—SNC.
Will not cause late final
date or other interim dates.
Will result in other missed
interim dates. Violation
for good or valid cause.
Will result in other missed
interim dates. No good or
valid cause—SNC.
Violation due to force
majeure (strike, act of
God, etc.).
90 days or more outstanding.
Failure or refusal to comply
without good or valid cause.
Continued—SNC.
RANGE OF RESPONSE
Request for criminal
investigation. Judicial
action, penalties, sewer
ban.
LOV.
LOV or AO.
LOV, AO, or judicial
action, including penalty.
Contact permittee and
require documentation of
good or valid cause?
show cause.
AO or judicial action,
including penalty.
AO to begin monitoring
(using outside contracts,
if necessary) and install
equipment withinminimal
time. Temporary sewer ban.
EFFLUENT LIMITS
NONCQMPLIANCE
Exceeding final limits
(categorical local or
prohibited).
Exceeding final limits.
Exceeding final limits.
CIRCUMSTANCES
Infrequent or isolated
minor violations.
Infrequent or isolated
major violations exceed
the limits by TRC of a
single effluent limit.
Violation(s) that are
SNC.
RANGE OF RESPONSE
LOV.
LOV, AO (judicial action
if environmental harm
resulted, including
penalty).
AO or judicial action,
including penalty.
3-58
-------
TABLE 3-2 (continued)
RESPONSE GUIDE
EFFLUENT LIMITS (cont.)
HONOOMPLIANCE
Exceeding interim limits
(categorical or local}.
Exceeding interim limits.
Reported slug load.
Reported slug load.
Reported slug load.
Discharge without a
permit or approval.
Discharge without a
permit or approval.
Discharge without a
permit or approval.
CIBClKSTAfiCES
Without known damages.
Results in known environ-
mental or KJTW damage—
SNC.
Isolated without known
damage.
Isolated with known
interference, pass-through,
or damage—SNC.
Recurring—SNC.
One time without known
environmental or P0TW
damage.
One tine that results in
environmental damage or
continuing violation—SNC.
Continuing violation with
known environmental or
POTW damage—9C.
RANGE OF RESPONSE
I0V or AQ.
AO or judcial action,
including penalty.
Show cause or AQ.
AO or judicial action,
including penalty.
Judicial action. Including
penalty. Sewer ban.
AO.
AO or judicial action and
penalty. Request for
criminal investigation.
Judicial action and penalty.
Request for criminal
investigation. Disconnect
frora sewer.
JCNCOMPLIANCE DETECTED
THROUGH INFECTIONS OR
FIHLD INVESTIGATIONS
NONCOMPLIANCE
Minor violation of
analytical procedures.
Major violation of
analytical procedures.
Major violation of
analytical procedures.
Minor violation of
permit condition.
CIRCUMSTANCES
Any instance.
No evidence of intent.
Evidence of negligence
or intent—SNC.
No evidence of negligence
or intent.
RANGE OP RESPONSE
DOV.
LOV or AO.
AO or judicial action
and penalty (possible
criminal action).
LOV. Immediate
correction required.
3-59
-------
IftBLE 3-2 {continued)
QIPQICEMENT RESPONSE GUIDE
fOCCMPLIANCE DETECTED
THROUGH INSPECTIONS OR
FIELD
Minor violation of
permit condition.
Major violation of
permit condition.
CIRCtJMSTANCES
Evidence of negligence
or intent—SUC.
Evidence of negligence
or intent—SNC.
RANGE OF RESPONSE
M> or judicial action
and penalty (possible
criminal action).
AD or judicial action
and penalty (possible
criminal action).
Sewer ban.
**
Proposed revisions on June 12, 1986, (51 PR 21454) to the General Pretreatment
Regulations include a requirement to repeat effluent analysis after each
violation and provide the information to the Control Authority within 21 days.
This denotes that the circumstances of a particular violation are
severe enough to meet the criteria specified on pages 3-52 and 3-53 for
Significant NoneoKpliance (SNC).
*** Whenever a letter of violation is issued that requires a response and the
industrial user fails to respond, the Control Authority should issue an
administrative order to require the industrial user to respond and return to
compliance immediately.
3-60
-------
3»4.4 Levels of Response
There are three possible levels of response to all violations
available to the Control Authority—no response, an informal response,
or a formal response. For any violation, the Control Authority must
review the violation and determine the appropriate response. For
some violations, the response may be no action necessary at this
time. The Response Guide includes a range of informal and formal
responses. The informal enforcement response can be an inspection,
phone call, informal meeting, or a letter of violation to the
industrial user. The letter of violation can be limited to a
notification of the violation or can require the IU to take
certain steps within specific timeframes. The formal enforcement
response must be one of the following (see Section 3.3.2):
0 Administrative orders and compliance schedules
* Civil suit for injunctive relief and/or civil penalties
0 Criminal suit*
* Termination of service (revoke permits)
• Collection of contract damages.
The terms major and minor violations are used in the Response
Guide to describe violations of effluent limits, sampling, monitoring,
and reporting requirements. Major violations are those that exceed
the limits frequently and/or by a large quantity (e.g., the technical
review criteria under Section 3.4.1); impede the determination of
* These tools may, under certain circumstances, be more appropriately
exercised by the Approval Authority.
3-61
-------
compliance status; have the potential to cause or may have actually
caused adverse environmental effects* health problemsr or interfered
with the POTW treatment capability. Any violation that meets the
definition of Significant Noncorapliance (Section 3.4.1) should be
considered a major violation.
Monetary penalties and collection of contract penalties may
also be used as part of the enforcement response. USEPA has
identified four goals that should be considered in assessing
penalties. These goals are:
0 Penalties should recover the economic benefit of
noncompliance plus some amount for the gravity of the
violation
8 Penalties should be large enough to deter future
noncompliance
0 Penalties should be uniform or reasonably consistent for
similar instances of noncompliance
9 A logical basis for the calculation of penalties should
exist.
EPA issued a Clean Water Act Penalty Policy (February 11, 1986) to
implement these principles for Clean Water Act violations and
provide a systematic approach for calculating penalties.
3.4.5 Factors in Selecting the Appropriate Response
As indicated, industrial user violations of monitoring,
reporting, and treatment requirements may range from the relatively
minor violations (reports submitted a week late) to major violations
described in the discussion above. Each instance of noncompliance
is a violation and sound enforcement policy would be to review each
and respond appropriately. However, selection of the appropriate
enforcement response will relate to whether the violation is major
or minor and such other factors as duration of the violation.
-------
compliance history, good faith of the violator, and the harm caused
by the violation. For example, if a semiannual report is late by
about a week, the Control Authority may not consider that a serious
violation. In most cases* a telephone call or notice of violation
for the Control Authority requesting an explanation will bring the
problem to the attention of the industrial user's management.
Frequently, such a notification is sufficient to correct the problem.
For each type of violation in the Response Guide, a range of responses
is shown. The Control Authority should select the appropriate
response after considering factors such as those below.
3.4.5.1 Duration of the Violation and Compliance History of the
1 nd u s t r i a l_jj s eY
The Control Authority should review the Violation Summary to
evaluate the duration of the violation and the compliance history
of the industrial user. A violation occurs whenever an industrial
user exceeds an applicable effluent limit or fails to meet the
deadlines and conditions for reporting, monitoring, or treatment.
The Control Authority should also consider the effectiveness of
the enforcement response that was used for the previous violation.
Isolated violations will usually be attributed to a relatively
simple problem that can be easily corrected. Although the tendency
is to assume that minor exceedances are unimportant, the persistence
of minor violations could indicate a more serious problem and
necessitate an escalated enforcement response. Categorical pretreat-
ment standards account for routine variations in treatment system
performance. When several minor exceedances occur, either consecu-
tively or several months apart, it may suggest that operating
practices are inadequate to meet the limits and additional controls
are needed.
3-63
-------
More aggressive enforcement actions should normally be taken
against facilities that frequently exceed numerical pretreatment
standards than those that report isolated exceedances (unless the
isolated exceedances are large and troublesome). Informal meetings
or a written notice of violation should seek specific explanations
of the causes of frequent exceedances. If inadequate operating
practices are found to be the cause, the Control Authority should
seek specific commitments and deadlines to improve operating
practices. If additional treatment is required, an enforceable
compliance schedule should be issued to the industrial facility.
3.4.5.2 Apparent Good Faith of Responsible Industrial User Personnej.
If industrial user personnel appear to be attempting in good
faith to comply with pretreatment requirements. Control Authority
enforcement actions should be on a more cooperative level than if
industrial user personnel do not appear to be attempting to comply
in good faith.
However, Control Authority personnel should be aware that the
Clean Water Act requires extraordinary efforts to comply with its
requirements in a timely way. Good faith must be measured against
this standard. Congress clearly expresses the efforts that are
expected:
The Act requires industry to take extraordinary
efforts if the vital and ambitious goals of the
Congress are to be met. This means that business-
as-usual is not enough. Prompt, vigorous, and in
many cases, expensive pollution control measures
must be initiated and completed as promptly as
possible. In assessing the good faith of a
discharger, the discharger is to be judged against
these criteria. Moreover, it is an established
principle, which applies to this act, that
administrative and judicial review are sought
on the discharger's own time.
Legislative History of the ClegnWater Act
No. 95-14, Vol. 3, p. 463
3-64
-------
Thus, if a facility challenges a permit, contract, or applicable
pretreatroent standard and delays progress toward compliance, the
facility assumes the risk that the permit, contract, or standard
will be upheld on judicial review. If the facility begins aggres-
sively to cone into compliance only after a decision is made adverse
to its interests, it cannot be considered to have acted in good
faith. Likewise, if a facility follows business-as~usual procedures,
it cannot be considered to have acted in good faith.
However, if measured against the high standards cited above,
a facility appears to be acting in good faith to comply, the Control
Authority may choose an enforcement response that is not as coercive
as one it would choose against a facility not acting in good faith.
3.4,5.3 NpncgjBpliance That _Causes interference or Pass-Through
Industrial user noncompliance night cause interference with
treatment plant performance or pass-through of pollutants. Such
violations should be addressed through formal enforcement action
and penalties to ensure that adequate treatment and compliance is
achieved promptly. In some cases, injunctive measures will also be
appropriate.
3-65
-------
SECTION 3.5
CONTROL AUTHORITY RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING TO APPROVAL AUTHORITY
3,5.1 Recordkeeping Requirements
The General Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR 403.12(n)) require
that Control Authorities maintain records of program activities for
a minimum of 3 years. These records include the reports submitted
by industrial users, results of Control Authority inspections and
sampling of industrial users, and information about Control Authority
enforcement action. Virtually all Control Authorities have developed
administrative systems for management of NPDES information. Some
Control Authorities, however, may be unfamiliar with the rules of
evidence for records that may be used for formal enforcement action.
Such Control Authorities should consult appropriate legal counsel
to determine applicable local, State, and Federal law.
3.5.2 Report i ngRequirements
The requirements for annual reporting by a Control Authority
to the Approval Authority are usually established by the NPDES
permit. The one exception to this is the State-operated pretreatment
program where there are no local Control Authorities and USEPA acts
as the Approval Authority. In this case, reporting requirements
will be established in the State/EPA Enforcement Agreement. In
general, the Control Authority will be required to report at least
annually and, in some cases, quarterly. (Proposed amendments to
the General Pretreatment Regulations include a new proposed 40
CFR 403.12U) (51 FR 21480, June 12, 1986), which would impose a
requirement for all Control Authorities to submit a report at least
annually to their Approval Authorities.)
3-66
-------
The Approval Authority will use these annual reports, in
conjunction with pretreatment compliance inspections and audits, to
evaluate the effectiveness of pretreatment program implementation
by the Control Authority. While the specific information requested
may vary among Control Authorities! in general, the report should
cover all requirements specified in the NPDES permit and approved
pretreatment program. Table 4-1 provides a listing of annual
report elements currently found in annual reports. Control Authori-
ties that have received removal credits are required to report on a
semiannual basis the results of their monthly influent/effluent
analyses to verify that consistent removal is achieved.
3.5.3 Data for an Annual PretreatmentProgram Report
Experience has demonstrated that there is a great deal of
variation in the type and quantity of information required from
POTWs. To ensure some degree of consistency and adequacy of reportsf
a set_ of minimum iji_foraa_t_ion_ needs_ to be_ defined. To the extent
that this information is captured in a standardized format using a
common set of definitions, it can become a basis for evaluating the
effectiveness of pretreatment program implementation on a nationwide
basis and for comparing the activities among Control Authorities.
Furtherr such minimum data can be the primary basis for an automated
pretreatment data system. For these reasons, this guidance recommends
a format for a Pretreatment Performance Summary that addresses the
minimum compliance information needs of an annual pretreatment
report. The Pre t r e a tine n t_Pe rf :QjCf»ai nee Sununa ry (or equivalent
information) should be part of all annual reports. Modification of
annual report requirements is the responsibility of the Approval
Authority? therefore, adoption of the Pretreatment Performance
Summary or any other change should be made as directed by the
Approval Authority.
3-61
-------
TABLE 4-1
ANNUAL REPORT ELEMENTS
1. Summary of POTW Monitoring Efforts
Influent/Effluent and Sludges
2. Updated industrial User Survey Cannual)
3. Summary of Control Mechanism Efforts
Issuance of Control Mechanisms
Revisions to IU Limits
4. Inspection and Monitoring Efforts
Summary of Previous Year Activities
Proposed Schedule for Next ¥ear
5, Reporting Frequency
6. Compliance Status
Description of Each Significant Industrial User
Notification of Substantial Changes in Volume
or Characteristics of Pollutants
Identification of All New Pollutants
List of Industrial Users In Significant Noncompliance
List of Industries not in Compliance With
Reporting Requirements
List of Interference/Upset/Permit
Violation Incidents
Summary of Compliance Status
Summary of Compliance of Nonsignificant Industrial Users
7. Notification Efforts
IOs Without Compliance Schedules
lUs With Compliance Schedules
8. Summary of Enforcement Action
Dates of Violations and Enforcement Response
Date Compliance Achieved
9. Program Evaluation
Evaluation of Program Effectiveness
Evaluation of Local Limits
Evaluation of Resources
Notification of Proposed Changes
Notification of Changes to Program
10. Summary of Public Participation Efforts
3-68
-------
As designed, the proposed format directs the Control Authority
to report on its activities only as they affect Significant Industrial
Users (see definition in Section 2.1,3). The 1 page format provides
the Approval Authority with the basic information needed to evaluate
Control Authority performance and to report program status and
industrial user compliance data to USEPA Regions and Headquarters*
Part I contains general information that identifies the Control
Authority, the appropriate contact person, permit numbers covered
by the approved program, and the total number of categorical and
significant noncategorical industrial users.
Part II requests summary information on industrial user
compliance with reporting requirements and pretreataent standards.
The first three entries request the number of industrial users that
submitted reports (BMR, 90-Day Compliance, and Semiannual Reports)
compared to the number of industrial users required to submit
reports during the period. The fourth question seeks to identify
the number of SIUs meeting compliance schedules as compared to the
number actually required to meet schedules. One of the more
significant pieces of information is the rate of Significant Non-
compliance by industrial users. This (fractional) rate is developed
by identifying the total number of Significant Industrial Users
that are in Significant Noncorapliance as the numerator, and by
identifying the total number of Significant Industrial Users (see
Significant Noncompliance definition in Section 3.4.1) as the
denominator.
3-69
-------
SAMPLE
PRETREATMENT PERFORMANCE SUMMARY
I. General Information
Control Authority Name
City
Contact Person ""
Contact Telephone Number
NPDES NoS.
State/Zip
Reporting Period
Categorical IPs
..............
Total Significant Noncategorical lUs
I certify that the information
contained is conplete and accurate
to the best of my knowledge.
AuthorizedRepresentative Date
II. Significant Industrial User Compliance
1) No. of SlUs Submitting BMRs/No. Required a ...
2} No. of SIUs Submitting 90-Day Ccnpliance Reports/No. Required. /~ ~SA
3) No. of SIUs Submitting Semiannual Report/Mo. Required
4) No. of SIUs Meeting Ccnpliance Schedule/No. Required to
Meet Schedule /_
5) No. of SIUs in Significant Noncompliance/Total No. of SIUs ........
6) Rate of Significant Nonoonpliance for all SIUs (categorical and
noncategorical} /__
III. CoBpliance MonitoringProgram
1) No. of Control Documents Issued/No. Required / /_
2) No. of Nonsanpling Inspections Conducted
3) No. of Sartpling Visits Conducted
4} No. of Facilities Inspected (rtonsampling)
5) No. of Facilities Sampled
IV. Enforcement Actions
1} Compliance Schedules Issued/Schedules Required
2) Notices of Violations Issued to SIUs
3) Administrative Orders Issued to SIUs
4) Civil Suits Piled
5) Criminal Suits Piled ..•
6) Significant Violators (attach newspaper list)
7) Amount of Penalties Collected (total dollars/lUs assessed)
8) Other Actions (sewer bans, etc.) , ,
SIGNIFICANT
INDUSTRIAL USERS
Cate-
gorical
Noncate-
gorical
3-70
-------
Part III summarizes the compliance monitoring program of the
Control Authority. The Control Authority should complete the table
with the number of control documents (I.e., permits) issued to
industrial users and the number required! the number of sampling
and nonsampling inspections conducted! and the number of facilities
inspected (sampling and nonsampling).
Part IV summarizes enforcement responses taken by the Control
Authority to industrial user noncompiiance. The Control Authority
should identify the total number of each type of enforcement action
taken in the period covered by this report. The actions taken
should include only those that were in writing. A notice of
violation given by telephone should not be included. The Control
Authority should also attach the list of Significant Violators
published in the newspaper as a part of its response to Part IV.
{Failure to publish the newspaper list is a violation in itself
and makes the Control Authority subject to an enforcement response
by the Approval Authority.)
To assist in determining the rate of Significant Noncorapliance»
worksheets and procedures (and an example newspaper violations
listing) are included in Appendix A.
3-71
-------
APPENDIX A
Example Reporting Procedures
Example procedures fort
Page
* Industrial User Reports .......................... A-l
* Evaluation of IU Compliance A-9
0 Summary of Industrial User Compliance ............ A-13
* POTW Reports to the Approval Authority ........... A-17
0 Newspaper Listing of Significant Violations A-19
-------
APPENDIX A
EXAMPLE REPORTING PROCEDURES
This appendix explains the recommended pretreatraent reporting
process, beginning with a summary of industrial sampling data,
through evaluation of IU compliance and reporting to the Approval
Authority and finishing with a public notice of Significant Viola-
tions in the newspaper. Reporting at all intervals—industrial
userf POTW, and States—will be an ongoing and significant activity
in pretreatment program operations. USEPA must rely on regular
status reports to develop national reports on industrial compliance
with pretreatment standards. In order for the national report to
be credible and verifiable, all facets of the reporting system
should be based on common definitions. The definition of Significant
Noncompliance provides the criteria for evaluating industrial user
compliance against pretreatment standards. Most NPDES permits
either currently contain or soon will be modified to contain language
that establishes regular timetables for reporting pretreatment
compliance status information to the Approval Authority.
1. Industrial User Reports
This section provides the Control Authority with a recommended
method of handling industrial user sampling and analysis information.
Other methodologies are available and some Control Authorities
already have procedures. If an existing procedure contains all oC
the fundamental elements discussed within* there may be no need to
modify that system. The fundamental elements of an industrial
report are listed in this section. These elements are then shown
in the context of a recommended Industrial Monitoring Report format.
The example reporting format is shown for a job shop electroplater
(Chrome Bumpers, Inc., is a hypothetical job shop electroplater).
A-l
-------
A. The following identifies the fundamental elements of an
industrial user report:
0 Basic Informations Name of IUf address, and reporting period.
m
a
o
o
Dai ly Pgllutan t ^Conce ntra tionsi The pollutants monitored,
theunits" in which pollutants are recorded, the date samples
were taken, and concentration of pollutants (analysis).
Average Pollutant Concentrations; Because categorical
Industrial" users are often subject to meeting average
concentrations, the report should provide a reading of such
averages at the appropriate frequencies.
Mass,Per Days The Control Authority may alter the units as
11 deems necessary. If limits are expressed in mass per day,
10s must submit reports in mass per day along with the
supporting concentration and flow data.
F3L ow Da t a Repo r ting: By regulation, IDs subject to categorical
standards must submit average and daily maximum flow data.
These should include flow data for each flow rate used in
calculating the industrial user's limits (e.g., total flow
and dilution flow).
0 Certification Statement; If an industrial user has certified
to a particular condition of a categorical regulation, a
statement should be included acknowledging the continuing
applicability of the certification. For example, Metal
Finishers and Electroplaters would provide the following:
"Based on my inquiry of the person or persons
directly responsible for managing compliance
with the pretreatment standard for total toxic
organics (TTO)f I certify that to the best of
my knowledge and belief, no dumping of concen-
trated toxic organics into the wastewater has
occurred since filing of the last semiannual
compliance report. I further certify that this
facility is implementing the toxic organic
management plan submitted to the Control
Authority.*
° Signature of AuthorizedRepresentative; A signed statement
by a n author iz e d ~ r e p r e s e h t a"t 1 v e, that certifies the validity
of the report.
A-2
-------
Reporting Production-based Standards
When the Industrial User is subject to a production-based
standard, production information must be supplied. For example!
PRODUCTION RATE
Average Production Rate
Production Factors Units for the .ReportingPeriod
Common Metals Sq.m.-op. 1,940
Electroless Plating Sq.».-op. 1,560
Coatings Sq.ra.-op. 780
or daily information can be provided.
PRODUCTION RATE
Production Factor Units 7/5/86 7/13/86 7/21/86 7/29/86
Common Metals Sq.m.-op. 1,980 2,590 1,110 2,080
Electroless Plating Sq.ra.-op. 1,590 2,080 900 1,680
Coatings Sq.ra.-op, 790 1,040 450 840
For a more detailed understanding of production-based standards,
see "Guidance Manual for Use of Production-Based Pretreatment
Standards and the Combined Wastestream Formula," available
through USEPA Regional Offices.
B. Recommended Industrial UserReporting Format
Section 403.12 of the General Pretreatment Regulations requires
that categorical industries report semiannually on their regulated
waste discharges. A recommended format for recording and reporting
the industrial user's effluent data for that report is provided on
page A-5. (This format may be modified by the Control Authority to
obtain additional information, or the Control Authority may use its
own form to obtain at least equivalent information for this report.)
This sample format, called the Industrial Monitoring Report, can be
A-3
-------
used byi |1) industrial users to record and report self-monitoring
activities, and (2) the Control Authority to record scheduled/
unscheduled, and demand monitoring activities of the industrial
user. To complete the format, the industrial user or Control
Authority should follow the instructions shown on page A-6(a)-(c).
Two semiannual Industrial Monitoring Reports completed for Chrome
Bumpers, Inc% (a hypothetical electroplater subject to daily and
4-day average maximum standards), are provided on pages A-7 and
A-8. (Appendix C describes the procedures for reporting on the
electroplating category's 4-day averages.)
A-4
-------
INDUSTRIAL MONITORING REPORT
1U NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
WWTP DISCHARGED TO
IU CODE
PRODUCTION RATE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
. . Authorized Representative Date
PARAMETERS
FLOW, TOTAL'
PLOW, DILUTE
BODs ii&T
COD
TSS
IS
pH
OIL, GREASE
AMMONIA, NH 3
NOj - llD"|
TOTAL PHOS
ftCANlDttj CN
PHENOL
SULFIDefS2~
FLUORIDE, F
SILVER, Ag
ALUMINUM, Al
ARSENIC, As
eACMIUM,Cd
HEXA CHSOM
TOTAL CHROH
QOPPER(Ou
IRON, Fe
MERCURY.Hg
^kNGANESETHn
NICKELt Ni
LEAD, Pb
SELENIUM ,Se
Zlfc, Zn
TOTAL METAL
TOT.TOX.ORG.
UNIT
qpd
qpd
IKJ/l
nq/i
mq/1
nq/1
mq/1
raq/i
WJ/i
mq/1
mq/i
»iq/l
mq/1
mq/1
mq/1
mq/1
mq/i
mtfl
mq/i
nq/1
W|/l
ma/1
wg|A
niq/4
mq/1
mq/1
mq/i
mq/1
nq/1
LIMITS
WOC/AW.
SAMPLE
/ /
mo day yr
SELF
SCHEQUL
UNSCHED**
DGMANB
SAMPLE
/ /
ma day yr
SELF
SCHEDUL
UNSCHED
DEMAND
SAMPLE
/ /
no day yr
SELF _
SCHEDUL *~
UNSCHED
DEMAND
SAMPLE
/ J
no day yr
SELF
SCHEDUL
UNSCHKD
DEMAND "~
SAM1PLE
/ /
my day yr
SELF
SCHEDUL ~
UNSCHED
DEMAND
SAMPLE
/ /
»3 day yr
SELF
SCHEDUL "~
UNSCHED
CO1AND
SAMPLE
/ /
no day yr
SELF
SCHEDUL
UNSCHED
DEMAND
SAMPLED
/ /
no day yr
SELF
SCHEfiUL
UNSCHED"*"
DEMAND ~
wmmi,
/ /
so day yr
to
/ /
wo day yr
-------
INSTRUCTIOB FOR CXMHJTING THE INDUSTRIAL MONITORING
0 Identify the industry name, address, and the wastewater treatment
plant to which it discharges. If the industrial user most comply with
production-based standards, the rate of production should be shown (in
units consistent with the standard), along with the date the production
rate was determined. The sampling period covered by the report should
also be identified.
0 For industrial users recording self-monitoring samples and analysis,
the date each sample was taken should be shown in the "Sample* column
and the type of sarrple indicated (if different from the sample type
required by the ordinance, permit, or categorical standard)* Because
all samples taken by the industrial user are self-monitoring samples,
the box indicating self-maniteeing ("SEtf*) should always be checked,
* For Control Authorities recording industrial user monitoring samples
and analysis, the date each sanple was taken should be shown in the
"Sanple* column. Because the Control Authority can collect one of
three types of monitoring sanples, the appropriate box (scheduled,
unscheduled, or demand) should be checked* (Section 3,2 explains the
scheduled, unscheduled, and demand monitoring types.)
0 By regulation, 403.12{c), semiannual reports should include a record
of measured estine ted average and maximum daily total flows (and
dilute flows when appropriate) for the reporting period. Space is
provided to record flow measurement on the day each sanple was taken*
If the industrial user maintains utility records of water usage,
copies of such records nay be substituted (if no major additional flow
or loss is regularly occurring at the discharge point).
A-6
-------
Industrial users subject to the combined wastestream formula must
report flow rates for all wastestrearos that were necessary to use the
formula.
0 The industrial user should record the numerical local limits and
categorical standards applicable to the industrial user in the column
titled "Limits.* {This information can be obtained from the permit*
ordinance, contract, or categorical standard applicable to the industrial
user.)
* Analytical results of each sairple are to be recorded in the column and
row appropriate to the sample and pollutant type. Analytical results
should be provided in units consistent with the "units" column. The
Control Authority may altar the units as it deems necessary. For
example, if limits are in mass per day, IDs must submit reports in
mass per day as well as concentration units.
(If more than eight sanples are taken during the sairpling period,
additional pages will be needed.)
0 Industries subject to categorical pretreatment standards raust comply
with the daily maximum concentration and the average sample concentra-
tion (either 4-day or a monthly average), depending on the industry
category. As an example, the daily maximum and 4-day average require-
ments are applied to electroplaters. In the column labeled "Average
Cone.," the beginning and end dates of the consecutive samples to be
averaged for calculation of a 4-day and monthly average should be
indicated. Where applicable, the average value must be calculated and
recorded in the column under "Average Cone."
-------
If an industrial user has certified to a particular condition of a
categorical regulation, a statement mist be included acknowledging the
continued applicability at the certification.
The report must be signed by an authorized representative of the
industry. Ihe industrial user conducting self-monitoring activitieSf
should submit the Industrial Monitoring Report to the Control Authority
at 6-nonth intervals (or more frequentlyr if required by the Control
Authority).
The industrial user's self-monitoring information can be combined with
the Control Authority's monitoring information to complete the miniram
compliance reporting requirements discussed in Section 3.5.
A-6(c)
-------
10 NAME
ADDRESS
ChroBB BunperSf lnc«
555 Man_ Street
_
STATE
55555
INDUSTRIAL MONITORING REPORT
WWTP DISCHARGED TO
IU COCK 1020C
KATE
I HEREBY CEIWIP* THAT THIS REHLMT IS
ACCURATE TO THE BEST (V MY KNOWLEDGE
John Doe 6/30/86
___Ajjthorizej 'Bapresentatlve
Date
PARAMETERS
FLCWjjlOTAL
Ft25w» DILUTE
BQD*i $2QBC
COD
TSS"
TS~
P«
OIL, GREASE
AMMbNlA^tiHi
NOl - NQl J
TOrnrftioB"1
C»NlOfe, CN
WENOL
SULPlDE.Si^
pLuetooi, p
SILVat, Ag
AUJMlfMljAi
ARSENIC, As
CMMltM.Od
HEXA OlpOM
totAL CMJCH
O3PPM»&
IRON, Fe
MERtt^^.fig^
MANGANESE.Mn
NI^lfeL, Ni
!]£% ft,
SELENIUH,55e
2IN6, Zn
•iWAt M&AL
Tbt.i6x.biS;.
t*IIT
gpd
gpd
"S/1
mq/1
mq/1
mq/1
rVl
mq/i
"i/i
«g^
«}/i
mq/i
mjA
"Vl
,mq/i
raq/1
MJ/1
WJ/i
m?/l
"i/1
fflq/1
"VJ
mq/1
"flA
nq/1
mq/t
mq/1
Vf
mq/,L
mq/i
LIMITS
MAX/AVG,
T.9/l.¥
1.2/0.7
T. 0/4.0
4.S/2.7
i.l/i.8
0.6/d.4
l,2/i«6^
16.5/C.fl
SAMPLE
l/5_/86
mo day yr
SELF K
SCHEDUL
UNSCHED
DEMAND
24,000
0
i.5
<.fll
7.4
<.6i
i.<
<.0l
1.3
10.1
SAMPLE
3 /6 /86
mo day yr
SELF |X
SCHEOUL
CBBCHEO
DEMAND
20,000
0
1.0
2.8
2.0
1.7
6.§
SAMPLE
6 /I /86
no day yr
SELF " X
SCHEDUL
UNSCHED
DEMAND
22,000
6
T.^
2,3
1.&
3.J
7.4
SAMPLE
/ /
mo day yr
SELF
SCHEUUL"
UNSCHED
DEMAND
SAMPLE
/ /
mo day yr
SELF
SCHEDUL *~
UNSCHED
DEMAND *~
SAMPLE
/ /
mo day yr
SELF
SCHEOUL ~~
UNSCHED
DEMAND
SAMPLE
/ /
mo day yr
SELF
SCHEOUL
UNSOMO ~
D0WND ~
SAMPLE
/ /
rao day yr
SELF j
SCHbDUL
UNSCHED *"
UtJiAND
.
AVERftut:
/ /
mo day yr
to
/ /
mo day yr
Abased on ny inquiry OE t»w person orperstxis directly responsible Cor managing compliance with the prctrtscitment
standard for total toxic organ ics (TTO), I certify tnat to the best of my Knowledge and belief, no aunping of
concantrated toxic organics has occurred since filing the last discharge monitoring report. I further cart if y
that this facility is tnplementing the toxic organic management plan submitted to the Control Authority,
-------
EXAMPLE
INDUSTRIAL MONITORING REPORT
IU NAME Chrome Buipers, Inc.
ADDRESS 555 Main Street
CITY AnytCHp gfrRTE XX
PRODUCTION RATE
WWTP DISCHARGEE ID
IU CODE 1020C
I HEREBY CERTIEY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE TO THE BEST OP MY KNOWLEDGE
John Doe
..12/30/86
Authorized Representative
Date
PARAMETERS
FLOW, TOTAL
FLOW, DILUTE
BC% i20"C
ODD
TSS
TS
pH
OIL, GREASE
AM43NXA,ifi3
sa^- soj
TOTAL PHOS
CYANIDE, CM
PHENOL
SULFIDE.S*"
FLUORIDE, F
SILVER, Ag
ALLMINUM.A1
ASSQJIC, AS
GMMTLM,C&
HEXRCHR^
TOTJiL" OHKW
O3PPER,Cii
IRON, Fe
!4ERCUKiT,»3
«ANGANESE,[*l
63IGKEL, Ni
LEAfi, Ife
SELENIUM, Se
ZINC, In
TOTAL METAL
TOk.TQX.QRG.
^ . .
WIT
3gd
ggd
i«?A
WJ/1
nig/l
ncf/1
Wl
"•i^1
Vl
mq/1
mqyi
racf/1
mcf/1
ITCf/1
it^/1
mcf/1
tnq/1
mcj/1
Wl
OTJ/1
mq/1
mq/1
*tfl
rrcf/1
mcf/1
i4/l
raq/I
irej/1
Wi
itq/1
Lmras
MAX/AW.
1.9/1.0
1.2/0.7
7.d/4.0
4.57:2.7
4.1/2.8
0.6/5.4
4.2/2.6
lO.S/6.6'
4.W
SAMPLE
8/4, /86
no day yr
SELF X
SCHEDUL
UNSCHED
DtMAND
2^,000
s
6.§
<0.1
2.5
<6.1
I'9
<6.i
2.4
b. 6
v
SAMPLE
10/1 /86
mo day yr
SELF X
SCHEDUL
UNSCHED
DEMAND
18,000
0^
i.i
3.8
1.6
2.8
8.6
SAMPLE
12/1 /86
mo day yr
SELF X
SCHEDUL
UNSCHED
DEMAND
20,000
0
T.I
4.3
1.5
2.6
8.4
SAMPLE
/ /
mo day yr
fiCTj?
SCHEDUL ~
UNSCHED
DEMAND
SAMPLE
/ 7
mo day yr
SELF
SCHEDUL
UNSCHED
DEMAND
. — " • • i
SAMPLE
/ /
mo day yr
SELF
SCHEDUL ""
UtBCHED ~
DEMAND
SAMPLE
/ /
mo day yr
SELF
SCHEDUL ~
UNSCHED
DEMAND
SAMPLE
/ /
mo day yr
SELF
SCHEDUL"
UNSCHED
DEMAND
AVERAGE
1/5 /06
ina day yr
to
8/4 /86
mo day yr
"* — ^>_
C1.20)
""-— — "
5."?5
1.8
^
(I^SS
"^— -S
standard for total toxic organics (TTO), I certify that to the beat of my knowledge and belief, no dunping of
concentrated toxic organics has occurred since filing the last discharge nottitoring rq«rt. I further certify
that this facility is iraplementirig the toxic organic management plan submitted to the Control Authority.
-------
2« Evaluation of 10 Compliance
Control Authorities must evaluate industrial user compliance
with pretreatment standards. In this guidance, EPA has defined the
term "Significant Noncoiopliance* for setting enforcement priorities
and for Control Authority reports (see pages 3-50 to 3-52).
To assist in determining Significant Noncompliance, an example
worksheet is included. There is no requirement to use or submit
this worksheet unless required by the Approval Authority in the NPDES
permit. The worksheet is provided to illustrate to the Control
Authority a method for organizing data so as to be able to determine
Significant Moncompliance. To complete this form, the Control
Authority should:
0 Identify each industrial user by name (or a four-digit code,
using the letter *C* to succeed the code for any categorical
industrial user).
* Insert the date of the industrial user's semiannual report*
6 Compare the monitoring results to the applicable limits.
For each parameter, enter (in the TOT column) the total
number of daily maximum samples (and averages for the Average
section) required by the Control Authority. In the EXC1
column, enter the number of times that the limit was exceeded.
In the EXC2 column, enter the number of times that the limit
was exceeded by TRC.
* At this point, the exceedances must be reviewed to determine
whether the BXC1 violations were greater than or equal to
66 percent of the TOT, and whether the EXC2 violations were
greater than or equal to 33 percent of the average TOT,
A-9
-------
* After recording the complete data for each industrial user,
the industrial user's overall compliance status should be
evaluated. If there is any violation(s) that meets the
criteria of Significant Noneompliance, the industrial user
must be counted as in Significant Noncompliance. Circle all
SNC violations.
A blank worksheet is provided on page A-ll. Page A-12
illustrates the use of the worksheet to evaluate Significant
Noncompliance. Based on the worksheet, Chrome Bumpers, Inc., was
not in Significant Noncompliance for the first semiannual report,
but was in Significant Noncompliance for the second semiannual
report (100 percent violations of the 4-day average for cyanide and
total metals). Admittedly, there is only one 4-day average, but as
stated previously, this example industrial user should be subject
to increased monitoring requirements.
A-10
-------
INDUSTRIAL USER COMPLIANCE EVALUATION WORKSHEET
PARAMETERS
FLOWr TOTAL
FLOW, DILUTE
BOD* i20°C
COD
TSS
TS
pH
OIL, GREASE
AMMONIA ,NH-*
NO2 - NOi
TOTAL PHOS
CYANIDE, CN
PHENOL
SULFIDE,S^~
FLUORIDE, F
SILVER, Ag
ALUMINUM,A1
ARSENIC, As
CADMIUM,Cd
HEXA CBROM
TOTAL CHROM
COPPER ,Cu
IRON, Fe
MERCURY, Hg
MANGANESE, Mn
NICKEL, Ni
LEAD, Pb
SELENIUM ,Se
ZINC, 2n
TOTAL METAL
TOT.TOX.ORG.
FAILURE TO
REPORT
COMP. SCHED.
VIOLATIONS
DAILY
TOT
EXC1
EXC2
AVERAGE
TOT
EXC1
EXC2
DAILY
TOT
EXC1
EXC2
AVERAGE
TOT
EXC1
EXC2
A-ll
-------
INDUSTRIAL USER COMPLIANCE EVALUATION WORKSHEET
PARAMETERS
FLOW, TOTAL
FLOW, DILUTE
BOD5 i20°C
COD
TSS
TS
£H
OIL, GREASE
AMMONIA, NH^
NO2 - NOij
TOTAL PHOS
CtSNlbfi, CH
PHENOL
SULFIDE,S*~
FLUQRIDE, F
SILVER, Ag
ALUMINUM,A1
ARSENIC, As
CADMIUM, Cd
BEXA CHROM
TOTAL CHROM
COPPER, Cu
IRON, We
MERCURY, Hg
MANGANESE, Mn
NICKEL, Ni
LEAD, Pb
SELENIUM, Se
ZINC, Zn
TOTAL METAL
TOT.TOX.ORG.
FAILURE TO
REPORT
COM P. SCHED.
VIOLATIONS
CHROME BUMPERS, INC.
1/1/86 to 6/30/86
DAIL¥
tot
3
1
3
1
J
1
3
3
EXC1
I
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
EXC2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
AVERAGE
TOT
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
EXC1
EXC2
NO
NO
CHROME BUMPERS, INC.
7/1/86 to 12/30/86
DAILk
TOT
3
I
3
i
3
1
3
^^
~™n
EXC1
tJ
0
0
0
0 i
0
0
iF
EXC2
0
0
0
0
0
0
tJ
0
AVERAGE
TOT
1
x^
0
I
6
T
&"1
^J—
^ I
EXCl
~~ X
1 '
^
0
0
0
0
d
-JW
ly
EXC2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NO
NO
Certification provided
A-12
-------
3. Summaryof Industrial UserCompliance
To summarize the industrial compliance worksheets discussed
above to provide the compliance information requested by Section II
of the Pretreatraent Performance Report, the Control Authority
may use the Control Authority Summary of Industrial User Compliance
format on page A-15. This is not a required form, and the Control
Authority may summarize ID performance using any number of methods,
including automatic data management systems. In any case, the
Control Authority should have some easily accessible summary that
indicates the level of IU compliance with both categorical standards
and local limits.
Instructions for Completing the It) Summary
1. Identify each industrial user by the four-digit code number in
the spaces provided, as shown.
2. In the TOT column( enter the total number of samples collected
and analyzed during the reporting period for each parameter
sampled.
3. Under the STAT column, identify the compliance status of each
parameter monitored by using the following grading system:
C - Consistent compliancef 100 percent compliance for all
samples collected.
I - Infrequent noncompliance, any measure of compliance less
than 100 percent but not SNC.
SNC - Significant noneorapliance, see definition on pages
3-50 to 3-52.
A-13
-------
In the heading box, indicate the rate of Significant Noncompliance
for all 10s in the POTW. The rate should be a fraction. The
denominator should represent the total number of significant
Industrial Users in the PQTW, and the numerator should identify
the total number of Significant Industrial Users in Significant
Noncompliance. Note: The rate (fraction) should be consistent
with the rate to b« included on the Pretreatraent Performance
Summary, page A-18,
In the exaaple on page A-16f a hypothetical Control Authority
(containing Chrorae Bumpersf Inc.—10 i!02QC> had the following
industrial compliance summary:
Consistent compliance ...*.. 2
Infrequent noncompliance .......... 4
Significant Noncompliance ......... i
TOTAL ItJs 7
A-14
-------
i
INDUSTRIAL USERS BY CODE |
1
|
i
i
i
B
i
s
I
•4
•4
3
|
ISTAT
p4
z
3
ISTAT
Ml
0
5
ft.
i
»4
a"
y
a
3
3
y
u
h
SI
D
§
\
1
OIL, GREASE
c
1
.
T*
1
rv
(TOTAL PHOS
S
D
J
£
7_s'aaiJinsl
| FLUORIDE, F
ISILVER, Ag
w'Hfwiwnnvl
5
%
u
i
5
5
c
ITOTAL CHHCM
3
X.
£
X
I
2
J"
^
U
s
£
ISELENIUM.Se j
c
N
%
| luI'AL METAL
'5
B
11
COMP. 9CHE.
VIOLATIONS
A-15
-------
CONTROL ALnHDRIW Sl*MARY OF IU COMPLIANCE
POTW NAME
Madison Township
EftTE 1 / 27/87
SIQJIFICAOT MQN-
COMPLIANCE RATE
THIS PAGE ONLY
1/7
PAGE 1 OF
PARAMETERS
HjOW, TOTAL
FLOW, D1UWB
B&^i20'*C
OOD
IKS
TS
pH
OIL, GREASE
W^CSlA.Wij
NO^ - tKh
TOTAL PHOB
CfflfflDE, CH
PrtS»L
aai'iffi'.s'"2
EUfoRlrt, F
SILVER, &g
M«mnjH,Ai
ARSENIC, Aa
CMMIUM,C3a
HEXA CHRCW
TflrkL owbk
OO^P&.Gi
IBDN, Pe"
MEROJW.Hg
MANGANESE, Mn
racaca., tii
LEAD, %
SEL£NIlH,Se
ZfflC, &5
'luz AL MLT/UJ
TcW.itK.oM
EMUJRE TO
ras?OKr
ocrtp. soffi.
V10LATICNS
INDUSTRIAL USERS BY OOOE
1020C
•KJP
F
6
2
6
&
6
2
6
6
\
STAT
C
sac
-------
4. I>re treatment ...Performance Summary
In addition to receiving industrial user reports and evaluating
compliance, Control Authorities must submit reports to the Approval
Authority as required by their NPDES permit, The Pretreatment
Performance Sumnary format on page 3-71 shows the type of compliance
monitoring and enforcement information that will generally be
required. The report format reflects the minimum amount of informa-
tion for such a report and the specific requirements for reporting
to a particular Control Authority will be defined by the Approval
Authority.
The following example of a completed Pretreatment Performance
Summary includes six other Significant Industrial Users (in addition
to Chrome Bumpers, Inc.). These additional SIUs were not in
Significant Noncompliance.
A-17
-------
SAMPLE
PRETREMWEOT PERFORMANCE SUMMARY
I. General Information
Control Authority Name Madison Township
Address 100 Main Street
City Maglson 1,State USA
2ip
55555
Contact Person
Contact Telephone Muntjer
NPDES Nos. XX55555
John Doe
Reporting Period" "..January
to December 31, 1986
Total Categorical IDs ^___
Total Significant Noncategorical lUs
I certify that the information
contained is complete and accurate
to the best of ay knowledge.
John Doe
1/27/87
Authorized Representative Date
II. Significant Industrial User Compliance
15 No. of SIUs Submitting M?s/No. Required
2) No. of SIUs Submitting 90-Day Conpliance Reports/No. Retired -/- NA
3) No. of SIUs Submitting SeraiAnnual Report/No. Required
4) No. of SIUs Meeting Conpliance Schedule/No. Required to
Meet Schedule -/- _ -/-:
5) No. of SIUs in Significant Nonconpliance/Botal No, of SIUs 1/3 I 0/4'
6) Rate of Significant Nonccnplianoe for all SIUs (categorical and
noncategorical 1/7
m« Compliance MonitoringProgram
1) No. of Nonsartpling Inspections Conducted 3 4
2) No. of Satpling Visits Conducted 4
3) No. of Facilities Inspected (Nonsanpling) 1 4
4) No. of Facilities Sanpled .,
IV. Enforcement Actions
1} Compliance Schedules Issued/Schedules Required » 0 0
2) Notices of Violations Issued to SIUs
3) Administrative Orders Issued to SIUs
4) Civil Suits Piled ,
5) Criminal Suits Filed
6) Significant Violators (attach newspaper list) —_~—
?) Amount of Penalties Collected (total dollars/IOs assessed) ......... */l
8} Other Actions (sswer bans, etc.)
SISHFICANrr
INDUSTRIAL USSffi
Cate-
gorical
Noncate-
gorical
* Penalty assessed on IU I 1020C, not yet collected.
A-18
-------
5. Exar^ple Newspaper Listing
RBLIC NOTICE
OP SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL
POLUOTION VIOLATION S)
Listed below ace significant industrial wastewater discharge
violations of the requirements of 40 CFR Rart 403 (General
Pretreatment Regulations) occurring over the past 12 months:
11 Industry nagei Chrome Byrapers, Inc.
Address; 123 Main Street, Madison Twsp., USA
Violation: Exceeded cyanide and total metals 4-day
average limitation based on four samples from 1/5/86
to 8/4/861 and exceeded the daily raaximja chrotdura
limitation on 1/5/86, These violations constitute
significant nonconpliance.
Actions Taken? Mter two notices of violation from the
City, Chrome Bumper, Inc., has not taken the appropriate
reponse to ccraply with the Federal standard.
Schedule of Conpliancet No agreenent currently
reached between the City and Chrcroe Bumpers as to when
consistent compliance can be obtained.
Penalties; City of Madison TVsp. has assessed a
$20,000 penalty against Chrome Bumpers for violation
of Federal Pretreatsnent Standards and potential
damage to human healthy receiving stream aquatic life,
and inhibition to the waste treatment plant.
A-19
-------
APPENDIX B
PROCEDURES FOR INSPECTIONS AT INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES
This appendix provides indepth guidance for those Control
Authority personnel responsible for conducting the onsite inspection
of an industrial facility. In particular* this section provides
the recommended procedures for conducting the initial inspection of
an industrial facility. Such inspections, if performed properly,
will provide the information to form the basis for future compliance
monitoring during pretreatment program implementation. This section
addresses the role of the Control Authority personnel before,
during, and after an inspection of an industrial facility.
1. Preinspection Preparation
Preinspection planning is necessary to ensure that a compliance
monitoring visit to an industrial facility is properly focused and
is conducted smoothly and efficiently. This planning generally
involves:
0 Review of background information related to the industrial
user
* Preparation of necessary sampling and safety equipment
0 Notification to the industrial user, when necessary.
A. Review ofBackground Information on the Industrial Facility
Collection and analysis of available background information on
the industrial facility is often essential to the effective planning
and overall success of pretreatment compliance monitoring. Materials
obtained from the files of Federal, State, and local agencies;
technical libraries? the industrial useri the original Industrial
Waste Survey (IWS); any industrial discharge permits; and other
information sources, should enable the Control Authority inspection
B-l
-------
personnel to become familiar with the industrial user and its
facility operations. Reviewing background information related to
the industrial user will also allow Control Authority personnel to
conduct the inspection in a timely and efficient manner, minimize
inconvenience to the industrial user caused by requesting data that
have been previously submitted, clarify technical and legal issues
before the inspection, and develop a sound and factual inspection
report. Review of such background information will also enhance
the regulatory credibility of the Control Authority inspector.
Howeverf Control Authority personnel may wish to exercise discretion
in judiciously displaying the full extent of their understanding of
the facility's operations; some facility personnel may be reluctant
to discuss or exhibit operations to inspectors who seem too well-
informed.
There are many factors affecting the amount of background
information necessary. The Control Authority staff's familiarity
with the industrial facility and its processes is probably the most
significant factor* but such things as the exact type of inspection
and/or sampling to be performed, the reason for the inspection
(routine vs. enforcement case preparation), and other issues also
influence the background information needed.
Many of the types of background information that may be
available for review are summarized in Table B-10,
B. Preparation of Samplj._ngmand Safety Equipment
After the background information for an industrial user is
gathered and reviewed. Control Authority personnel should have a
clear understanding of the types of equipment necessary to
B-2
-------
TABLE B-l
BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO W INSPECTIONS
General 10 Facility Information
- Maps and schematics showing facility location and layout,
points of discharge to the POTW, and geographic features
— Namesr titles, and phone numbers of appropriate facility
officials
- Any special entry requirements
- Nature of IU processes, operation, and wastewater
characteristics
- Production levels (past, present, and projected)
- Water use and disposal data
- Changes in facility conditions or operations since previous
inspection/permit application
- Available photographs
- Sourcest volume, and characterization of waste discharge(s)
Applicable Requirements, Regulations, and Limitations
- Copies of applicable ordinance, contract, statutes, joint
agreements, permits, and regulations {including Federal,
State, and local discharge limitations). Also, any condi-
tions placed on discharges including compliance schedules,
monitoring and reporting requirements, existing monitoring
stations, and analytical methods used by the IU.
- Special exemptions and waivers, if any.
- Previous facility applications for water, air, or solid
waste permits that may contain useful data not provided
elsewhere.
Facility Compliance and Enforcement History
- Federal, State, and local IU compliance files
- Correspondence between an 10 and local, State, and Federal
agencies
- Complaints and reports about an ID, including followup
studies and findings
B-3
-------
TABLE B-l (continued)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO IU INSPECTIONS
- Previous IU inspection or self-monitoring reports and
correspondence concerning past violations
- Status of past, current, and pending litigation against
an IU.
* Pollution Control and Pretreatraent Systems
- Description of and design and operation data for any
existing pollution control or pretreatment systems utilized
by an IU
- Available bypasses for existing pollution control system
components.
* Miscellaneous Information
- IU spill contingency plans
- Previous EPA, State, local, and consultant studies and
reports regarding an IU
- Technical reports, documents, and references to provide
generic information on industrial process operations, as
well as pertinent specific data on available pretreatment/
control techniques applicable to an IU.
B-4
-------
effectively meet the objectives of the compliance monitoring visit.
The necessary types of equipment may vary according to the industrial
user and the type of compliance monitoring to be performed by the
Control Authority. For example* if the Control Authority wished to
perform sampling of an industrial user's wastewater discharge in
conjunction with the onsite inspection, sampling and possibly
safety equipment would need to be prepared in advance of the site
visit.
Considerations related to selection and preparation of the
required sampling equipment—if the compliance monitoring of an
industrial user will include sample collection—include:
* The number of different discharge points to be sampled
* The type{s) of sample(s) to be collected (i.e.f grab or
composite)
* The pollutant parameters to be analyzed in each of the
samples collected
0 The sample container and preservation requirements for those
pollutant parameters to be analyzed in each sample
* The quality assurance and control samples to be taken
for particular pollutant parameters.
Control Authority staff performing any compliance monitoring
activity* whether inspections or sampling, should be properly
equipped for the safety hazards that may exist at an industrial
facility. Safety equipment and requirements are important* not
only for safety reasons, but also to ensure that Control Authority
personnel, are not denied entry to an industrial facility or to
specific sections within the facility during inspection or sampling.
Table B-2 lists the typical safety equipment that an inspection
team should have readily available if necessary.
B-5
-------
TABLE B-2
TYPICAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT FOR
INDUSTRIAL IHSPECTION AND SAMPLING TEAMS
Oxygen/co«bustion/H2S aeter with alarm
Air blower with 15 ft. hose
Safety harness and tripod
Safety rope
Hard hat
Rubber boots
Safety glasses
Rubber boots
Rubber gloves
Coveralls
Flashlight (explosion-proof)
Manhole hook or pick
Firit aid kit
Fire extinguisher
Safety ladder (aluminum, chain, or rope)
Safety cones
Warning flags
Particulate masks
Self-contained breathing apparatus
Traffic diversion devices
B-6
-------
C. NotijjcatioT^to the Industrial User
Notify the industrial user prior to visiting the facility in
recommended primarily in the following two instances;
* Before monitoring an industrial user for the first time, the
industrial user should be notified and arrangements made for
a tour of the facility to familiarize the Control Authority
personnel with the operations of the facility
* Prior to a scheduled monitoring visit of the industrial
facility during subsequent pretreatment program implementation.
In the first instance, it is recommended -that the industrial
user be informed by letter that the Control Authority plans to
visit its facility as a part of pretreatment program implementation.
Several weeks notice is advisable in roost cases. Especially for
the initial inspection, it is important that the industrial user be
informed of the reason for the inspection (and sampling, if applic-
able }» what information the Control Authority is interested in
collecting, which Control Authority personnel will be involved in
the inspection, and how the information and data collected will be
used by the Control Authority. The Control Authority should followup
the notification letter (if used as the initial means of notification}
with a telephone call to discuss any questions or concerns the
industrial user may have and to finalize dates, times, meeting
places, etc. The followup telephone call also provides a good
opportunity to request information regarding onsite safety require-
ments of the industrial user, thus avoiding possible problems
concerning lack of appropriate safety equipment by Control Authority
personnel as reason for denial of access at the tine of inspection.
The second instance where notifying an industrial user is
advisable is when the Control Authority plans to conduct a scheduled
monitoring visit of an industrial facility as part of its pretreatment
B-7
-------
program implementation. Generally, the same notification procedures
used for the initial inspection are recommended (i.e., notification
letter followed by a telephone call).
For all other types of monitoring (i.e., unscheduled or demand),
prior notification of the industrial user is not recommended. There
may be instances, however, where notification just prior to the
inspection or sampling activity may be necessary to gain access to
the industrial facility. The concern that physical conditions may
be altered prior to monitoring or that records may be destroyed
justifies an unannounced inspection in the case of unscheduled or
demand monitoring. Section 403.8(f)(2)(v) of the General Pretreat-
ment Regulations requires that random monitoring be used to spot-
check industrial discharges to the Control Authority system.
2. Entry Procedures for Control Authority Personnel
Section 403.8(f)(1)(v) of the General Pretreatraent Regulations
for Existing and New Sources requires that POTWs have the authority
to carry out all inspection, surveillance, and monitoring procedures
necessary to determine compliance with applicable standards and
requirements, independent of information supplied by the industrial
user. This authority is required to be at least as extensive as
provided in Section 308 of the Clean Water Act, which states:
"...the EPA Administrator or his authorized representative,
upon presentation of his credentials shall have a right of
entry to, upon, or through any premises in which an effluent
source is located or in which any records required to be
maintained...and may at reasonable times have access to and
copy any records, inspect any monitoring equipment or method...
and sample any effluents which the owner or operator of such
source is required to sample..."
8-8
-------
The authority to enter an industrial facility will normally be
secured in a Control Authority's local sewer use ordinance, or in
the case of a State* in State statutes. Control Authority monitoring
personnel should be familiar with the legal authorities belonging
to the Control Authority for entering an industrial user, so that
the appropriate reference can be made during any monitoring visit.
In many instances, the Control Authority employs an independent
contractor to perform all or certain aspects of the inspection and
sampling of the industrial facility. Control Authority personnel
should confirm with local legal counsel that the Control Authority
may designate such contractor personnel as inspectors and that the
designation meets the requirements of applicable State laws.
The inspector should arrive at the facility during normal
working hours unless circumstances require otherwise. The facility
owner or agent-in-charge should be located as soon as the inspector
arrives on the premises, notified of the Control Authority's intent
(i.e., scheduled, unscheduled, or demand inspections, and/or
sampling), and asked for consent to the activity.
When the proper facility officials have been located, inspection
personnel should introduce themselves as inspectors for the Control
Authority and present the proper credentials (or other indications
of authority), and, if required by local law, also present any
notices or other required documents. The credentials indicate that
the holder is a lawful representative of the Control Authority and
is authorized to perform pretreatment monitoring. As a matter of
establishing credibility, the credentials should be presented
B-9
-------
whether or not identification is requested, even if presentation of
credentials is not required under the statute or ordinance that
authorizes the inspection and/or sampling.
After facility officials have acknowledged the credentialsf
they may wish to telephone the Control Authority for verification
of the personnel identification. Credentials should never leave
the sight of inspection personnel.
Consent to inspect and sample on the premises must be given by
the owner or operator at the time of the inspection unless a search
warrant has been obtained. As long as Control Authority personnel
are allowed to enter, entry is considered voluntary and consensual,
unless the personnel are expressly told to leave the premises.
Generally, express consent is not necessary? absence of an express
denial constitutes consent. However, if the inspector has any
question as to the propriety of an inspection, he or she should
consult with supervisory personnel at the Control Authority or with
the Control Authority's legal counsel.
If Control Authority personnel are refused entry into a facility
for the purpose of authorized monitoring, certain procedural steps
must be followed. The following procedures have been developed in
response to the 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Marshall v.
Barlow's, Inc.t
1. Make certain that all credentials and notices have been
properly presented to the facility owner or agent-in-
charge.
2. If entry is not granted, ask why. Tactfully probe the
reason for the denial to see if obstacles (such as
misunderstandings) can be cleared. If resolution is
beyond the authority of the Control Authority personnel,
ra-lQ
-------
he or she may tactfully suggest that the officials seek
advice from their attorneys on clarification of the scope
of monitoring authority under the Control Authority's
local ordinance or State law.
3. If entry is still denied, personnel should withdraw from
the premises and contact their supervisor. The supervisor
may confer with attorneys to discuss the desirability of
obtaining an administrative warrant.
4. All observations pertaining to the denial should be
thoroughly noted by the personnel in a field notebook as
soon as possible. Include facility name and exact address,
name and title of person(s) approached, authority of
person(s) who refused entry, date and time of denial,
detailed reasons for denial, facility appearance, any
reasonable suspicions that refusal was based on a desire
to cover up regulatory violations, etc. All such informa-
tion will be important should a warrant be sought.
5. Under no circumstances should the Control Authority
personnel discusspotential penalties or do anything that
may be construed as coercive or threatening.
6. Control Authority personnel should use discretion and
avoid any situations that may be potentially threatening
or inflammatory. In the event of a threatening confronta-
tion, personnel should document the event and report it
immediately to their supervisor. If feasible, statements
from witnesses should be obtained and included in the
documentation.
Following are some additional situations that the Control
Authority may be subject to:
o
Withdrawal of ConsentDuring Monitorinp. If Control Authority
personnel are requested Cor toldl to~Ieave the premises
after monitoring has begun, such personnel should leave as
soon as possible, following the procedures above for denial
of entry. All activities and evidence obtained prior to the
withdrawal of consent are valid. Control Authority personnel
should ensure that all personnel and Control Authority
equipment are removed from the facility.
° Denial of Access toSome Areas ofthe Facility. If, during
the course" of the inspection or"Sampling, access to some
parts of the facility is denied. Control Authority personnel
should make a notation of the circumstances surrounding the
denial of access and of the portion of the inspection or
sampling that could not be completed. Personnel should then
proceed with the remainder of the monitoring. After leaving
the facility, personnel should contact the Control Authority
supervisor to determine whether a warrant should be obtained
to -complete the monitoring.
B-ll
-------
As an alternative to conducting an inspection with the consent
of the facility, inspectors may conduct inspections under a search
warrant. If a search warrant is obtained prior to the inspection,
the inspection nay be conducted whether or not facility officials
consent. The Supreme Court decision in the Barlow case, noted
earlier, authorizes issuance of administrative warrants to inspect
facilities without showing that a violation is probably occurring
(probable cause requirement). The entity (such as a Control
Authority) seeking an administrative warrant must, however, show
that it has comprehensive legal rights to inspect, such as those
contained in Section 308 of the Clean Water Act. Obtaining such
an administrative warrant may be an appropriate part of the pre-
inspection preparation when the Control Authority suspects that
entry may be denied either absolutely or temporarily until processes
can be altered, records can be tampered with, or other action taken
to obscure violations of applicable pretreatment standards, reporting
requirements * or recordkeeping requirements.
3. Opening Conference
If Control Authority personnel are inspecting or sampling an
industrial user for the first time, after credentials have been'
presented and legal entry has been established, it is recommended
that an opening conference be held for all those personnel involved
(Control Authority personnel and industrial facility personnel).
Subsequent inspection and sampling activities at an industrial
facility during pretreatment program implementation may not require
a detailed opening conference, as described below, or require any
conference at all. This is due to the fact that future compliance
monitoring will require only updating existing information, and
B-12
-------
personnel at the industrial facility will already be familiar with
pretreatment program requirements and the Control Authority's
intent. The purpose of an opening conference is to allow Control
Authority personnel to outline the monitoring plans with the
officials and personnel of the industrial facility. At the opening
conference, Control Authority personnel should describe the purpose
of the inspection, authorities under which the compliance inspection
and/or sampling is being conducted, and the procedures that will be
followed. The following points should be discussed during the
opening conference, as necessary!
* Inspe c t i onTObjecti ves. An outline of monitoring objectives
will i n f o rm f acITi ty of f i c i a1s of the purpose and scope of
the visit and may help avoid misunderstandings.
° Order of InspectiojTu A discussion of the order in which the
Control Authority personnel would like to conduct the inspec-
tion will help eliminate wasted time by allowing officials
time to make records available and possibly startup
intermittent operations.
o
Meet i ng_Schedules. A schedule of meetings with key facility
personnelwi11 allow the facility personnel to allocate
sufficient tine to spend with the inspection personnel.
* *4st of Records. A list of records to be inspected will
allow officials to gather and make the records available for
the inspection personnel.
a
Accompanintent. A facility official should accompany Control
AuthorIty personne1 during the inspection, not only to
describe the plant and its principal operating characteristics,
but also for safety and liability considerations.
* Perm i t Verif i ca t ion• If the Control Authority uses a permit
system to control the discharge of its regulated industrial
users* the inspection personnel should verify all information
addressed in the facility's discharge permit. This would
include correct facility name and address, process description,
pollutants regulated, discharge points, sampling location
and frequency, etc.
* Safety Reguireroents. Control Authority personnel should
determ i he wh a t OS HA and other facility safety regulations
will be involved in monitoring an industrial facility and
should be prepared to meet the requirements.
B-13
-------
* New Reguirgroents* The inspection personnel should discuss
any newrules~ "and regulations that might affect the industrial
user and answer questions pertaining to these rules and
regulations. If inspection personnel are aware of proposed
rules that might affect the industrial facility* they may
wish to encourage facility officials to obtain a copy.
'IS
o
lit Samples. Facility officials should be informed during
e openlng conference of their right to receive a split of
any samples collected for laboratory analysis. At this point,
officials should indicate the desire to receive split samples
so that arrangements can be made to secure the adequate
samples during the inspection.
Fhotograp_hs_. Photographs can be used to prepare a more
thorough and accurate inspection report and to better explain
conditions found at the plant. An industrial user may
object to the use of cameras on their property. If a mutually
acceptable solution cannot be reached and photographs are
considered essential to the inspection! Control Authority
supervisory and legal staff should be contacted for advice.
Facility personnel may also request that any photographs
taken during the visit be considered confidential. The
Control Authority is obliged to comply with this request
pending further legal determination.
4. Informationand Data Collected During an Inspection
During the inspection portion of compliance monitoring, the
Control Authority will collect or confirm detailed information
concerning an industrial facility and its processes, as well as
evaluate the facility's compliance with applicable pretreatment
standards and requirements. The types of information and data that
should be collected during an inspection of the industrial facility
are listed in Table B-3. The type of information collected (as
well as the form of the inspection) may vary with the type of
facility inspected. For example, an inspector would probably have
a core of basic questions to answer for all facilities in addition
to variety of questions specified for whatever specific type of
facility is inspected.
B-14
-------
TABLE B-3
INFORMATION THAT MAX BE COLLECTED DURING AN IU INSPECTION
0 Facility name, site address, correspondence address.
0 Facility contact name, title, and telephone number.
0 General background information about the facility to include
items such as:
- Applicable Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes
- Number of shifts used
- Number of employees per shift
* A schematic of the water flow through the facility and the
location of all wastewater discharge lines that flow to the
POTM system? the schematic should also include the layout of
major plant features.
* A description of each discharge (including any batch
discharges), including the amount, chemical nature, frequency,
and destination of each discharge.
0 A description and process flow diagram of each major product
line and process used within the plant, particularly processes
that may be subject to Federal Categorical Pretreatment
Standards.
0 A detailed description and appropriate sketches of existing
pretreatment facilities, including operating data, if
available.
0 A list of pollutants of interest at the facility. The list
should be divided into two categories: (1) pollutants that
come into direct contact with the water that is discharged
to the POTWf and (2) pollutants that do not come into direct
contact, but have a potential to enter the wastewater due to
spills, machinery malfunctions, etc.
0 Identification of appropriate sampling locations.
8 Availability of sampling results performed by the facility.
* Proximity of chemical storage to floor drains and whether
floor drains discharge to storm or sanitary sewers.
0 A description of spill control practices the facility uses.
Information should be included about past spills, unusual
discharges, or temporary problems with any of the process
units that may affect the wastewater discharge.
0 A description of air pollution control equipment that may
generate a wastestream, pollutants that are likely to be
found in the wastestream, the discharge or disposal method,
and location.
B-15
-------
TABLE B-3 {continued)
INFORMATION THAT MAY BE COLLECTED DURING AN IU INSPECTION
* A description of how waste residuals (solids) are handled*
stored, and/or disposed.
** A description of proposed or recent changes to the facility's
processes that would affect the discharge characteristics or
sampling locations.
0 A description of any operational problems or shut-downs of
pretreatment facilities.
* Other information as may be necessary.
B-16
-------
The notes taken by inspection personnel during an inspection
are the core of all documentation relating to an inspection of an
industrial user. Normally, field notes will be written in a field
notebook and/or on a prepared report form developed by the Control
Authority to ensure collection of all pertinent information. In
order to provide the maximum assistance in recollecting information,
it is important to date all documents and prepare the final report
shortly after the inspection and/or sampling event. An inspection
report form should be used in conjunction with a field notebook by
inspection personnel to provide accurate and inclusive documentation
of all inspection activities. Field notebooks should be bound.
Together, the inspection report form and field notebook will form
the basis for written reports and should only contain pertinent
data and observations. The Control Authority's legal counsel
should be consulted for advice on preparing notes so that they may
be read or introduced as independent evidence, if civil or criminal
enforcement action is necessary.
Such information includes sampling results, flow measurements,
etc., and possibly production rates to the extent necessary to
determine compliance with applicable mass-based standards. Represen-
tatives of the industrial facility may request that any or all
information collected by inspectors be treated as confidential
business information. The Control Authority must honor all such
requests until or unless appropriate legal counsel (e.g., the City
Attorney) determines otherwise and notifies the industrial facility
of his or her determination. The procedures for making final
determinations as to the validity of such claims of confidentiality
are a matter of State law. Confidential business information must
B-17
-------
not be disclosed to competitors or to any other person who does not
need to have access to the information to evaluate compliance with
pretreatment obligations. The Control Authority, if it does not
already have procedures in place, will need to set up a process for
safeguarding these materials, including obtaining locked files,
designating responsible parties, etc. Federal law requires that
information describing the effluent discharge to the sewer system,
however, nay not be treated as confidential information whether it
is collected by the Control Authority or by the industrial user.
5. Inspection Report
The adequacy of compliance followup to correct problems or
deficiencies noted during an inspection depends in large part on
the quality of the inspection report package prepared by the inspec-
tion personnel. The preceding sections detailed the procedures for
collecting and substantiating this information. Once collected,
however, the material must be organized and arranged in a manner
that will allow compliance personnel to make optimum use of the
information.
The inspector is responsible for reporting all compliance
inspection activities by completing an inspection report as soon as
possible after the inspection. The objective of an inspection
report is to organize and coordinate all inspection information in
a comprehensive, usable manner. Although specific information
requirements for an inspection report will vary, most compliance
inspection reports will include the same basic elements? supplementary
narrative information, and documentary support.
B-18
-------
A, Supplementary narrative Information
Supplementary narrative information could be a memorandum, in
the case of routine inspections, or coyld be a narrative report
where major violations are detected. When a narrative report is
necessary to fully describe a compliance inspection, the contents
of the report should focus on supporting or explaining the informa-
tion provided in the inspection report, The narrative report
should be a concise, factual summary of observations and activities,
organized in a logical, legible manner, and supported by specific
references to accompanying documentary support.
B. DocumentarySupport
All documentation that is produced or collected by the inspector
to provide evidence of suspected violations should be included in
the inspection report. Types of documentation may include the
inspection report form, field notebook, statements, photographs,
drawings and maps, printed matter, mechanical recordings, and
:opies of records. (See Section 4 and Table B-3 for a further
discussion of inspection documentation.)
B-19
-------
APPENDIX C
AVERAGE LIMITATIONS
Average L i m i t a t i on s
Categorical standards establish daily maximum limitations and,
in most cases, also set maximum average limitations* The structur*
of these average limits varies among categories. For example, in
the Electroplating category, there is a 4-day average, while the
Metal Finishing category establishes a monthly average. These two
types of averages apply to numerous industrial users*
Four Day Average
In developing the Electroplating 4-day average, the Agency
performed a statistical analysis that examined independent groups
of 4 consecutive sampling days. Implementation of the Electro-
plating 4 day average calls for comparison of the standard with
independent results from 4 consecutive sampling days. For the
sampling days to be independent, each calculated 4-day average
should not include sampling data used in another 4-day average.
For example, if there were 11 days of sampling, samples 1, 2, 3,
and 4 constitute a 4-day average? samples 5, 6, 7, and 8 produce
the next 4-day average? and samples 9, 10, and 11 will have to wait
until an additional sample is taken so that the next 4-day average
can be calculated. These sampling days are not necessarily calendar
days, but reflect the sampling frequency! namely, weekly sampling
produces a 4-day average every 4 weeks, and monthly sampling produces
a 4-day average every 4 months.
Monthly Average
A monthly average is used in the Metal Finishing category and
many other categories, such as Porcelain Enameling, Coil Coating,
C-l
-------
Battery Manufacturing, Copper Forming, and Aluminum Forming. In
developing these monthly averages, the Agency performed a statistical
analysis based on a fixed number of samples being taken per month
(10 for Metal Finishing). To implement these regulations, the
average of the samples taken in a calendar month constitutes the
monthly average and should be compared to the standard. This could
mean a monthly average based on only 1 sample or as many as 31
sampling events. As stated in the preamble to the Metal Finishing
rule, 48 PR 32478 CJuly 15f 1983)t
Although it is not anticipated that a monitoring
frequency of 10 times per month will always be
required, the cost of this frequency of monitoring
is presented in the economic impact analysis to
the metal finishing regulation* That frequency
was selected because if facilities sample 10
times per month, they can expect a compliance
rate of approximately 99 percent, if they are
operating at the expected mean and variability.
Plant personnel* in agreement with the Control
Authority, may choose to take fewer samples if
their treatment system achieves better long
term concentrations or lower variability than
the basis for the limits, or if plant personnel
are willing to accept a statistical possibility
of increased violations.
C-2
-------
APPENDIX D
CURRENTLY APPROVED REPOTTING REQUIREMQfrS BY
THE OFFICE Of" MAHAGSffiHT AND BUDGET (7/25)
Descrigtion
Baseline Monitoring
Report
IU Compliance
Attainment Report
IU Self-Sonitoring
Report
IU Carpiiance Schedule
Keport
IU Slug Load
Notification
IU (TTO) Certification
of Exeraption
40 CFR Containing
R&qpjireraent
403.12(b»
403.
403.12(e)
403.12{c)
403.12{£5
2040-0012
2040-0011
2040-0024
2040-0014
2040-0023
2040-0033
Expiration
tete
10/31/87
6/30/87
6/30/87
6/30/87
6/30/87
6/30/89
0-1
------- |