49176 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION The reasonableness of the relationship expensive in some cases. Accordingly, AGENCY between the costs of attaining a reduction in Congress required that a special "cost effluents and the effluent reduction benefits reasonableness comparison" be applied 40 CFR Parts 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, derived, and the comparison of the cost and before establishing BCT limitations at a 411, 412, 415, 422, 424, level of reduction of such pollutants from the 426, 429,430, discharge of publicly owned treatment works level more stringent than BPT. The core 431, 432, 433, and 440 to the cost and level of reduction of such of the Agency's BCT methodology was a pollutants from a class or category of comparison of the costs of removing lWH-FRL-2150-41 industrial sources. additional pounds of conventional pollu*tants for industry with comparable Best Conventional Pollutant Control The Act also specifies that in making costs of removal for an average-sized Technology; Effluent Limitation BCT determinations consideration be publicly owned treatment works Guidelines given to the age of equipment, production process, energy (POTW). AGENCY: Environmental Protection requirements, and other appropriate C. BCT Court Suit Agency. factors. ACTION: Proposed rules. BCT is not an additional effluent The 1979 regulations were challenged limitation for industrial dischargers, but in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the SUMMARY: EPA proposes new and rather replaces "best available Fourth Circuit. On July 28, 1981, the revised effluent limitation guidelines for technology economically achievable" Court issued its decision, upholding the best conventional pollutant control (BAT) effluent limitations for the control methodology EPA had developed for the POTW cost-comparison test. American technology (BCT) under the Clean Water of conventional pollutants. Effluent Act and a revised BCT methodology. limitations representing BCT may not be Paper Institute v. EPA, 660 F2d 954 (4th The proposed rules cover the Dairy, less stringent than limitations Cir. 1981). However, since EPA had Grain Milling, Fruits and Vegetables, representing "best practicable control recently informed the Court that Seafood, Sugar, Feedlots, Ferroalloys, technology currently available" (BPT). significant statistical errors had been Glass, Meat, Phosphate, Timber, Conventional pollutants can be found in its calculation of the POTW Inorganic Chemicals, Ore Mining test, and controlled to more stringent levels than the Court directed the Agency to Dressing, Metal Finishing, and Pulp, BCT for dischargers in areas where correct the errors. Paper, and Paperboard industries. They water quality considerations necessitate The Court also held that the CWA are based on a revised approach to the additional requires EPA to consider two control. "reasonableness" tests BCT methodology developed in Section 304(a)(4) of the Act specifies as part of the response to judicial and agency review that conventional pollutants include, but BCT methodology: an industry cost- of the BCT methodology promulgated in are not limited to, biochemical oxygen effectiveness test and a POTW cost August, 1979. comparison test. Because EPA had only demanding materials (BOD5), total DATE: Comments must be submitted on suspended solids (TSS), fecal coliform, developed the latter test, the Court or before December 28, 1982. and pH. The Agency has also designated remanded the regulations and ordered ADDRESSES: Send comments in triplicate oil and grease as a conventional EPA to develop and implement an on the proposal to: Ms. Renee Rico, U.S. pollutant (44 FR 44501, July 30, 1979). industry cost-effectiveness test that Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M compares the industry's costs of Street, S.W. (WH-586), Washington, B. Previous Regulations attaining a reduction in effluents with D.C. 20460. .Under Section 73 of the 1977 CWA, the effluent reduction benefits derived, The Record, including copies of the EPA was directed to review all existing As a result of the remand, EPA development documents and economic BAT effluent guidelines for conventional withdrew many of the 1979 regulations, analyses, will be available for public pollutants in those industries not as well as the BCT limitations for the review in EPA's Public Information covered in the Settlement Agreement Timber category. (47 FR 6835, February Reference Unit, Room 2404 (Rear), EPA reached in NationalResources Defense 17, 1982.) Since BPT represents the library, 401 M St., S.W., Washington, Council v. Train, 8 ERC 2120 (D.D.C. minimal level of control required by law D.C. 20460. The EPA information 1976), as modifed 12 ERC 1833 (D.D.C. for conventional pollutants, those BCT regulation (40 CFR Part 2) allows the 1979), and to determine their suitability limitations which equalled BPT were left Agency to charge a reasonable fee for as BCT limitations. These industries are in effect. Those BCT regulations which copyifig." often referred to as "secondary required a higher level of control than FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: industries." On August 29, 1979, EPA BPT were withdrawn. Ms. Renee Rico, U.S. Environmental published its BCT methodology and D. Purpose of This Proposal Protection Agency, Office of Analysis promulgated BCT limitations for 41 and Evaluation (WH-586), 401 M Street, subcategories of the secondary This rulemaking serves several S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460, (202) 382- industries (44 FR 50732). However, EPA purposes. First, in response to the court 5386. did not have sufficient Information at remand, EPA has developed an industry that time to establish BCT limitations for cost-effectiveness test and corrected the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: all the secondary industries and statistical errors in its prior calculation I. Background therefore deferred regulation of some of of the POTW test. them. A. Statutory Authority Second, EPA has generally In developing the methodology for the reevaluated the BCT methodology in In 1977, Congress amended the Clean 1979 regulation, EPA was guided both by response to a March 15, 1981 directive Water Act (CWA) to include section the statutory language of Section from the Presidential Task Force on 304(b)(4)(B), 33 U.S.C. 1314(b)(4)(B). This 304(b)(4)(B and by Congress' underlying Regulatory Relief and comments by the provision requires EPA to establish best objectives in establishing BCT. Congress Council on Wage and Price Stability. conventional pollutant control was concerned that requirements for the Based on this review, EPA has technology (BCT) effluent limitations to control of conventional pollutants determined that the POTW cost- be determined by an analysis of: beyond BPT were unreasonably comparison methodology promulgated in Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49177

1979 and upheld by the Court of Appeals POTW test is passed if the incremental The columns and their entries are is still the preferred approach, with the cost per pound of conventional pollutant defined as follows. exception of one change proposed removed in going from BPT to BCT is 1. Industry/Subcategory:Each today. less than $.27 per pound in 1976 dollars. industrial point source subcategory in Finally, EPA is required to apply the The industry test is passed if this same the primary and secondary industries is BCT methodology to establish BCT incremental cost per pound is less than listed in the table. The chart and the limitations for both the primary 143% of the incremental cost per pound discussions in Section III include those industries (those covered by the NRDC associated with achieving BPT. Both subcategories for which BCT limitations Consent Decree) and the secondary, tests must be passed for a BCT equal to BPT have already been industries. Today's proposal, if limitation more stringent than BPT to be established. They are included for promulgated, would replace the BCT established. informational purposes only. limits withdrawn on February 17, 1982, EPA applied this methodology to the 2. Size: EPA performed many of the and establish BCT limits for some of the categories included in today's proposal. BCT industrial calculation using model secondary industries that were not If the BAT limits that were promulgated plants. Where more than one model included in the 1979 regulations. Second, for a secondary industry pass the BCT plant was used, the size designations EPA is reproposing BCT limitations for reasonableness test, BCT is established are listed for small, medium, and large the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard, equal to BAT. If either test is failed, BCT dischargers. Inorganic Chemicals, Metal Finishing, is established equal to BPT. 3. CFR Part:The CFR Part and section and Timber industries since the original In those subcategories for which BAT number are included for additional BCT limitations for these industries or BCT limitations were never identification of the subcategory. Where were proposed or promulgated using the promulgated, or were being reevaluated no BCT section exists, the proposed BCT methodology remanded'by the on technical grounds, the Agency section number for the subcategory is Court. Therefore, today's proposal considered several candidate used. supersedes BCT limitations proposed on technologies for BCT. These candidate 4. CurrentStatus: A number of terms January 6, 1981 for Pulp, Paper and technologies are those that remove that are explained below are used to Paperboard (46 FR 1430), July 24, 1980 significant amounts of conventional define the rulemaking status of a for Inorganic Chemicals [44 FR 49450). pollutants beyond BPT..In evaluating particular subcategory prior to today's and June 14, 1982 for Ore Mining and their reasonableness, EPA used BPT as proposal. For further information, refer Dressing (47 FR 25682). It would also a starting point and determined the to the Application of BCT Methodology replace the BCT limitations that were incremental costs and levels of pollutant withdrawn for Timber (46 FR 3260). EPA (Section III). removal from BPT to each of the a. Removed: The BCT limitations for is also reproposing BCT limitations for candidate technologies. The selection the Ore Mining and Dressing category of the subcategory were withdrawn in the final BCT limitations is based on the since BCT limitations were erroneously response to the Court Remand of July proposed. most stringent technology option which 1981 (47'FR 6835, February 17, 1982). passes the reasonableness tests, as well These proposed limitations apply to b. pHLimit: The BCT limitation for as the other factors specified in the Act. the subcategory contains only a BOD5 , TSS, fecal coliform, pH, and oil and grease. Since all of the BAT pH The Agency has determined that limitation for pH that equals the BPT limitations were set at BPT levels, no establishing the BAT level of control of limitations. BDT assessment was carried out for pH. conventional pollutants as BCT for the c. BPT=BCT: EPA has already If at any time pollutants are added or secondary industries is reasonable for promulgated BCT limitations that are deleted from the conventional pollutant the following 8 of the 96 subcategories equal to BPT. EPA did not perform a list, the Agency plans to reevaluate all reviewed: Pacific Coast Hand-Shucked BCT review of these subcategories in effluent guidelines affected by such Oyster (408.257), Atlantic and Gulf today's proposal. revisions. Coast Hand-Shucked Oy9ter (408.267), d. No section: No BCT limitations EPA intends to use today's Non-Alaskan Scallop (408.307), Abalone were ever promulgated for this methodology to evaluate conventional (408.337), Sodium Phosphates (422.67), subcategory, and no current section pollutant treatment requirements for the Slag Processing (424.37), Small Prccessor number exists in the CFR. remaining primary industries. These (432.57), and Renderers (432.107). e. BCT Reserved: The CFR section for BCT limitations will be proposed and EPA also determined that BCT this subcategory was reserved for future promulgated where possible along with limitations more stringent than BPT are BCT effluent guideline rulemaking. BAT, pretreatment, and new source reasonable for the following 4 f. BCT Proposed:EPA previously standards. Calculations for applying the subcategories in the pulp, paper, and proposed BCT limitations for this BCT methodology for each industry will paperboard and timber industries: Wet subcategory based on the 1979 be explained when each regulation is Process Hardboard (429.62), Papergrade methodology. proposed. Because the methodology Sulfite-Blow Pit Wash (430.103), 5. BCT Methodology: This column proposed today will be used in all Groundwood-Thermo Mechanical describes the resu'ts of applying the effluent guidelines, t&is notice is (430.133), and Papergrade Sulfite Drum proposed BCT methodology. It indicates intended to provide the opportunity for Wash (430.213). BCT equals BPT for the whether any candidate technology all industries to submit comments on the remaining subcategories in the pulp and passes the BCT tests and whether methodology now. paper and timber industries, as well as therefore, BCT is proposed equal to or a for the ore mining, metal finishing and more stringent level than BPT. E. Summary of Proposal inorganic chemicals industries. 6. Other: EPA reviewed the EPA proposes to use the methodology All the subcategories reviewed appear technology basis and economic impact contained in this notice to determine the in Table I. This table summarizes the of candidate BCT technologies if new cost-reasonableness of all BCT current status of each point source information became available. Where technology options. The methodology subcategory, the results of the BCT these factors caused the Agency to consists of two parts: a POTW test and review, and whether BCT is set equal to reject the technologies, the column an industry cost-effectiveness test. The or more stringent than BPT limitations. b entries are marked Fail. See the 49178 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules discussion of each industry in Section III subcategories where EPA has X appears in the column BCT=BPT. for more information, determined that the candidate BCT Where the Agency has determined that 7. BCT Limitations: This heading technologies are not reasonable and is they are reasonable and is setting BCT contains two columns. For those setting BCT limitations equal to BPT, an limitations more stringent than BPT, an X appears in the column BCT>BPT.

TABLE

BCT methodology BCT lmits Industry and subcategory Size CFR Part Current status Other POTW test Industry test BBPT)

DAIRYPRODUCTS PROCESSING Receiving Stations ...... S L ...... 405.17 Removed ...... Fail ...... X. Fluid Products ...... S, L ...... 405.27 Removed ...... Fail ...... X (S. L. Cultured Products ...... S, L ...... 405.37 Removed ...... I ...... Fail ...... X IS. L).. Butter ...... S , L ...... 405.47 Removed ...... Fail ...... x IS,L) Cottage Cheese Cultured Cream Cheese ...... S, L ...... 405.57 Removed ...... Fail ...... X. Natural, Processed Cheese ...... S, L ...... 405.67 Removed ...... Fail ...... Fluid Mix for Ice Cream and Other Frozen Desserts ...... S. L ...... 405.77 Removed ...... Fail ...... Ice Cream, Frozen Desserts ...... S, L ...... 405.87 Removed ...... I...... I...... I Fail ...... x. Condensed Milk ...... S, L ...... 405.97, Removed ...... Fail ...... X. Dry Milk...... S,L. 405.107 RemoI vedI ...... I...... I...... Fail ...... Condensed Whey ...... S, L ...... 405.117 pH Limit...... I...... Fail ...... x. Dry Whey ...... S,L. 405.127 Removed ...... Fail ...... X. GRAINMILLS X Corn Wet Milling ...... S. M, L ...... 406.17 Removed ...... F.a...... Reserved ...... x Corn Dry Milling ...... S,S L...... 406.27 Removed ...... I...... Normal Wheat Flour Milling ...... 406.37 BPT-BCT ...... Fail...... I...... Bulgar Wheat Flour Milling ...... 406.47 pH Limits ...... I Normal Rice Milling ...... 406.57 BPT-BCT ...... I...... Parboiled Rice Processing...... 406.67 Removed ...... x! Anim al Fee d ...... 406.77 BPT-BCT ...... I...... X. Hot Cereal ...... 406.67 BPT-BCT ...... I...... Ready-To-Eat.Co real ...... S, M, L ...... 406.97 Removed ...... Fail ...... I ...... Wheat Starch and Gluten ...... 406.107 Removed ...... Pass ...... Fail ...... CANNED AND PRESERVED FRUITS AND VEGETABLES Apple Juice ...... S, L ...... 407.17 Removed ...... Fail ...... x is , L) -...... XiS , L): Apple Products ...... S, L ...... 407.27 Removed ...... Fail ...... L - - .... Citrus Products ...... SA ...... 407.37 Removed ...... Fail(S) ...... I...... IX IS,L). Pass(L) ...... Fail (L) ...... Dehydrated Potatoes ...... Products ...... Frozen Potato Products...... L...... 407.47 pH Limit ...... Pass (S, L). Fail (S, L) ...... X (5, Q) Dehydrated Potatoes Products...... 5S, L...... 407.57 Removed ...... Pass (S,L). Fail (S, L) ...... X IS' LI. Canned and Preserved Fruits ...... 407.67 No section ...... Fail ...... Fall...... Canned and Preserved Vegetables ...... 407.77 No section ...... Fail ...... x. Canned and Miscellaneous Specialities ...... 407.87 No section ...... Fail ...... X. CANNEDAND PRESERVEDSEAFOOD PROCESSING Farm.Raised Catfish Processing ...... S M, L ...... 408.17 No section ...... Fail ...... I ...... Fail...... Conventional Blue Crab Processing...... S, M, L ...... 408.27 No section ...... Fail...... Mechanized Blue Crab Processing ...... S, M, L ...... 408.37 No Section...... Fail ...... Non-Remote Alaskan Crab Meat Processing ...... 408.47 No section ...... I...... Fail ...... Remote Alaskan Crab Meat ...... 408.57 No section ...... Fail ...... Non-Remote Alaskan Whole Crab and Crab Section Process- ...... 408.67 No section ...... I...... I.- ing. Remote Alaskan Whole Crab and Crab Section Processing. S, M, L ...... 408.77 No section ...... No section FIil...... Fal ...... Dungeness and Tanner Crab Processing in the contiguous ...... 408.87 ...... Fai ...... States. Non-Remote Alaskan Shrimp Processing ...... S, M, L ...... 408.97 No section ...... Remote Alaskan Shnmp Processing ...... S, M, L ...... 408.107 No section ...... Fail .. -...... :...... -Fail...I...... Northern Shrimp Processing in the Contiguous States ...... S M, L ...... 408.117 No section ...... Fail ...... Southern Non-Breaded Shrimp Processing in the Contiguous S, M, L ...... 408.127 No section ...... Fail ..... I ...... States. Breaded Shrimp Processing in the Contiguous States ...... S, M, L ...... 408.137 No section ...... I...... Fail ...... X. Tuna Processing ...... ;...... S, M, L ...... 408.147 No section ...... Fall ...... Fish Meal Processing ...... 408.157 No section ...... x. Alaskan Hand-Butchered Salmon Processing ...... Fail 408.167 ...... F..l...... -Remote ...... x. No section...... - Non-Remote ...... No section ...... X. Alaskan Mechanized Salmon Processing ...... 408.177 ...... I Fail ...... UIU ...... Ii No section ...... Fail ...... - Non-Remote ...... No section. x. I...... If. West Coast Hand-Butchered Salmon Processing ...... S L. 408.187 No section Fail ...... Fail ...... West Coast Mechanized Salmon Processing ...... L. 408.187 No section*..... I...... x. Alaskan Bottom Fish Processing ...... 408.207 ...... Fail ...... x. - Remote ...... I...... INo section ...... I ...... I...... - Non-R em ote...... NO section ...... I...... Fail ...... Non-Alaskan Conventional Bottom Fish Processing ...... S, M, L ...... 408.217 No section ...... XIfS. M, Q. Non-Alaskan Mechanical Botton Fish Processing ...... S, L ...... 408.227 No section ...... Fail (S) Pass Fail IS, M, L).. If. (M. LI. Hand-Shucked Clam Processing ...... 408.237 No section ...... Fail ...... X. M echanized Clam Processing ...... S,L ...... 408.247 No section ...... Fail ...... X Pacific Coast Hand-Shucked Oyster Processing ...... 408.257 No section ...... Pass ...... NA...... X'...... Atlantic and Gull Coast Hand-Shucked Oyster Processing ...... 408.267 No section ...... Pass ...... NA ...... Steamed and Canned Oyster Processing ...... 408.277 No section ...... X ...... Fail Sardine Processing...... S,M,L ...... 408.287 No section ...... Fail ...... Alaskan Scallop Processing ...... 408.297 - Re m o te ...... No section ...... Fail ...... -Non-Remote ...... No section ...... X ...... Non-Alaskan Scallop Processing ...... No section ...... 408.307...... Pass...... NA...... I ...... X...... Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49179

TABLE I-Continued

i F BCT methodology BCT limits ndustry and subcategory Size FP Current status test Industry test Otter Pass Fail (=BPT)

...... Alaskan Herring Filet Processing ...... 408.3 17 No section...... - Rem ote ...... No section ...... Fagl...... - Non.Remote ...... No section ...... Reserved...... Non-Alaskan Herring Filet Processing ...... 408.327 No section ...... Pass...... Fail...... I...... Abalone Processing ...... 408.337 NA ...... Fag...... X...... SUGARPROCESSING pH s ci ...... Pass ...... Beet Sugar Processing ...... 409.17 pH limit ...... Fal ...... Crystalline Cane Sugar Refining ...... S, L ...... 409.27 pH limit ...... Fail ...... - ..'...... Uquid Cane Sugar Refining ...... 409.37 Fail ...... Louisiana Raw Cane Sugar Processing ...... ; ...... 409.47 No section ...... I...... Florida and Texas Raw Cane Sugar Processing ...... 409.57 No section ...... Hdo-Hamakua Coast of the Island of Hawaii Raw Cane Sugar ...... 409.67 No section ...... Processing. Hawaiian Raw Cane Sugar Processing Subcategory ...... 409.77 No seton]::::::.c ...... t Puerto Rican Raw Cane Sugar Processing ...... 409.87 CEMENTMANUFACTURING Nonleaching ...... 411.17 BPT=BCT ...... Leaching ...... 411.27 pH sect ...... I...... X Material Storage ...... 411.37 BPT=BCT ...... FEEDLOTS All Subcategories except Ducks ...... 412.17 BPT=BCT ...... Ducks ...... 412.27 No section ...... Reserved ...... INORGANICCHEMICALS MANUFACTUFINGR Chlor-Alkali-Mercury Cell ...... 415.67(a) BPT=BCT ...... I - Diaphragm Cell ...... 415.67(b) Reserved ...... Fall ...... Hydrofluoric Acid ...... 415.87 Reserved ...... Fail ...... Sodium Dichromate and Sodium Sulfate ...... 415.177 BPT=BCT ...... I...... Titanium Dioxide ...... 415.227 BPT=BCT ...... Aluminum Fluoride ...... 415.237 BPT=BCT ...... Chrome Pigments ...... 415.347 BPT=BCT ...... Copper Sulfate ...... 415.367 BPT=BCT ...... I...... Hyofrogen Cyanide ...... 415.427 BPT=BCT ...... N ickel Sulfate ...... 415.477 BPT=BCT ...... Sodium Bisulfite ...... 415.547 BPT=BCT ...... PHOSPHATES Defluorinated Phosphate Rock ...... 422.47 BPT=BCT ......

Defluorinated Phosphoric Acid ...... 422.57 BPT=BCT ...... I...... Sodium Phosphates...... XS, S, M, L 422.67 Removed ...... Pass...... =...... PassI ...... I ...... FERROALLOYMANUFACTURING Open Electric Furnaces, Wet ...... 424.17 Covered Electric Furnaces and Other Smelting Operations ...... 424.27 Removed.11-111...... Fail...... I I...... I: - Slag Processing ...... 424.37 Removed ...... Pass ...... Pass ...... X ...... Covered Calcium Carbide Furnaces, Wet ...... 424.47 pH limit ...... Fail ...... Other Calcium Carbide Furnaces ...... 424.57 BCT =B PT ...... Electrolytic M anganese ...... 424.67 pH limit ...... Fail ...... Electrolytic Chromium ...... 424.77 pH limit ...... Fall...... X. GLASS MANUFACTURING Insulation Fiberglass ...... 426.17 Rem oved ...... Fail ...... Sheet G lass...... 426.27 BPT= BCT ...... R olled G lass ...... 426.37 BPT= BGT ...... PlateG lass...... 426.47 Removed ...... Fail ...... :..... Float Glass ...... 426.57 pH limit. Fail...... K Automotive Glass Tempenng ...... 426.67 pH limit ...... Fail ...... i. X Automotive Glass Laminating ...... 426.77 pH limit ...... Fail ...... X. Glass Container Manufacturing ...... 426.87 pH limit ...... Fai...... X Glass Tubing (Danner) Manufacturing ...... 426.107 pH limit ...... Fail...... x. Television Picture Tube ...... 426.117 pH lim it ...... Fail ...... X Incandescent Lamp ...... 426.127 pH limit ...... Fail ...... X, Hand Pressed and Blown Glass ...... 426.137 pH limit ...... Fall ...... X. TIMBERPRODUCTS Barking ...... 429.22(a) Reserved...... R ...... 429.22(b) Reserved ...... Real...... Veneer ...... 429.32 Reserved z...... Faill...... t. Plyw ood ...... 429.42 ...... Fail ...... It. 429.52 Reserved ...... Dry Process Hardboard ...... Remorved ...... Pass.... Pass.l...... It...... Wet Process Hardboard ...... 429.62 Wood Preserving-Waterborne Nonpressure ...... 429.72 Reserved ...... F ...... Wood Presering-Steam ...... 429.82 Reserved ...... Revl...... X. Wood Preservino-Boulton ...... 429.92 Reserved ...... Fall ...... X. 429.102 Reserved...... Fal...... K!ii!Reserved ...... F....., ,.,.,.,...... Log Washing ...... 429.112 Reserved ...... Fail ...... X. Sawmills and Planning Mills ...... 429.122 Reserved ...... Fal...... Finishing ...... 429.132 R eserved ...... Fail...... Particleboard M ftg ...... AAO' Reserved ...... Fail ...... Fail...... Insulation Board ...... Removed ...... X. Wood Furniture and Fixture Production w/o Water Wash Reserved ...... Fail ...... X Spray Booth. Wood Furniture and Fixture Production w/Water Wash Spray .. 429.172 Reserved ...... ;...... Reserved ...... Booth. PULP,PAPER AND PAPERBOARO BCT proposed .... Fail ...... Unbleached Kraft ...... 430.13 Sodium Based-Neutral Sulfite Semi-Chemical ...... 430.23 Reserved ...... I NA ...... 49180 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules

TABLE I-Continued

BCT methodology BCT limits Industry and subcategory Size CFR Part Current status POTW test Industry testt Other (aBPTPaF Fail (=BPT)

Ammonia Base Neutral Sulfite SemI-Chemical ...... - 1er.e...... Unbleached Kraft and Neutral Sulfite Serni-Chemical (Cross Reserved ...... NAF.a...... Recovery). Poperboard trom Wastepaper ...... BCT proposed. Fal ...... X. Dissolving Kraft ...... OCT proposed. Fail ...... X. Market Bleached Kraft ...... BCT proposed. Fail ...... X. OCT Bleached Kraft ...... BCT proposed. Fail ...... X. ine Bleached Kraft ...... BCT proposed. Fall ...... X. Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) ...... 430.103 BCT proposed ...... Pas ...... Dissolving Sulfite Pulp ...... 430.113 BCT proposed. F il...... X. Groundwood-Chemi-Mechanical ...... 430.123 Reserved ...... NA ...... s...... Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical ...... 430.133 BCT proposed...... Pass ...... Pass ...... X...... Groundwood-CM N Papers ...... 430.143 BCT proposed..... Fail ...... X. Groundwood-Fine Papers ...... 430.153 BCT proposed Fall ...... X. Soda...... 430.163 BCT proposed Fail ...... X Deink...... 430.173 BCT proposed Pass ...... Fail ...... X. NI- Fine Papers...... 430.183 BCT proposed . Fail ...... X. NI-Tissue Papers ...... 430.193 BCT proposed. Fall ...... X. Tissue from Wastepaper ...... 430.203 BCT proposed...... a ...... X Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) ...... 430.213 BCT proposed...... Pass ...... X ...... Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical ...... 430.223 BCT proposed._.. Fall ...... X. BCT proposed .... Fail ...... X. Sem i-Chem lcal ...... 430.233 Wastepaper--Molded Products ...... 430.243 BCT proposed . Fall ...... X. NI-Lightweight Papers ...... 430.253 BCT proposed Fail ...... X. NI-Filter arl Nonwoven Papers ...... 430.263 BCT proposed. Fail ...... I ...... NI--Paperboard ...... BCT proposed. Fai ...... BUILDERS'PAPER AND BOARD MILLS CATEGORY Builder's Paper and Roofing Felt ...... 430.12 BCT proposed . Fail ...... MEAT PRODUCTS Sim ple Sl ug te ouse ...... 432.17 pH limit ...... Fail ...... X. Com plex Slaughter ouse ...... 432.27 pH limit ...... Fail ...... X. Low Proc. Packinghouse ...... 432.37 pH limit ...... Fail ...... X High Proc. Pac inghouse...... 432.47 pH li t ...... Pass...... Fail ...... X. Small Processor ...... 432.57 Removed ...... Pass ...... M eat Cutter...... 432.67 pH limit ...... Fail ...... X Sausage and Luncheon M eats...... 432.77 pH limit ...... Fail ...... X. Hem Processor ...... 432.87 pH limit ...... Fail ...... X. Fal...... Canned Meat ...... 432.97 pH limit ...... Pass ...... Renderers ...... 432.107 Removed ...... Pass ...... X ...-. .... METALFINISHNG M etal Finlshing ...... 433.18 Reserved ...... Fail ...... OREMINING AND DRESSING Iron O re ...... 440.15 OCT proposed. I 1...... Alum inumO re ...... 440.35 BCT proposed...... Uranium. Radium and Vanadium ...... 440.55 BCT proposed. Mercury Ores ...... 440.65 OCT proposed. AAfl 75 Titanium O re ...... BCT proposed. Tun-tn nre:... BCT proposed...... -. 1 ...... I...... 440.95 Reserved ...... u -rt~.~r ...... Reserved ...... Antimony Ore ...... 440.115 Reserved ...... Copper, Lead, Zinc, Gold, Silver, Platinum, and Molybdenum 440.125 OCT proposed. Ores.

II. BCT Methodology pollutants was less than $1.15, BCT proposes to base the POTW benchmark limitations beyond BPT levels were on cost and removal data for POTWs A. Part 1: The POTW test established. with flows ranging from one to fifty mgd. 1. Background.The POTW test As explained above, EPA We have computed cost per pound compares the cost for industry to subsequently discovered that the costs figures for four flow sizes in this range remove a pound of conventional used to calculate the $1.15 benchmark and then weighted them according to pollutants to the cost incurred by a were incorrect. Correction of the errors each size's contribution to the total U.S. POTW for removing a pound of using updated and revised data results flow of POTWs. Finally, we summed conventional pollutants. in a benchmark in the range of $.50-.60 these figures to obtain a single POTW In 1979, a single number ( the POTW per pound. The POTW test benchmark benchmark. benchmark) was developed based on proposed today is $.27 per pound (1976 EPA believes that weighting a variety the costs of an average-size POTW to dollars) because EPA has decided to of sizes of POTWs gives a better upgrade its facility from secondary modify the method used to calculate it. estimate of the costs to treat treatment to advanced secondary 2. Modification to Promulgated conventional pollutants at POITWs for treatment. The benchmark, as POTW Test Benchmark. EPA is using two reasons. First, the use of data for established in 1979, was $1.15 per pound the 1979 methodology upheld by the different flow sizes of plants better (1976 dollars). This number was then Court as the basis for this proposal with depicts the costs of removing compared to the costs industry would one modification. Instead of basing the conventional pollutants at POTWs since incur in going from BPT to the candidate POTW benchmark on costs and the economies of scale inherent in large BCT technologies. If the cost to industry removals for an average-size 2 million POTWs can be included in the to remove a pound of conventional gallon per day (mgd) plant, EPA calculation. Second, the statistical Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49181 reliability of the benchmark is improved annual incremental cost to remove a ROI measure the changes in plant because more data points are used. pound of conventional pollutants profitability. Although absolute changes The resulting.POTW benchmark beyond BPT, and is the figure compared in ROI indicate that the plant is being equals $.27 per pound in 1976 dollars. to the POTW benchmark to determine affected, they do not measure the size of This figure is indexed to other years to whether a BCT option passes the POTW the impact on the plant since the base account for inflation. These calculations, test. These figures appear in Appendix level of the ROI is extremely important. as well as a more detailed discussion of D. Plant Closures. Another alternative is computations for the modified POTW C. Part-1: The Industry Cost Test. to look at the potential for plant benchmark, appear in Appendix A. closures. However, this is not always a 3. Comparison of Municipaland 1. Background.The Court of Appeals reliable economic indicator since plants IndustrialTreatment Costs. Under directed EPA to develop a separate. seriously affected by pollution control EPA's methodology, industry's costs in additional cost-effectiveness test which requirements may still decide to remain going from BPT to the candidate BCT compares the costs to industry and the open for other financial reasons such as are compared to determine whether the effluent reduction benefits achieved by potential for long-term profitabiltiy, industrial costs are lower than the industry in going from BPT to more ability to absorb short term losses or POTW benchmark of $.27 per pound stringent levels of control. Neither the low fixed costs of production. (1976 dollars) and therefore reasonable. Court nor the legislative history of the Pollution Control Investment to Book The sections below describe the 1977 amendments provide specific Value. This criterion is based on the calculation of the industrial costs. guidance on how to design this test. EPA a. Calculationof ratio of pollution control investment IndustrialTeatment believes that three conditions must be costs to the book value of the plant. In a Costs. EPA has calculated met by the methodology the for the second general way, it measures the likelihood incremental annual costs for pollution test. First, the industry cost test should that the pollution control equipment can control by determining the difference be performed using an explicit be financed. between the annual costs for a model numerical benchmark to determine the Other Measures. Other measures were plant or all plants in a subcategory to reasonableness of the proposed also considered such as the ratio of achieve BPT and the costs to achieve limitations. By comparing industry costs the candidate BCT. Annual costs include to a uniform benchmark, EPA will annual compliance costs to the total operation and maintenance expenses, reduce the bias in calculating limitations value of shipments and cash flow interest, and depreciation. The data for so many different industries. Second, analyses. used by EPA in determining industrial the test must measure both for increases All these economic achievability costs for this review are drawn from the in pollution control costs and for measures contain three drawbacks. Agency Development Documents for effluent reductions of conventional First, they do not consider the effluent each of the industries (See Appendix C.) pollutants. Third, the information reductions benefits of additional b. Calculationof IndustrialPollutant needed to perform the test must be controls. Second, the data required to Removal. EPA calculated the currently available for those industries perform these analyses are not generally incremental removal of conventional covered by the secondary industry available. Finally, the economic pollutants by determining the difference review, so that promulgation of BCT achievability of the regulations was between the annual pounds of limitations is not significantly delayed. already taken into account in the initial conventional pollutants removed after The following sections describe the development of the BAT regulations. compliance with BPT and the pounds industry cost test and the alternatives (2) Relative PollutantReduction removed after compliance with the considered. The discussion of the (Percent).Pollutant reduction efficiency candidate BCT. These removals are selection of the proposed method for for a plant is a measure of the relative based on the regulatory limits calculating the incremental costs of BCT amount of pollutant removed from the established for the 30-day average for the industrial subcategories appears wastewater in percentage terms. One discharge of each pollutant. The first. The discussion of the selection of alternative for the test is to compute the conventional pollutants subject to this the proposed benchmark against which percentage of pollutants removed in review fall into two categories: total the industry incremental costs are going from BPT to BCT levels of control suspended solids (TSS), and oxygen- measured follows. as compared to the total amount of demanding substances (BOD 5 and oil 2. IndustrialCost Calculations.The pollutants in the untreated wastewater. and grease). To avoid "double counting" alternatives considered are discussed Because the removals are expressed in of the amount of pollutants removed first, followed by the explanation of the percentage terms, the results of such from BPT to the candidate BCT, selection of the meihod and its analysis would not depend on the size of pollutant removals are calculated using computation. the facility, making the test "blind" to only one pollutant from each group. In a. Alternatives Considered.EPA size. those cases where both BOD5 and oil considered 5 different ways to measure There are two major drawbacks to and grease are subject to limitations, the incremental costs of BCT for the these types of measures. First, the costs EPA included the pollutant with the industry cost test. of pollutant removal would not be greater amount of removal in the (1) Measures of Economic considered. Second, measuring only the calculation. Achievability. One alternative was to relative amounts of pollutants removed c. Calculationof the IndustrialCost use measures of economic achievability. can lead to misleading conclusions Per PoundFigure. EPA calculated the Examples of such measures are; about effluent reduction benefits. A ratio of incremental annual cost to After Tax Return on Investment. large facility might remove 10 times the incremental conventional pollutant Return on investment (ROI) is the waste as a small facility, yet in removal as follows: (candidate BCT plant's profit (or n'et income) divided by percentage terms have a smaller relative annual costs minus BPT annual costs) the investment in the plant. Investment efficiency than the small facility, and divided by (candidate BCT pounds of in water pollution control generally thus "fail" the BCT industry cost test conventional pollutants removed minus reduces the plant's ROI because there is when in reality substantial additional BPT pounds of conventional pollutants no monetary "return" to the firm on this pounds of conventional pollutants removed) This cost figure represents the investment. Therefore, changes in the would be removed by further treatment. 49182 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49182 •,

(3) Cost Curve Elasticity.The denominatorin the increasing cost ratio. the point on a continuous cost curve elasticity of the pollution control cost The "pre-BPT" level is set at one of two where, on a percentage basis, the curve is measured by the ratio of levels, depending upon the availability incremental costs begin to exceed the bercent change in pollutant removal of data for each affected industry. If incremental effluent reduction. If the test divided by the percent change in the sufficient data exists for the were to be applied, all industrial total annual compliance cost. This development of cost and effluent data calculations which are less than 1.0 criterion has a number of advantages for treatment levels in-place at the time would be considered reasonable over the first two alternatives. First, the BPT limitations were being developed, because the unit cost per pound of going criterion considers both cost and that level of treatment would be used in beyond BPT levels would be less than pollutant reduction. Second, the the calculation. If not enough data is that incurred in attaining BPT levels. measure does not assess factors already available, the "pre-BPT" control would This approach establishes the cost per taken into account in the development be assumed to be no treatment of pound of achieving BPT as an upper of the BAT regulations. Third, the figure effluent wastewater. This use leads to bound of reasonable cost. generally can be calculated from variation in the way the incremental (2) POTW Data. Another alternative available data. Finally, a numerical cost per pound figuers are calculated. is using POTW cost-effectiveness data benchmark for costs and removal can be The cost per pound under the increment in going from primary to ST and from ST computed for comparison. from raw waste load to BPT will in to AST as the basis for comparison with (4) IncrementalCosts to Average Cost general be smaller than that for the pre- industrial cost-effectiveness data. As of PollutantRemoval Ratio. Under this BPT to BPT increment. This means that discussed in 1979, there are general alternative EPA would calculate the the assumption of no treatment-in-place parallels between industrial and average cost per pound of conventional may lead to an overestimation of municipal treatment levels at BCT and pollutants removed in going from no pounds removed by BPT and advanced secondary treatment levels. 45 treatment to BCT levels, and divide the underestimation of the incremental cost Fr 50735. In addition, pre-BPT and result into the incremental cost per per pound. In the absence of additional primary treatment levels correspond pound in going from BPT to BCT levels. data, EPA beleives this result is since both levels represent the basic It has the same advantages as the unavoidable. technologies used to treat raw wastes. elasticity approach, and in addition is The calculation of cost and effluent This benchmark alternative is computed easier to compute with currently reduction (in pounds of conventional by dividing the incremental cost per available data. pollutants removed) for the pre-BPT to pound in going from ST to AST by the (5) Increasing Cost Ratio. The last BPT increment would follow the method incremental cost per pound in going ratio EPA considered is the incremental used for the BPT to candidate BCT from primary to secondary. The cost per pound in going from BPT to BCT increment except for one point. The benchmark, which is computed in levels divided by the average cost in conventional pollutant discharges at Apendix B to be 1.43, would then serve going to BPT. This alternative has the pre-BPT would be based on the average as a basis for assessing the cost- same advatages as Alternative (4). effluent discharge per year because no effectiveness of advanced wastewater b. Selection of Second Test 30-day limitations exist. Monthly or 30- treatment of coventional pollutants. Methodology. Alternatives (1) and (2) in day average discharge levels are used b. Selection of Benchmark. EPA chose the previous section were rejected for for BPT and candidate BCT levels to use a POTW-based benchmark for the reasons discussed above, while because they are the regulatory limits several reasons. First, the data on alternatives (3), (4), and (5) generally with which industry must comply. Using POTW costs and removal are the most fulfill all the conditions that EPA has annual average effluent data instead of sophisticated data available on satisfy, determined the second test must monthly average data for the pre-BPT conventional pollutant removal. In view EPA's proposed methodology is based levels of control increases the pre-BPT of the analogies between industrial and on the increasing cost ratio, Alternative to BPT incremental cost per pound. EPA municipal treatment levels, EPA dedided (5), because it is the only measure which requests comments on both of these to utilize this POTW basis. Second, EPA directly compares the cost-effectiveness issues on the second increment. believes the first alternative is contrary effluent reduction in achieving BCT of After each increment is calculated, to Congressional intent since the cost (in dollars per pound removed) levels EPA calculates the increasing cost ratio per pound in achieving BCT could never with the cost-effectiveness that is by dividing the first increment by the higher than the cost per pound in levels. be achieved at BPT second: achieving BPT. While Congress directed c. Calculationof the Industry Cost to evaluate the cost-effectiveness Figures. This section describes how the EPA Alternative 5 calculations are actually Total annual coat/pounds removed (BPT to BCT) of BCT it did not establish the cost per pound in achieving BPT as a ceiling for performed. The increasing cost ratios Total annual cost/pounds removed (praPT to BPT) Finally, EPA believes are a combination of two computations BCT costs. objective, documented for incremental annual cost per pound. reliance on an The first increment is the annual cost 3. The Industry Cost Benchmark. As POTW measure is preferable to judging per pound in going from BPT to mentioned before, EPA beleives that the the cost-effectiveness of industrial candidate BCT control levels. This is industrial cost calculations should be treatment on an ad-hoc basis. EPA identical to the industry calculation compared against a single numerical requests comments on either alternative, used in the POTW test. (See "PartI: The benchmark. This section describes the and other possible alternatives not POTW Test" in this notice for the alternatives considered, the selection of presented here. detailed explanation.) This increment the benchmark, and its computation. c. Comparison of Industry Costs and becomes the numerator in the increasing a. Alternatives Considered.EPA Benchmark. Under EPA's proposed. cost ratio. identified two alternative benchmarks methodology, the industry subcategory The second increment is the for use in the industry cost test. calculations would be compared to the incremental annual cost per pound in (1) Elastiicityof Unity (1.0). The unit benchmark of 1.42. If the industry figure going from a "pre-BPT" level of control elasticity, 1.0, was considered fr a for a subcategory is lower than 1.43, the to BPT levels of control and becomes the benchmark value because it identifies subcate.gory passes this BCT test. If the Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49183

industry figure is higher than 1.43, the can cause filter blindig and substantial equal to BPT. EPA is reviewing the costs for BCT are considered operational difficulty. Thus, EPA is remaining ten subcategories nine fail unreasonable, and the limitations are set proposing BCT limitations equal to BPT the proposed BCT test, and BCT at the lowest level that passes the test. for all twelve subcategories. limitations for them are proposed equal This may be BPT or alternative 2. Grain Mills. BCT limitations equal to BPT. The remaining subcategory, candidate BCT limitations above BPT to BPT were already promulgated for the Insulation Fiberglass, had zero levels. Normal Wheat Flour, Normal Rice, discharge limitations set at BPT for II!. Application of BCT Methodology Animal Feed and Hot Cereal wastewater from air emission subcategories. BCT limitations for the equipment. BCT limitations are EPA applied the proposed BCT Corn Wet Milling subcategory are being proposed equal to BPT since no further methodology above to the following reserved until more recent information pollutant removal is possible. secondary industry and primary on BPT compliance costs received by 9. Meat Products. This category industry categories: Dairy Products, EPA has been evaluated. The remaining contains ten subcategories. The BAT Grain Mills, Canned and Preserved 5 subcategories fail the proposed BCT effluent limitations for conventional Fruits and Vegetables, Canned and test. BCT limiations for them are pollutants for eight Preserved Seafoods, Sugar, Cement of these therefore proposed equal to BPT. subcategories Manufacturing, Feedlots, Inorganic were withdrawn, pending 3. Canned and PreservedFruits and a technical review of biological Chemicals, Phosphates, Ferroalloy Vegetables. There are eight nitrification technology for ammonia Manufacturing, Glass Manufacturing, subcategories in this category. All eight Timber Products, Pulp Paper and and TSS removal in response to a court fail the proposed BCT test and BCT decision. Based on this review EPA has Paperboard, and Builder's paper and limitaions for them are proposed equal Board Mills, Meat Products, Metal determined that nitrification, the BAT to BPT. technology, is Finishing, and Ore Mining and Dressing. 4. Sugar.Of the eight subcategories unsuitable as a basis for a BCT technology. One significant factor Table 1 summarizes the results of this for Sugar Processing, five had the same application. The actual calculations are conventional is that nitrification effects removal of pollutants limitations for ammonia nitrogen from in the rulemaking record. For secondary BAT and BPT. None of the three these industries where BAT limitations remaining subcategories pass the wastewaters, but affords only equalled BPT, EPA did not perform the proposed BCT test. EPA therefore insignificant removal of conventional BCT costs calculations, since BCT must proposes that BCT limitations for all pollutants beyond BPT levels. Further, be at least as stringent as BPT. eight subcategories be equal to BPT. reduction in water use in meat In addition to the BCT cost test, 5. Cement Manufacturing.Two of the processing operations, a key part of the Section 304(b)(4)(B) of the Clean Water three subcategories already contain BCT former BAT limitations, may not be Act requires EPA to consider other limitations equal to BPT. The remaining achievable at many plants. Finally, factors such as the age of equipment, subcategory, Leaching, fails the preliminary results of the nitrification, production process, and energy proposed BCT test and the BCT technology review indicate that requirements in the development of BCT limitations are proposed equal to BPT. consistent year round removal of limitations. Based on the rulemaking 6. Feedlots.The Feedlots category conventional pollutants is technically record for these industrial categories contains two subcategories. For the first achievable only with extraordinary and this proceeding, EPA has subcategory (All Subcategories Except operational care. For these reasons EPA determined that the proposed limitations Ducks), both BPT and BAT are zero has rejected nitrification as a BCT are technically achievable and discharge limitations. Therefore, zero technology and is proposing BCT equal otherwise satisfy Section 304(b}(4)(B). discharge BCT limitations were to BPT for those eight subcategories. The remaining two subcategories, the A. Secondary Industries. promulgated in 1979. For the remaining subcategory, Duck feedlots, Small Processor and Renderers The BCT test determinations for the conventional pollutant discharges from subcategories, pass the proposed BCT scotidary industries are based on the man-made or natural (e.g., marshes) test. BCT limitations equal to BAT are cost and effluent data collected at the swimwater areas are difficult to proposed for these subcategories. time of the original proposal and quantify and adapt to traditIonal end-of- 10. Phosphates.The Phosphates promulgation of the BAT guidelines for pipe treatment technologies. Because the category contains three subcategories, those industries. Where new effluent reduction benefits between two of which already have BCT information regarding the availability of existing discharges and the BAT limitations equal to BPT. The third pollution control technologies and its technology, dry lots, are not readily subcategory, Sodium Phosphates, passes economic achievability became quantifiable, the BCT test cannot be the proposed BCT test. The BCT available, EPA used the information to performed. Therefore, EPA is not now limitations for this subcategory are determine whether the BAT technology proposing BCT effluent limitations for proposed equal to BAT. still satisfied all the statutory factors. this subcategory. 11. Canned and PreservedSeafood 1. DairyProducts. All twelve 7.Ferroalloy Manufacturing. One of Processing.EPA conducted a review of subcategories in tle Dairy subcategory the seven subcategories contains BCT all 33 subcategories in the Canned and were reviewed. The technology basis for limitations equal to BPT. The remaining Preserved Seafoods Category. Because the former BAT limitations was tertiary six are being reviewed; only the Slag new information has become available, treatment by multi-media filtration. Processing subcategory passes the EPA also reevaluated the technical Based on information submitted to the Proposed BCT test. BCT limitations for availability and economic achievability Agency since promulgation of the BAT Slag Processing subcategory are of the BAT regulations. effluent limitations, EPA believes that proposed at the BAT level; the BCT The BAT technology basis for the the aplication of iltration technology limitations for the other five following 12 subcategories and sections would be difficult technically in this subcategories are proposed equal to of two other subcategories is dissolved industry. The suspended solids in the BPT. air flotation (DAF): Mechanized Blue Dairy Products Industry are extremely 8. Glass Manufacturing.Three of 13 Crab, Dungeness and Tanner Crab, Non- difficult to treat, and the excess solids subcategories contain BCT limitations Remote Alaskan Shrimp, Northern 49184 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules

Shrimp, Southern Non-Breaded Shrimp, disposal techniques available to the Shucked Oyster, Non-Alaskan Scallop, Breaded Shrimp, Alaska Mechanized remote seafood processors; however, and Abalone. The BPT technology for Salmon (Non-Remote), West Coast they are often not feasible or work the latter four subcategories is screening Mechanized Salmon, Non-Alaskan during only a portion of the year of the fish wastes. Because screening Mechanized Bottom Fish, Mechanized because of weather. Therefore, the removes only gross solids from the Clam, Sardine, Alaskan Herring Fillet Agency has rejected the BAT technology wastewater, EPA cannot calculate the (Non-Remote), Non-Alaskan Herring as being suitable for BCT. incremental removal of pollutants in Fillet, and Tuna. This technology has not Two subcategories, Hand-Shucked going from raw waste load to BPT in a been widely applied at full scale, except Clam and Fish Meal, would incur quantitatively meaningful way. for the tuna subcategory. Experience in substantial adverse economic impacts Therefore, EPA cannot perform the the tuna subcategory shows that as a result of the former BAT industry cost test according to the achievement of effluent limitations on a regulations. For the Hand-Shucked Clam formula EPA is proposing. However, consistent basis by DAF can be difficult subcategory, nine of the fifteen plants EPA has examined the technology basis in light of the variability of raw that directly discharge process of BCT, which is simple in-plant wastewater effluent loads, their wastewaters would probably close controls, and has determined that the typically oily nature, and the rather than comply with the BCT technology is cost-effective (less than operational problems these regulations. These nine plants consist of $.04 per pound of conventional circumstances present in maintaining all six small plants and all three canned pollutants removed) and economically the solids flotation process. Space clam plants. Because the economic achievable. EPA is therefore proposing requirements for installation of this impacts appear to be so severe, EPA is BCT limitations equal to the BAT level, technology also can present problems proposing BCT limitations equal to BPT and request comments on this decision. for many plants. Optimized DAF (with for this subcategory. In 1979 a number of seafood processers chemically assisted coagulation) for the For the Fish Meal subcategory, twelve filed a petition with EPA requesting that tuna subcategory adds operational of the 54 direct discharging plants would the Agency modify BPT limitations for complexity, maintenance requirements, probably close as a result of the former certain seafood processing areas in and disposal cost for additional sludge BAT regulations. Most of these plants Alaska. The Agency is currently volume generated by optimized are small facilities. Because the reviewing the petition and will decide operation. EPA has therefore determined economic impacts as a result of this whether to modify the BPT limitations that this technology is infeasible and regulation are so adverse, EPA is shortly. If any modification is proposed, propose BCT limitations for these proposing BCT limitations equal to BPT the corresponding BCT limitations will subcategories equal to BPT. for this subcategory. be revised accordingly. Aerated lagoons were the BAT On February 17, 1977, EPA voluntarily B. PrimaryIndustries. technology for three subcategories: withdrew BAT limitations for the Conventional Blue Crab, Non-Alaskan following five Alaskan Seafood 1. Timber Products. This category Conventional Bottom Fish and Steamed Categories because of an inadequate contains 16 subcategories. Two and Canned Oyster. EPA has economic analysis: Alaskan Hand- subcategories had BCT limitations determined that aerated laoons are not Butchered Salmon, Alaskan Mechanized established in January 1981 (46 FR 3260); a feasible technology for these Salmon, Alaskan Bottom Fish, Alaskan they were subsequently withdrawn in subcategories because lagoons require a Scallop and Alaskan Herring Fillet. As February 1982 (47 FR 6835). The substantial amount of land, which is not discussed above, BCT is being proposed Insulation Board subcategory fails the uniformly available. Moreover, the equal to BPT for the geographically proposed BCT test, while the Wet seasonal and often sporadic processing remote sections of these subcategories Process Hardboard subcategory passes operations of these plants does not because of technical problems with the proposed BCT test. This result is provide the consistent source of screening, and for the Non-Remote identical to the 1981 promulgation. wastewater needed for proper Alaskan Mechanized Salmon and Non- EPA never established BCT functioning of biological treatment Remote Alaskan Herring Fillet limitations for the remaining 14 systems such as aerated lagoons. subcategories because the BAT subcategories. BPT limitations for the Therefore, EPA is proposing BCT technology was DAF. The economic Barking-Mechanical (a portion of the limitations equal to BPT for these impact analysis for the non-remote Barking subcategory), Veneer, Plywood, subcategories. sections of the three remaining Dry Process Hardboard, Wood EPA is proposing BCT equal to BPT subcategories Alaskan Hand-Butchered Preserving-Waterborne Nonpressure, for the Remote Alaskan Crab Meat, Salmon (Non-Remote), Alaskan Bottom Wood Preserving-Boulton, Sawmills and Remote Alaskan Whole Crab and Crab Fish (Non-Remote), Alaskan Herring Planing Mills, Finishing, Particleboard Section, and Remote Alaskan Shrimp Fillet (Non-Remote), has not been and one of the Wood Furniture and subcategories and remote sections of 5 completed. EPA is therefore deferring Fixture Production Subcategories a;e no other subcategories because there are proposing BCT limitations for the 3 discharge of wastewater. Because no technical problems with the technology remaining subcategories until the incremental removal can be achieved that was promulgated for BAT. This analysis is completed. beyond BPT, EPA is proposing BCT technology was screening of the fish Four of the remaining 8 subcategories limitations equal to BPT for these wastes, and subsequent disposal of fail the POTW test: Farm-Raised subcategories. EPA cannot identify these wastes. Solid waste disposal in Catfish, Non-Remote Alaskan Crab treatment technologies beyond BPT for nonremote areas can be accomplished Meat, Non-Remote Alaskan Whole the Wet Storage subcategory that by the use of reduction facilities; Crab, and West Coast Hand-Butchered remove significant amounts of however, these are not economically Salmon. BCT limitations for these conventional pollutants. EPA is viable in remote areas there are no subcategories are proposed equal to therefore proposing BCT limitations seafood processing waste-water BPT. Four subcategories pass the POTW equal to BPT. EPA is not proposing BCT treatment facilities. Land disposal or test: Pacific Coast Hand-Shucked limitations for the Barking-Hydraulic (a barging are the only solid waste Oyster, Atlantic and Gulf Coast Hand- segment of the Barking subcategory), Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49185

Wood Preserving-Steam, Log Washing 4. Ore Mining and Dressing. EPA comments and/or data on the following and the other Wood Furniture and proposed BCT equal to BPT limitations issues: Fixture Production subcategories. EPA for seven subcategories on June 14, 1982 1. New economic information which will reserve BCT limitations for these (47 FR 25682). The proposed limitations would affect the Agency's consideration subcategories until a BCT assessment were published erroneously without of economic impacts on any of the can be made. applying the proposed BCT cost test. industries affected by this rulemaking. 2. Pulp, Paper,and Paperboard.In EPA has now applied the new test to all January of 1981, EPA proposed BCT seven subcategories. None pass and 2. EPA's plans to recommend that limitations for 24 subcategories in this EPA is proposing revised BCT permit writers use the proposed BCT industry (46 FR 1430). Of these 24, 21 limitations for them equal to BPT. methodology in setting BPJ-BCT permits would have required pollution control 5. Metal Finishing.Effluent limitations in the absence of national effluent more stringent than BPT. In performing guidelines for the metal finishing point limitations. the proposed BCT test, EPA used BCT source category were proposed on VII. OMB Review Computations based on BPT limitations August 31, 1982 (47 FR 38462). EPA promulgated in 1977 with the following deferred proposing BCT limitations for The regulation was submitted to the exceptions. EPA will be shortly this category because the 1979 BCT Office of Management and Budget for promulgating BPT limitations for four methodology had been remanded. EPA review as required by E.O. 12291. Any new subcategories and 2 new has since performed the proposed BCT comments from OMB to EPA and any subdivisions. These BPT limitations test on the category, which contains one EPA response to those comments are were used as the basis for reproposing subcategory. The category failed the available for public inspection at Room BCT for those subcategories and test, and BCT limitations equal to BPT 2404, U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW., subdivisions and are included in this are proposed. Washington, D.C. 20460 from 9:00 a.m. to rulemaking record solely to facilitate V. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday comments on BCT. Regulatory Impact Analysis excluding Federal holidays. The BCT limitations for the two Papergrade Sulfite subcategories and Public Law 96-354 requires EPA to Lists of Subjects prepare an Initial Regulatory Flexibility the Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical 40 CFR Part405 subcategory pass the new BCT test. In Analysis for all proposed regulations the January 1981 proposal, EPA selected that have a significant impact on a Dairy products, Water pollution substantial Option 4 for these subcategories; number of small entities. control, Waste treatment and disposal. however, Option 4 did not pass the new This analysis may be done in conjunction 40 BCT test. EPA has therefore selected with or as part of any other CFR Part406 analysis conducted by the Agency. EPA Option 1, BPT plus in-plant controls, as already performed analyses designed to Grain mill products, Water pollution the technology basis for proposed BCT control, Waste treatment and disposal. limitations for these subcategories. No evaluate significant impacts on small additional end-of-pipe technology facilities in the previous proposal and/ 40 CFR Part407 or promulagtion of these regulations and beyond BPT is contemplated in this these showed no potential for a Fruits, Vegetables, Water pollution option. The controls primarily achieve significant impact. The newer control, Waste treatment and disposal. reductions in water use and BOD raw economic 5 analysis for seafoods showed a waste loadings that translate into lower 40 CFR Part408 significant economic impact for certain conventional pollutant discharge after small plants, as discussed previously. treatment in existing end-of-pipe Seafood, Water pollution control, EPA is therefore proposing that BCT systems. This option passes Waste treatment and disposal. the equal BPT for these plants. Thus, no new proposed BCT test for all three significant impacts on small businesses 40 CFR Part409 subcategories and will cost less than the are expected as a result of this proposal. previously proposed option. In addition, Sugar, Water pollution control, Waste Therefore, a formal regulatory flexibility no economic impact was projected for treatment and disposal. analysis is not required. The analyses Option 4; therefore, no impact is and small business 40 CFR Part 411 expected definitions appear in for this less costly option. the documents listed in Appendix C. Cement industry, Water pollution The remaining twenty-one Executive Order 12291 requires EPA control, Waste treatment and disposal. subcategories fail the proposed BCT test and other agencies to perform regulatory for all options. The BCT limitations impact analyses of major regulations. 40 CFIi Part412 proposed in January 1981 are revised to Major rules impose an annual cost to the equal BPT for these subcategories. economy of $100 million or more or meet Livestock, Water pollution control, 3. Inorganic Chemicals. EPA other economic impact criteria. EPA Feedlots, Waste treatment and disposal. promulgated BCT limitations equal to does not consider the proposed rules for 40 CFR Part415 BPT for all subcategories except for the BCT to be a major rule because the Hydrofluoric Acid and the Chlor- annual cost is less than $100 million and Chemicals, Water pollution control, Alkali-Diaphragm Cells subcategories. none of the other criteria are met. Waste treatment and disposal. BCT limitations for these two subcategories were reserved because VI. Comments Invited 40 CFR Part422 the 1979 BCT methodology had been The Agency urges interested Phosphate, Water pollution control, remanded (47 FR 28260, June 29, 1982). individuals to submit comments on the Waste treatment and disposal. EPA has since performed the proposed proposal set forth in this notice. All BCT test on the two subcategories. Both comments received within 60 days will 40 CFR Part424 of them failed the test, and BCT be considered in the promulgation of Iron, Metals, Water pollution control, limitations for them are proposed equal these BCT effluent limitations Waste treatment and disposal. to the BPT level. guidelines. EPA particularly requests 49186 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules

40 CFR Part426 §§ 405.17, 405.27, 405.37, 405.47, 405.57, PART 406-GRAIN MILLS POINT 405.67, 405.77, 405.87, 405.97, 405.107, and SOURCE CATEGORY Glass and glass products, Water 405.127 [Added] pollution control, Waste treatment and 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 406 for the disposal. § 405.117 [Revised] Grain Mills Point Source Category is 1. Sections 405.17, 405.27, 405.37, amended as follows: 40 CFR Part429 405.47, 405.57, 405.67, 405.77, 405.87, 405.97, 405.107, and 405.127 are added, §§ 406.27, 406.67, 406.97 and 406.107 Forests and forest products, Furniture [Added] industry, Water pollution control, Waste and 405.117 is revised. The text of each treatment and disposal. section is identical except for the section number in the heading and the §§ 406.37, 406.47, 406.57 and 406.77 and 40 CFR Part430 section number referenced at the end of 406.87 [Revised] Sections 406.27, 406.67, 406.97, and Paper and paper products industry, the section. The text of the sections is set out only once. Within the text are 406.107 are added, and § § 406.37, 406.47, Water pollution control, Waste two blank spaces, one designated (a) 406.57, 406.77, and 406.87 are revised. treatment and disposal. and one designated (b). In the table The text of each section is identical 40 CFR Part 431 preceding the text, column (a) indicates except for the section number in the the section number to be added to the heading and the section number Paper and paper products industry, section heading for the respective referenced at the end of the section. The Water pollution control, Waste subparts of Part 405. Column (b) text of the sections is set out only once. treatment and disposal. indicates the section number to be Within the text are two blank spaces, 40 CFR Part432 added to the text of the section one designated (a) and one designated indicated in column (a). (b). In the table preceding the text, Meat and meat products, Water column (a) indicates the section number pollution control, Waste treatment and to be added to the section heading for disposal. (b) the respective subparts of Part 406. (a,) Section Section number Column (b) indicates the section number 40 CFR Part433 number to be Subpart to be added to to be added to the text of the section Water pollution control, Waste added to text of section the indicated in column (a). treatment and disposal. heading section in (a) 40 CFR Part440 Subpart A-Receiving Stations Sub- (b) Metals, Mines, Water pollution category ...... 405.17 405.12 (a) Section Subpart B-Fluid Products Subcate- Section number control, Waste treatment and disposal. gory ...... 405.27 405.22 number to be Subpart C-Cultured Products Subca- Subpart to be added to (Secs. 301 and 304, Clean Water Act, (Federal added to text of tegory ...... 405.37 405.32 section the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of Subpart D-Butter Subcategory ...... 405.47 405.42 heading section Subpart E-Cottage Cheese and Cul- in (a) 1972, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., as amended by tured Cream CheqeseSubcategory-... 405.57 405.52 the Clean Water Act of 1977, Pub. L. 95-217)) Subpart F-Natural and Processed Subpart B-Corn Dry Milling Subcate. Cheese Subcategory ...... - __ 405.67 405.62 gory ...... 406.27 406.22 Dated: October 14, 1982. Subpart G-Fluid Mix for Ice Cream and Other Frozen Desserts Subca- Subpart C-Normal Wheat Flour Mill- John W. Hernandez, Subcategory ..... 406.37 406.32 tegory...... 405.77 405.72 ing Acting Administrator. Subpart H-Ice Cream, Frozen Des- Subpart D-Bulgar Wheat Flour Mill. 406.42 serts. Novelties and Other Dairy ing Subcategory ...... 406.47 For reasons set out in the preamble, Desserts Subcategory ...... 405.87 405.82 Subpart E-Normal Rice Milling Sub- the revisions proposed on January 6, Subpart I--Condensed Milk Subcat- category...... 406.57 406.52 gory ...... 405.97 405.92 Subpart F-Parboiled Rice Processing 1981 (46 FR 1430) for § § 430.13, 430.53, Subpart J-Dr Milk Subcategory ...... 405.107 405.102 Subcategory ...... 406.67 406.62 430.63, 430.73, 430.83, 430.93, 430.103, Subpart K-Condensed Whey Subca, Subpart G-Animal Feed Subcategory. 406.77 406.72 tegory...... 405.117 405.112 Subpart H-Hot Cereal Subcategory 406.87 406.82 430.113, 430.133, 430.143, 430.153, 430.163, Subpart L-Dry Whey Subcategory . 405.127 405.122 Subpart I-Ready.To-Eat Cereal Sub- 430.173, 430.183, 430.193, 430.203, 430.213, category ...... 406.97 406.92 Subpart J-Wheat Starch and Gluten 430.223, 430.233, 430.243, 430.253, 430.263, Subcategory ...... 406.107 466.102 430.273 and 431.13 are withdrawn. In addition, 40 CFR Parts 405, 406, 407, 408, § (a) Effluent limitations guidelines 409,411, 412, 415,422, 424,426, 429,430, representing the degree of effluent 431, 432, 433 and 440 are proposed to be reduction attainable by the application of § (a) Effluent limitations guidelines amended as follows: the best conventional pollutant control representing the degree of effluent technology (BCT). reduction attainable by the application of the best conventional pollutant control LIMITATIONS Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any PART 405-EFFLUENT technology (BCT). GUIDELINES FOR STANDARDS OF existing point source subject to this PERFORMANCE AND PRETREATMENT subpart shall achieve the following Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES effluent limitations representing the existing point source subject to this FOR THE DAIRY PRODUCTS degree of effluent reduction attainable subpart shall achieve the following PROCESSING INDUSTRY POINT by the application of the best effluent limitations representing the SOURCE CATEGORY conventional pollutant control degree of effluent reduction attainable technology (BCT): The limitations shall by the application of the best 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 405 for the be the same as those specified for conventional pollutant control Dairy Products Processing Industry conventional pollutants (which are technology (BCT}: The limitations shall Point Source Category is amended as defined in § 401.16) in §(b) of this be the same as those specified for follows: subpart for the best practicable control conventional pollutants (which are technology currently available (BPT). defined in § 406.16) in § (b) of this Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49187

conventional pollutants (which are (b) subpart for the best practicable control (a) Section technology currently available (BPT). defined in § 401.16) in § (b) of this Section number number to be subpart for the best practicable control Subpart to be added to PART 407-CANNED AND technology currently available (BPT). added to text of section the PRESERVED FRUITS AND heading section VEGETABLES PROCESSING POINT PART 4O8-,-CANNED AND in (a) SOURCE CATEGORY PRESERVED SEAFOOD PROCESSING Subpart M-Breaded Shrimp Process- 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 407 for the POINT SOURCE CATEGORY ing in the Contiguous States Subca- tegory ...... 408.137 408.132 Canned and Preserved Fruits and 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 408 for the Subpart N-Tuna Processing Subca- Vegetables Processing Point Source Canned and Preserved Seafood tegory ...... 408.147 408.142 Category isamended as follows: Subpart 0-Fish Meal Processing Processing Point Source Category is Subcategory ...... 408.157 408.152 amended as follows: Subpart Q--Alaskan Mechanized §§ 407.37, 407.57, 407.67 and 407.77, 407.87 Salmon Processing Subcategory . 408.177 408.172 [Added] §§ 408.17, 408.27, 408.37, 408.47, 408.57, Subpart R-West Coast Hand-But- chered Salmon Processing Subca- 408.67, 408.77, 408.87, 408.97, 408.107, tegory ...... 408.187 408.182 §§ 407.17, 407.27, 407.47 [Revised] 408.117, 408.127, 408.137, 408.147, 408.157, Subpart S-West Coast Mechanized Sections 407.17, 407.27, and 407.47 are 408.177, 408.187, 408.197, 408.217, 408.227, Salmon Processing Subcategory . 408.197 408.192 408.237, 408.247, 408.277, 408.287, 408.317, Subpart U-Non-Alaskan Convention- revised, and § § 407.37, 407.57, 407.67, al Bottom Fish Processing Subcate- 407.77, and 407.87 are added. The text of and 408.327 [Added] gory ...... 408.217 408.212 each section is identical except for the Subpart V-Non-Alaskan Mechanized 1.Sections 408.17, 408.27, 408.37, Bottom Fish Processing Subcate- section number in the heading and the 408.47, 408.57, 408.67, 408.77, 408.87, gory ...... 408.227 408.222 section number referenced at the end of 408.97, 408.107, 408.117, 408.127, 408.137, Subpart W-Hand-Shucked Clam Processing Subcategory ...... 408.237 408.232 the section. The text of the sections is 408.147, 408.157, 408.177, 408.187, 408.197, Subpart X-Mechanized Clam Proc- set out only once. Within the text are 408.217, 408.227, 408.237, 408.247, 408.277, essing Subcategory ...... 408.247 408.242 one designated (a) Subpart AA-Steamed and Canned two blank spaces, 408.287, 408.317, and 408.327 are added. Oyster Processing Subcategory ...... 408.277 408.272 and one designated (b). In the table The text of each section is identical Subpart AB-Sardine Processing Sub- preceding the text, column (a) indicates category ...... 408.287 408.282 except for the section number in the Subpart AE-Alaskan Herring Fillet the section number to be added to the heading and the section number Processing Subcategory ...... 408.317 408.312 section heading for the respective referenced at the end of the section. The Subpart AF-Non-Alaskan Herring subparts of Part 407. Column (b) text of the sections is set out only once. Fillet Processing Subcategory ...... 408.327 408.322 indicates the section number to be Within the text are two blank spaces, added to the text of the section one designated (a) and one designated indicated in column (a). §(a) Effluent limitations guidelines (b). In the table preceding the text, representing the degree of effluent column (a) indicates the section number reduction attainable by the application of to be added to the section heading for the best conventional pollutant control (b) the respective subparts of Part 408. S(al Section technology (BCT). on number Column (b) indicates the section number 125.30-32 any number to be to be added to the text of the section Except as provided in § Subpart to be added to existing point source subject to this added to text ot indicated in column (a). section the subpart shall achieve the following heading section in (a) effluent limitations representing the degree of effluent reduction attainable Subpart A-Apple Juice Subcategory.... 407.17 407.12 by the application of the best Subpart B-Apple Products Subcate- (b) gory ...... 407.27 407.22 (a) Section conventional pollutant control Subpart C-Citrus Products Subcate- Section number technology (BCT): The limitations shall gory ...... 407.37 407.32 number to be Subpart' to be added to be the same as those specified for Subpart 0-Frozen Potato Products added to test of Subcategory ...... 407.47 407.42 section the conventional pollutants (which are Subpart E-Dehydrated Potato Prod- heading section defined in § 401.16) in § (b) of this ucts Subcategory ...... 407.57 407.52 in(a) Subpart F-Canned and Preserved subpart for the best practicable control 407.62 Fruits Subcategory ...... 407.67 Subpart A-Farm-Raised Catfish technology currently available (BPT). Subpart G-Canned and Preserved 407.72 Processing Subcategory ...... 408.17 408.12 for Subpart P- Vegetables Subcategory ...... 407.77 Subpart B--Conventional Blue Crab 2. Section 408.167 Subpart H-Canned and Miscella- Alaskan Hand-Butchered Salmon neous Specialties Subcategory ...... 407.87 407.82 Processing Subcategory ...... 408.27 408.22 Subpart C-Mechanized Blue Crab Processing Subcategory is added as set Processing Subcategory ...... 408.37 408.32 Subpart D-Non-Remote Alaskan forth below: Crab Meat Processing Subcategory.. 408.47 408.42 Subpart E-Remote Alaskan Crab § 408.167 Effluent limitations representing § (a) Effluent limitations guidelines Meat Processing Subcategory ...... -408.57 408.52 the degree of effluent reduction attainable representing the degree of effluent Subpart F-Non-Remote Alaskan reduction attainable by the application of Whole Crab and Crab Section ...... 408.67 408.82 by the application of the best conventional Subpart G-Remote Alaskan Whole pollutant control technology. the best conventional pollutant control Crab and Section Processing Sub- technology (BCT). category ...... 408.77 408.72 (a) [Reserved] Subpart H-Dungeness and Tanner Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any Crab Processing in the Contiguous (b) Except as provided in § 125.30-32 existing point source subject to this States Subcategory ...... 408.87 408.82 any herring fillet processing facility Subpart I-Non-Remote Alaskan subpart shall achieve the following Shrimp Processing Subcategory. 408.97 408.92 located in population or processing effluent limitations representing the Subpart J-Remote Alaskan Shrimp centers including but not limited to degree of effluent reduction attainable Processing Subcategory ...... 408.107 408.102 Acachorege, Cordova, Juneau, Subpart K-Northern Shrimp Process- by the application of the best ing in the Contiguous States Sub- Ketchikan, Kodiak, and Petersburg shall conventional pollutant control category ...... 408.117 408.112 achieve the following effluent Subpart L-Southern Non-Breaded technology (BCT]: The limitations shall Shrimp Processing in the Conligu- limitations representing the degree of be the same as those specified for ous States Subcategory ...... 408.127 408.122 effluent reduction attainable by the 49188 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules

application of the best conventional § 408.257 Effluent limitations representing 7. Section 408.307 for Subpart AD- pollutant control technology (BCT): The the degree of effluent reduction attainable Non-Alaskan Scallop Processing limitations shall be the same as those by the application of the best conventional Subcategory is added as set forth below: pollutant control technology. specified for conventional pollutants §408.307 Effluent limitations representing (which are defined in § 401.16) in The following limitations establish the the degree of effluent reduction attainable § 408.16Z(b)(2) of this subpart for the quantity or quality of pollutants or pollutant properties, controlled by this by the application of the best conventional best practicable control technology pollutant control technology. currently available (BPT). section, which may be discharged by a point source subject to the provisions of The following limitations establish the 3. Section 408.207 for Subpart T- this subpart after application of the best quantity or quality of pollutants or Alaskan Bottom Fish Processing available technology economically pollutant properties, controlled by this Subcategory is added as set forth below: achievable: section, which may be discharged by a § 408.207 Effluent limitations representing point source subject to the provisions of the degree of effluent reduction attainable this subpart after application of the best by the application of the best conventional Effluent limitations conventional pollutant control pollutant control technology. Average of dlydaMmum values technology: Effluent characteristic Mayimunfor for 30 (a) [Reserved] any I day consecutive days shall (b) Except as provided in § 125.30-32 not exceed Effluent limitations any bottom fish processing facility Average of (Metric unlts) (kilograms per located in population or processing Maximum for i values 1,000 kg of product) Effluent characteristic Maximmfor for 30 centers including but not limited to any 1 day consecutive Acachorege, Cordova, Juneau, TSS ...... 45 36 days shall Oil and Grease ...... 2.2 1.7 not exceed Ketchikan, Kodiak, and Petersburg shall pH ...... achieve the following effluent (Metric units) kk/kkg of (English units) (pounds per product limitations representing the degree of 1,000 lbof product) TSS ...... 5.7 1.4 effluent reduction attainable by the TSS ...... 45 36 Oil and Grease ...... 7.3 0.23 application of the best conventional Oil and Grease ...... 2.2 1.7 pH ...... pollutant control technology (BCT): The pH ...... (') . ... limitations shall be the same as those Within the range 6.0 to 9.0. (English units) pounds per 1,000 lb of product specified for conventional pollutants (which are defined in § 401.16) in TSS ...... 5.7 1.4 6. Section 406.267 for Subpart Z- Oil and Grease ...... 7.3 0.23 § 408.202(b)(2) of this subpart for the pH ...... 'best practicable control technology Atlantic and Gulf Coast Hand-Shucked Oyster Processing Subcategory is added currently available (BPT). Within the range 6.0 to 9.0. to read as set forth below: 4. Section 408.297 for Subpart AC- Alaskan Scallop Processing Subcategory § 408.267 Effluent limitations representing 8. Section 408.337 for Subpart AG- is added as set forth below: the degree of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the best conventional Abalone Processing Subcategory is § 408.297 Effluent limitations representing pollutant control technology. added as set forth below: the degree of effluent reduction attainable The following limitations establish the § 408.337 Effluent limitations representing by the application of the best conventional quantity or quality of pollutants or the degree of effluent reduction attainable pollutant control technology. pollutant properties, controlled by this by the application of the best conventional (a) [Reserved] section, which may be discharged by a pollutant control technology. (b) Except as provided in § 125.30-32 point source subject to the provisions of The following limitations establish the any scallop processing facility located in this subpart after application of the best quantity or quality of pollutants or population or processing centers conventional pollutant control pollutant properties, controlled by this including but not limited to Acachorege, technology: section, which may be discharged by a Cordova, Juneau, Ketchikan, Kodiak, point source subject to the provisions of and Petersburg shall achieve the S Effluent, limidtations this subpart after application of the best following effluent limitations conventional pollutant control Average of representing the degree of effluent daily values technology: reduction attainable by the application Effluent characteristic Maximum for Ifor 30 any 1 day consecutive of the best conventional pollutant days shall not exceed control technology (BCT): Tha ERI0*2 Effluent Imittions limitations shall be the same as those (Metric units) (kilograms per Average of 1,000 kg of producty Maxim aly values specified for conventional pollutants Effluent characteristic Maximmfor for 30 T S S ...... 23 16 any 1 day consecutive (which are defined in § 401.16) in Oil and Grease ...... 1.1I 0.77 days shall § 408.292(b)(2) of this subpart for the pH ...... ( ...... not exceed best practicable control technology (English units) (pounds per (Metric units) kk/kkg of currently available (BPT). 1,000 lb of product) seaiood

5. Section 408.257 for Subpart Y- TSS ...... 23 16 TSS ...... 26 14 Pacific Coast Hand-Shucked Oyster Oil and Grease ...... 1.1 0.77 Oil and Grease ...... 21 1.3 Processing Subcategory is added as set pH ...... D ...... pH ...... forth below: Within the range 6.0 to 9.0. Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49189

Effluent limitations § (a) Effluent limitations guidelines Subcategory (Chlorine and Sodium or representing Average of the degree of effluent Potassium Hydroxide Production), reduction attainable by the application Effluent charactersicEfflent harateriticdailyMaximum for for values30 of is added to read as follows: the best conventional pollutant control § 415.67(b) any I day consecutivedays ahall not exceed technology (BCT). §415.67 Effluent limitations representing Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any the degree of effluent reduction attainable (English units) pounds per existing point source subject to this by the application of the best conventional 1.000 lb of product subpart shall achieve the following pollutant control technology (BCT). TSS ...... 26 14 effluent limitations representing the Oiland Grease _...... 2.1 1.3 pH ... . (1)...... degree of effluent reduction attainable (b) Except as provided in 40 CFR by the application of the best 125.30-125.32, any existing point source IWthin the range 6.0 to 9.0. conventional pollutant control subject to this subpart and using the technology (BCT): The limitations shall diaphragm cell process must achieve the PART 409-SUGAR PROCESSING be the same as those specified for following effluent limitations POINT SOURCE CATEGORY conventional pollutants (which are representing the degree of effluent defined in § 401.16) in § (b) of this reduction attainable by the application 40 CFR Subchapter N. Part 409 for the subpart for the best practicable control of the best conventional pollutant Sugar Processing Point Source Category technology currently available (BPT). control technology (BCT): The is amended as follows: limitations are the same for TSS and pH PART 411-CEMENT §§ 409.17, 409.27, 409.37 [Revised] as specified in § 415.62. MANUFACTURING POINT SOURCE 2. In Subpart H-Hydrofluoric Acid §§ 409.47, 409.57, 409.67, 409.77, and 409.87 CATEGORY Production Subcategory, § 415.87 is [Added] 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 411 for the added to read as follows! Section 409.17, 409.27, and 409.37 are Cement Manufacturing Point Source 415.87 Effluent limitations representing revised. Sections 409.47, 409.57, 409.67, Category is amended by revising the degree of effluent reduction attainable 409.77, and 409.87 are added. The text of § 411.27 of the Leaching Subcategory as by the application of the best conventional each section is identical except for the follows: pollutant control technology (BCT). section number in the heading and the Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30- section number referenced at the end of § 411.27 Effluent limitations guidelines representing the degree of effluent 125.32, limitations on the the section. The text of the sections is discharge of reduction attainable by application of the conventional pollutants set out only once. Within the text are (which are best conventional pollutant control defined in § 401.16) by an existing point two blank spaces, one designated (a) technology (BCT). and one designated (b). In the table source subject to this subpart shall, after preceding the text, column (a) indicates Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any the application of the best conventional pollutant control the section number to be added to the existing point source subject to this technology (BCT), be the same as the limitations specified for section heading for the respective subpart shall achieve the following subparts of Part 409. Column (b) effluent limitations representing the conventional pollutants in this subpart degree of effluent reduction attainable under the best indicates the section number to be practicable control technology currently added to the text of the section by the application of the best available (BPT), as indicated in column (a). conventional pollutant control stated in § 415.82. technology (BCT): The limitations shall be the same as those specified for PART 422-PHOSPHATE conventional pollutants (which are MANUFACTURING POINT SOURCE defined in § 401.16) in § 411.22 of this CATEGORY (b) (a) Section subpart for the best practicable control Section number 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 422 for the number to be technology currently available (BPT). Subpart to be added to Phosphate Point Source Category is added to text of PART 412-FEEDLOTS POINT amended by adding § 422.67 of the section the heading section SOURCE CATEGORY Sodium Phosphates Subcategory as in (a) follows: Subpart A-Beet Sugar Processing § 412.17 [Removed] Subcategory ...... 409.17 409.12 §422.67 Effluent limitations guidelines Subpart B-Crystalline Cane Sugar 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 412 for the representing the degree of effluent Refining Subcategory ...... 409.27 409.22 Feedlots Point Source Category is reduction attainable by the application of Subpart C-Lictuld Cane Sugar Refin- ing Subcategory . ... . 409.37 409.32 amended by removing § 412.17. the best conventional pollutant control Subpart D-Louisiana Raw Cane technology. Sugar Processing Subcategory ...... 409.47 409.42 PART 415-INORGANIC CHEMICALS The following limitations establish the Subpart E-Florlda and Texas Raw MANUFACTURING POINT SOURCE Cane Sugar Processing Subcate- quantity or quality of pollutants or gory ...... 409.57 409.52 CATEGORY Subpart F-Hio-Hamakua Coast of pollutant properties, controlled by this the Island of Hawaii Raw Cane 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 415 for the section, which may be discharged by a Sugar Processing Subcategory ...... 409.67 409.62 point source Subpart G-Hawaian Raw Cane Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing subject to the provisions of Sugar Processing Subcategory ...... 406.77 406.72 Point Source Category is amended as this subpart after application of the best Subpart H-Puerto Rican Raw Cane follows: conventional pollutant control Sugar Processing Subcategory ...... 406.87 406.82 1. In Subpart F-Chlor-Alkali technology: 49190 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49190

METRIC UNITS (KG/KKG OF PRODUCT); ENGLISH subpart shall achieve the following to be added to the section heading for UNITS (1B/1,000 LB OF PRODUCT) effluent limitations representing the the respective subparts of Part 426. degree of effluent reduction attainable Column (b) indicates the section number Effluent limitations by the application of the best to be added to the text of the section Aerage of conventional pollutant control indicated in column (a). characteristic rdaily values Effluent Maximufor for 30 technology (BCT): The limitations shall any 1 day consecutive days shall be the same as those specified for not exceed conventional pollutants (which are (b) defined in § 401.16) in § (b) of this (s) Section TSSpH ...... (I).35 01) Section number subpart for the best practicable control number to be technology currently available (BPT). Subpart to be added to 3Within the range 6.0 to 9.5. added to text Of 2. Section 424.37 for Subpart C-Slag section the heading section Processing Subcategory is added to read in (a) as set forth below: PART 424-FERROALLOY Subpart A-Insulation Fiberglass Sub- MANUFACTURING POINT SOURCE § 424.37 Effluent limitations guidelines category ...... 426.17 426.12 representing the degree of effluent Subpart D-Plate Glass Manufactur- CATEGORY ing Subcategory ...... 426.47 426.42 reduction attainable by the application of Subpart E-Float Glass Manufacturing 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 424 for the the best conventional pollutant control Subcategory ...... 426.57 426.52 Ferroalloy Manufacturing Point Source technology (BCT). Subpart F-Automative Glass Tem- pering Subcategory ...... 426.67 426.62 Category is amended as follows: The following limitations establish the Subpart G-Automative Glass Lami- or quality of pollutants or nating Subcategory ...... 426.77 426.72 §§ 424.17 and 424.27 [Added] quantity Subpart H-Glass Container Manufac- pollutant properties, controlled by this turing Subcategory ...... 426.87 426.82 §§ 424.47, 424.67, and 424.77 [Revised] section, which may be discharged by a Subpart J-Glass Tubing (Danner) Manufacturing Subcategory ...... 426.107 426.102 1. Sections 424.17, 424.27 are added, point source subject to the provisions of Subpart K-Television Picture Tube this subpart after application of the best Envelope Manufacturing Subcate- and §§ 424.47, 424.67, and 424.77 are gory ...... 426.117 426.112 revised.'The text of each section is conventional pollutant control Subpart L-ncandescent Lamp Enve- identical except for the section number technology: lope Manufacturing Subcategory . 426.127 426.122 Subpart M-Hand Pressed and Blown in the heading and the section number Glass Manufacturing Subcategory 426.137 426.132 referenced at the end of the section. The text of the sections is set out only once. Effluent Limitations Within the text are two blank spaces, Average of one designated (a) and one designated Effluent charactoristic Maximmfor dailyfor values 30 § (a) Effluent limitations guidelines (b). In the table preceding the text, any 1 day consecutive representing the degree of effluent days shall column (a) indicates the section number not exceed reduction attainable by the application of to be added to the section heading for the best conventional pollutant control the respective subparts of Part 424. Metric units (kg/Mwh) technology (BCT). Column (b) indicates the section number TSS ...... 0,211 0.136 Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any to be added to the text of the section pH ...... () (1) existing point source subject to this indicated in column (a). English units Ob/Mwh) subpart shall achieve the following effluent limitations representing the TSS ...... 542 .271 degree of effluent reduction attainable (b) pH ...... (i) I ) (a) .Section by the application of the best Section number IWith the range 6.0 to 9.0. conventional pollutant control number to be Subpart to be added to technology (BCT): The limitations shall added to text of section the be the same as those specified for heading section conventional pollutants (which are in (a) PART 426-GLASS MANUFACTURING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY defined in § 401.16) in § (b) of this Subpart A--Open Electric Furnaces subpart for the best practicable control with Wet Air Pollution Control De- 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 426 for the technology currently available (BPT). vices Subcategory ...... 424.17 424.12 Glass Manufacturing Point Source Subpart B--Covered Electric Fur- naces and Other Smelting Oper- Category is amended as follows: PART 429-TIMBER PRODUCTS ations with Wet Air Pollution Con- PROCESSING POINT SOURCE trol Devices Subcategory ...... 424.27 424.22 §§ 426.17 and 427.47 [Added] Subpart D-overed Calcium Carbide CATEGORY Furnaces with Wet Air Pollution §§ 426.57, 426.67, 426.77, 426.87, 426.107, 40 CFR Subchaper N, Part 429 for the Control Devices Subcategory . 424.47 424.42 426.117, 426.127, and 426.137 [Revised] Subpart F-Electrolytic Manganese Timber Products Point Source Category Products Subcategory ...... 424.67 424.62 Sections 426.17, 426.47 are added, and Subpart G-Electrolytic Chromium is amended as follows: Subcategory ...... 424.77 424.72 § § 426.57, 426.67, 426.77, 426.87, 426.107, 426.117, 426.127, and 426.137 are revised. §§ 429.32, 429.42, 429.52, 429.72, 429.92, The text of each section is identical 429.102,429.112, 429.132, 429.142, 429.162 except for the section number in the and 429.152 [Added] § (a) Effluent limitations guidelines heading and the section number The text of §§ 429.32, 429.42, 429.52, representing the degree of effluent referenced at the end of the section. The 429.72, 429.92, 429.102, 429.112, 429.132, reduction attainable by the application of text of the sections is set out only once. 429.142, and 429.162 is added. Section the best conventional pollutant control Within the text are two blank spaces, 429.152 is added. The text of each technology (BCT). one designated (a) and one designated section is identical except for the Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any (b). In the table preceding the text, section number in the heading and the existing point source subject to this .column (a) indicates the section number section number referenced at the end of Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49191 the section. The text of the sections is conventional pollutant control §§ 430.63, 430.73, 430.83, 430.93, 430.113, set out only once. Within the text are technology (BCT): 430.143,430.153, 430.163, 430.173, 430.183, 430.193, 430.203, 430.243, 430.253, 430.263 two blank spaces, one designated (a) (a) The following limitations apply to and 430.273 [Revised] and one designated (b). In the table plans which produce smooth-one-side preceding the text, column (a) indicates (SiS) hardboard. 1. Proposed § § 430.63, 430.73, 430.83, the section number to be add to the 430.113, 430.143,430.153, 430.163, 430.173, section heading for the respective SUBPART E (SIS) 430.183, 430.193, 430.203, 430.243, 430.253, subparts of Part 429. Column (b) 430.263 and 430.273 are revised. The text indicates the section number to be BCT effluent limitations of each section is identical except for added to the text of the section Average of the section number in the heading and Pollutant or pollutant property Maximum for daily values indicated in column (a). any....da..... for 30 the section number referenced at the any 1 day Jconsecutive days end of the section. The text of the sections is set out only once. Within the (ti) (kg/kkg (pounds per 1,000 text are two blank spaces, one (a) Secton rb)of gross production) designated (a) and one designated (b). In Section number number to be B005 ...... 3.83 2.51 the table preceding the text, column (a) Subpart to be added to TSS ...... -...... 10.9 7.04 indicates the section number to be added to text of pH ...... () section the added to the section heading for the heading section in (a) 'Within the range 6.0 to 9.0 at all times. respective subparts of Part 430. Column (b) indicates the section number to be Subpart B-Veneer Subcategory ...... 429.32 429.31 (b) The following limitations apply to added to the text of the section Subpart C-Plywood Subcategory 429.42 429.41 plants which produce smooth-two-sides indicated in column (a). Subpart D-Dry Process Hardboard Subcategory...... 429.52 429.51 ($2S) hardboard: Subpart F-Wood Preserving-Water Borne or Nonpressure Subcategory 429.72 429.71 SUBPART E ($2S) Subpart H-Wood Presenring-Boutton 5) Subcategory ...... 429.92 429.91 Subpart I-Wet Storage Subcategory 429.102 429.101 BCT effluent limitations Sectilon number number to be Subpart K-Saw Mills and Planing Average of Mills Subcategory ...... 429.122 429.121 Subpart to be added to Pollutant or pollutant property Maximum for daily values added to text of Subpart L-Finishing Subcategory. 429.132 429.131 ayIdy for 30 section the Subpart M-Particleboerd Manufactur- ay1dy consecutive heading section ing Subcategory ...... 429.142 429.141 days In (a) Subpart N-Insuation Board Subcate- gory...... 429.152 429.151 (kg/kkg (pounds per 1,000 Subpart Subpart F-Dissolving Kraft Subcate- 0-Wood Furniture and Fix- Ib)of gross production) gory ...... 430.63 430.62 ture Production Without Wash Subpart G-Market Bleached Kraft Spray Booth(s) or Without Laundry B D 5 ...... 13.2 8.62 Facilities Subcategory 429.162 429.161 Subcategory ...... 430.73 430.72 ...... 139 . 9.52 Subpart H-BCT Bleached Kraft Sub- pH ...... (') (') category ...... 430.83 430.82 Subpart I--Fine Bleached Kraft Sub- 'Within the range 6.0 to 9.0 at all times. category ...... 430.93 430.92 Subpart K-Dissolving Sufite Pulp § (a) Effluent limitations guidelines 3. The text of § 429.22 is added as set Subcategory ...... 430.113 430.112 representing the degree of effluent Subpart M-Groundwood-CMN reduction attainable by the application forth below: Papers Subcategory ...... 430.143 430.142 of Subpart O-Grundwood-Fine Papers the best conventional pollutant control § 429.22 Effluent ilmitations representing Subcategory ...... 430.153 430.152 technology (BCT). the degree of effluent reduction attainable Subpart P-Sods Subcategory ...... 430.163 430.162 Subpart 0-Deink Subcategory ...... 430.173 430.172 Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any by the application of the best conventional Subpart R-Nonintegrated Fine pollutant control technology (BCT). Papers Subcategory ...... 430.183 430.182 existing point source subject to this Subpart S-Nonintegrated-Tissue subpart shall achieve the following Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30- Papers Subcategory ...... 430.193 430.192 effluent limitations representing the 32, any existing point source subject to Subpart T-Tissue from Wastepaper Subcategory ...... 430.203 430.202 degree of effluent reduction attainable this subpart must achieve the following Subpart X-Wastepaper-Molded Prod- by the application of the best effluent limitations representing the ucts Subcategory ...... 430.243 430.242 Subpart Y-Nonntegrated-Lightweight conventional pollutant control degree of effluent reduction attainable Paper Subcategory ...... 430.253 430.252 technology (BCT): The limitations shall by the application of the best Subpart Z-Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers Subcategory 430.263 430.262 be the same as those specified for conventional pollutant control Subpart AA-Nonintegrated-Paper- conventional pollutants (which are technology (BCT). board Subcategory ...... 430.273 430.272 defined in § 401.16) in § (b) of this (a) The following limitations apply to subpart for the best practicable control all mechanical barking installations: technology currently available (BPT). There shall be no discharge of process 2. Section 429.62 is added as set forth wastewater pollutants into navigable § (a) Effluent limitations guidelines representing the degree of effluent below: waters. reduction attainable by the application of (b] [Reserved] § 429.62 Effluent limitations representing the best conventional pollutant control the degree of effluent reduction attainable technology (BCT). PART 430-PULP, PAPER, AND by the application of the best conventional Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any pollutant control technology (BCT). PAPERBOARD POINT SOURCE CATEGORY existing point source subject to this Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30- subpart shall achieve the following 32, any existing point source subject to On January 6, 1981, at 46 FR 1457, EPA effluent limitations representing the this subpart must achieve the following proposed to revise 40 CFR Part 430 for degree of effluent reduction attainable effluent limitations representing the the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point by the application of the best degree of effluent reduction attainable Source Category. EPA proposes to futher conventional pollutant control by the application of the best amend proposed Part 430 as follows: technology (BCT): The limitations shall 49192 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules

be the same as those specified for consecutive-days limitations, but shall average-of-30-consecutive-days conventional pollutants (which are be subject to annual average effluent limitations, but shall be subject to defined in § 401.16) in § (b) of this limitations determined by dividing the annual average effluent limitations subpart for the best practicable control average-of-30-consecutive-days determined by dividing the average-of- technology currently available (BPT). limitations for BOD 5 by 1.78 and TSS by 30-consecutive-days limitations for 2. Proposed § 430.13 is revised for 1.82. BOD 5 by 1.78 and TSS by 1.82. Subpart A-Unbleached Kraft 3. Proposed § 430.53 is revised for 4. Proposed § 430.103 is revised for Subcategory and reads as follows: Subpart E-Paperboard from Subpart J-Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wastepaper Subcategory and reads as Wash) Subcategory, and reads as §430.13 Effluent limitations guidelines follows: representing the degree of effluent follows: reduction attainable by the application of § 430.53 Effluent limitations guidelines § 430.103 Effluent limitations guidelines the best conventional pollutant control representing the degree of effluent representing the degree of effluent technology (BCT). reduction attainable by the application of reduction attainable by the application of the best conventional pollutant control Except as provided in § 125.30-32, the best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT). technology (BCT). limitations on the discharge of Any existing point source subject to conventional pollutants (which are Except as provided in § 125.30-32, this subpart must achieve the following defined in § 401.16) by an existing point limitations on the discharge of effluent limitations representing the source subject to this subpart shall, after conventional pollutants (which are degree of effluent reduction attainable the application of the best conventional defined In § 401.16) by an existing point by the application of the best pollutant control technology (BCT), be source subject to this subpart shall, after conventional pollutant control the same as the limitations specified for the application of the best conventional technology (BCT), except that non- conventional pollutants in this subpart pollutant control technology (BCT), be continuous dischargers shall not be under the best practicable control the same as the limitations specified for subject to the maximum day and technology currently available (BPT), as conventional pollutants in this subpart average-of-30-consecutive days stated in § 430.12, except that non- under the best practicable control limitations, but shall be subject to continuous dischargers shall not be technology currently available (BPT), as annual average effluent limitations subject to the maximum day and stated in § 430.52, except that non- determined by dividing the average-of- average effluent limitations determined continuous dischargers shall not be 30-consecutive day limitations for BOD5 by dividing the average-of-30- subject to the maximum day and by 1.78 and TSS by 1.82:

SUBPART J

Pollutant or pollutant property BCT effluent limitations Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days

Kg/kkg (or pounds per 1,000 Ib) of product BOD ...... 0.00438X'-0.234X+ 14.8 0.00260X-0.139X+8.76 TSS ...... I ...... 0.00684X'-0.363X+23.2 0.00415X1_0.220X+ 14.1 pH ...... () X= Percent sulfite pulp In final product. 'Within the range of 5.0 to 9.0 at all times.

5. Proposed § 430.133 is revised for annual average effluent limitations Wash Subcategory, and reads as Subpart M-Groundwood-Thermo- determined by dividing the average-of- follows: Mechanical Subcategory, and reads as 30-consecutive-days limitations for follows: § 430.213 Effluent limitations guidelines BOD5 by 1.78 and TSS by 1.82: representing the degree of effluent § 430.133 Effluent limitations guidelines reduction attainable by the application of representing the degree of effluent SUBPART M the best conventional pollutant control reduction attainable by the application technology (BCT). of BCT effluent linitations the best conventional pollutant control Any existing point source subject to Average of technology (BCT). Pollutant or pollutant property Maximum daily values this subpart must achieve the following for any for30 effluent limitations Any existing point source subject to day consecutive representing the this subpart must achieve the following days degree of effluent reduction attainable effluent limitations representing the by the application of the best Kg/kkg (orpounds per conventional pollutant degree of effluent reduction attainable 1,000 lb) of product control by the application of the best technology (BCT), except that non- BOD5 ...... 5,7 3.4 continuous dischargers shall not be conventional pollutant control TSS ...... 9.6 5.8 technology (BCT), except that non- pH ...... subject to the maximum day and (1) (1) average-of-30-consecutive days continuous dischargers shall not be 'Within the range subject of 5.0 to 9.0 at all times. limitations, but shall be subject to to the maximum day and annual average effluent limitations average-of-30-consecutive-days 6. Proposed § 430.213 is revised for determined limitations, by dividing the average-of- but shall be subject to Subpart U-Papergrade Sulfite (Drum 30-consecutive days limitations for BOD5 by 1.78 and TSS by 1.82: Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49193

SUBPART U

BCT effluent limitations Pollutant or pollutant propertyI Maximum for any 1 day 1 Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days

Kg/kkg (or pounds per 1,000 tb) of product

BOD5 ...... 00438X-0,234X+14.8 0.00260X -0.139x+.76 TSS ...... 0.00684X -0.363X+23.2 0.00415X -0.220X+ 14.1 pH ...... I...... ( ) '

X= Percent sulfite pulp In final product. 'Within the range of 5.0 to 9.0 at all times.

7. Proposed § 430.223 is revised for average-of-30-consecutive-days §431.12 Effluent limitations guidelines Subpart V-Unbleached Kraft and Semi- limitations, but shall be subject to representing the degree of effluent Chemical Subcategory and reads as annual average effluent limitations reduction attainable by the application of the best practicable control technology follows: determined by dividing the average-of- currently available. 30-consecutive-days limitations for § 430.223 Effluent limitations guidelines BOD5 by 1.78 and TSS by 1.82. (a] In establishing the limitations sel representing the degree of effluent forth in this section, EPA took into reduction attainable by the application of (a) For plants producing pulp and account all information it was able to the best conventional pollutant control paper by the ammonia base neutral technology (BCT). collect, develop and solicit with respect sulfite semi-chemical process: to factors (such as age and size of plant, Any existing point source subject to raw materials, manufacturing processes, this subpart must achieve the following SUBPART W-AMMONIA BASE products produced, treatment effluent limitations representiog the of effluent reduction attainable Effluent imitations technology available, energy degree requirements and costs] which can by the application of the best Average of Effluent characteristic Maxim for daily values affect the industry subcategorization conventional pollutant control for 30 any Iun daym consecutive and effluent levels established. It is, technology (BCT], except that non- days however, possible that data which continuous dischargers shall not be would affect these limitations have not subject to the maximum day and Kg/kkg (or pounds per 1,000 Ib) been*available and, as a result, these average-of-30-consecutive-days limitations should be adjusted for limitations, but shall be subject to OD5 ...... 8.0 4.0 certain plants in this industry. An annual average effluent limitations TSS...... 10.0. 5.0 pH ...... (') individual discharger or other interested determined by dividing the average-of- person may submit evidence to the 30-consecutive-days limitations for Within the range of 6.0 to 9.0 at all times. Regional Administrator (or to the State, BOD5 by 178 and TSS by 1.82: (b) For plants producing pulp and if the State has the authority to issue to SUBPART V paper by all other semi-chemical NPDES permits) that factors relating the equipment or facilities involved, the processes: Effluent limitations process applied, or other such factors Average of SUBPART W-OTHER BASES related to such discharger are Effluent characteristic Maximum for daily values nI daxf for 30 fundamentally different from the factors any 1 day consecutive Effluent limitations considered in the establishment of the days MxumfrAverage of guidelines. On the basis of such Effluent characteristic Maximum for daily values per 1,000 evidence or other available information, Kg/kg (or pounds for 30 Ib) any 1 day consecutive the Regional Administrator (or the days State) will make a written finding that BO 5 ...... 8.0 4.0 TSS ...... 12.5 6.25 kg/kkg (or pounds per such factors are or are not pH ...... ( ) (') 1,000 Ih) of product fundamentally different for that facility compared to those specified in the 'Within the range of 6.0 to 9.0 at all times. BOD5 ...... 8.7 4.35 TSS ...... 1.. 5.5 Development Document. If such 8. Proposed § 430.233 is revised for pH ...... (') (') fundamentally different factors are Subpart W-Semi-Chemical Subcategory found to exist, the Regional and reads as follows: 'Within the range of 6.0 to .0 at all times. Administrator or the State shall establish for the discharger effluent § 430.223 Effluent limitations guidelines representing the degree of effluent PART 431-BUILDERS' PAPER AND limitations in the NPDES permit either reduction attainable by the application of BOARD MILLS POINT SOURCE more or less stringent than the the best conventional pollutant control CATEGORY limitations established herein, to the technology (BCT). extent dictated by such fundamentally On January 6, 1981, at 46 FR 1457, EPA Any existing point source subject to different factors. Such limitations must proposed to revise 40 CFR Part 431 for be approved by the Administrator of the this subpart must achieve the following Builders' Paper and Board Mills effluent limitations representing the the Environmental Protection Agency. The degree of effluent reduction attainable Point Source Category. EPA proposes to Administrator may approve or by the application of the best further amend proposed Part 431 as disapprove such limitations, specify conventional pollutant control follows: other limitations, or initiate proceedings technology (BCT), except that non- 1. Section 431.12 is added to read as to revise these regulations. continuous dischargers shall not be follows: (b) The following limitations establish subject to the maximum day and the quantity or quality of pollutants or 49194 4194Federal Reister / Vol. 47, No. 210 I Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49194 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules pollutant properties, controlled by this one designated (a) and one designated Effluent limitations section, which may be discharged by a (b). In the table preceding the text, Average of daily values point source subject to the provisions of column (a) indicates the section number Effluent characteristic Maximum for for 30 any I day consecutive this subpart after application of the best to be added to the section heading for days shall practicable control technology currently the respective subparts of Part 432. not exceed available: Column (b) indicates the section number Metric units (kg/kkg of to be added to the text of the section finished product)

indicated in column (a). BOD5 ...... 1.0 ...... 0.5 Effluent Average of TSS ...... 1.2 0.6 limitations daily values Oil and Grease ...... 0.5 0.25 Effluent characteristics consecutive (b) pH ...... () () (a) Section Fecal coliforms ...... ) (V) Maximum for days shall not exceed Section number number to be English units (lbll,000 lb. Subpart to be added to of finished product) Metric units (kilograms per added to text of the kg of product) section 1.000 heading section BO D5...... 1.0 0.5 in (a) TSS ...... 1.2 0.6 BO DS ...... 5.0 3.0 Oil and Grease ...... 0.5 0.25 TSS ...... 5.0 3.0 (1) (I) Subpart A-Simple Slaughterhouse pH ...... Oiand Grease ...... ') (' Fecalccoforms ...... ( ) (1) pH ...... ) ) Subcategory ...... 432.17 432.12 Subpart S-Comptex Slaughterhouse 432.27 432.22 -Within the range 6.0 to 9.0. English units (pounds per Subcategory ...... No limitation. ton of product) Subpart C-Low-Processing Packing- house Subcategory ...... 432.37 432.32 Subpart D-High-Processing Packing- BOD5 ...... 10.0 6.0 house Subcategory ...... 432.47 432.42 TSS ...... 10.0 6.0 3. Section 432.107 for Subpart I- 432.62 Oil and Grease ...... () 12) Subpart F-Meat Cutter Subcategory 432.67 Renderer Subcategory is added to read pH ...... (.) ( ) Subpart G--Sauseage and Luncheon Meats Processor Subcategory ...... 432.77 432.72 as set forth below: 'Not to exceed 0.2 rt/L Subpart H-Ham Processor Subcate- 'Within the range 6.0 to 9.0. gory ...... 432.87 432.82 'No comparable English units. Subpart f--Canned Meat Processor §432.107 Effluent limitations guidelines Subcatego ry...... 432.97 432.92 representing the degree of effluent 2. Proposed § 431.13 under Subpart reduction attainable by the application of A-Builders Paper and Roofing Felt the best conventional pollutant control technology. Subcategory is revised as follows: § (a) Effluent limitations guidelines representing the degree of effluent guidelines (a) Subject to the provisions of § 431.13 Effluent limitations by the application of representing the degree of effluent reduction attainable paragraph (b) of this section, the reduction attainable by the application of the best conventional pollutant control following limitations establish the the best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT). quantity or quality of pollutants or technology (BCT). Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any pollutant properties, controlled by this Except as provided in § 125.30-32 any existing point source subject to this section, which may be discharged by a existing point source subject to this subpart shall achieve the following point source subject to the provisions of subpart shall achieve the following effluent limitations representing the this subpart after application of the best effluent limitations representing the degree of effluent reduction attainable conventional pollutant control degree of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the best technology: by the application of the best conventional pollutant control conventional pollutant control technology (BCT): The limitations shall technology (BCT): The limitations shall be the same as those specified for be the same as those specified for conventional pollutants (which are conventional pollutants (which are defined in § 401.16) in § (b) of this Effluent limitations defined in § 401.16) in § 431.12 of this subpart for the best practicable control Average of control Effluent characteristic Maximum daily values subpart for the best practicable technology currently available (BPT). Maximmfor for 30 technology currently available (BPT). any 1 day consecutive Section 432.57 for Subpart E-Small days shall 2. not exceed PART 423-MEAT PRODUCTS POINT Processor Subcategory is added to read SOURCE CATEGORY as set forth below: Metric units (Kg/kkg of finished product) 40 CFR Subchapter N, Part 432 for the §432.57 Effluent limitations guidelines BOD5 ...... 0.18 0.09 Meat Products Point Source Category is representing the degree of effluent TSS ...... 0.22 0.11 amended as follows: reduction attainable by the application of Oil and Grease ...... 0.10 0.05 the best conventional pollutant control Fecal coliforms ...... () (') (') (') §§ 432.17, 432.27, 432.37, 432.47, 432.67, technology. pH ...... 432.77, 432.87, 432.97 [Revised] establish the English units (pounds per 1. Sections 432.17, 432.27, 432.37. The following limitations 1,000 lb. of finished prod- 432.47, 432.67, 432.77, 432.87, 432.97 are quantity or quality of pollutants or uct) controlled by this revised. The text of each section is pollutant properties, BODS ...... 0.18 0.09 identical except for the section number section, which may be discharged by a TSS ...... 0.22 0.11 Oil and Grease ...... 0.10 0.05 in the heading and the section number point source subject to the provisions of Fecal coliforms ...... =) (,) referenced at the end of the section. The this subpart after application of the best pH ...... (.) C') text of the sections is set out only once. conventional pollutant control Maximum at any time. 400 mpn/l00 mi. Within the text are two blank spaces, technology: 'Within the range 6.0 to 9.0. Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49195

(b) The limitations given in paragraph PART 440-ORE MINING AND § 440.125 Effluent limitations representing (a) of this section for BOD5 and TSS are DRESSING POINT SOURCE the degree of effluent reduction attalnabale by the application of the best conventional derived for a renderer which does no CATEGORY pollutant control technology (BCT). cattle hide curing as part of the plant On June 14, 1982 at 47 FR 25682, EPA activities. If a renderer does conduct proposed to revise 40 CFR Part 440 for Except as provided in Subpart M of hide curing, the following empirical the Ore Mining and Dressing Point this regulation and 40 CFR 125.30- formulas should be used to derive an Source Category. EPA proposes to 125.32, any existing source subject to additive adjustment to the effluent further amend proposed Part 440 as this subpart must achieve the following limitations for BOD5 and TSS. follows: limitations: (a) The concentration of pollutants BOD5 Adjustment (kg/kkg RM= §§ 440.15, 440.35, 440.55, 440.65, 440.75, discharged in mine drainage from mines [Revised] 3.6 x (number of hides) and 440.85 that produce copper, lead, zinc, gold, 1. Proposed §§ 440.15,440.35, 440.55, kg of raw material silver, platinum or molybdenum bearing 440.65, 440.75 and 440.85 are revised. ores or any combination of these ores 7.9 x (number of hides) lbs The text of each section is identical from open-pit or underground of raw material except for the section number in the operations, except gold placer mines, heading and the section number shall not exceed: TSS Adjustment (kg/kkg RM= referenced at the end of the section. The 6.2 X (number of hides) text of the sections is set out only once. Within the text are two blank spaces, Effluent limitations k8 of raw material one designated (a) and one designated Average of (b). In the table preceding the text, Effluent characteristic Maximum for daily values 13.6 X (number of hides) 30 (lb/1,0 lb RM = column (a) indicates the section number any.. ... 1yIay consecutivefor lbs of raw material to be added to the section heading for days the respective subparts of Part 440. Milligrams per liter PART 433-METAL FINISHING POINT Column (b) indicates the section number SOURCE CATEGORY to be added to the text of the section pH ...... (') (') TSS ...... 300 300 indicated in Column (a]. Part 433 consisting of § 433.18 is 'Within the range 6.0to 9.0. added to 40 CFR Subchapter N to read as follows: ( Sb)on (b) The concentration of pollutants § 433.18 Effluent limitations guidelines Section number discharged in mine drainage in mine number to be representing the degree of effluent Supart to be added to drainage from mills that use forth- reduction attainable by the application of added to text of flotation process alone, or in section the the best conventional pollutant control section In ______heading (a) conjunction with other processes, for the technology (BCT). benefication of copper, lead, zinc, gold, (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR Subpart A--Iron Ore Subcategory 440.15 440.12 silver, platinum or molybdenum ores, or 125.30-125.32, any existing point source Subpart C-Aluminum Ore Subcate- any combination of these shall not gory ...... 440.35 440.32 subject to this subpart must achieve the Supart E-Uranium. Radium and Va- exceed: following effluent limitations nadium Subcategory ...... 440.55 440.52 representing the degree of effluent Subpart F-Mercury Ores Subcate Effluent limitations gory ...... 440.65 440.62 reduction attainable by the best Subpart G-Tianium Ore Subcate- EAverage of Effluentcharacteristic conventional pollutant control gory...... 440.75 440.72 [I...... fo,,dailyr forvalues 30 Subpart H-Tungsten Ore Subcata- any consecutive technology: gory...... 440.85 440.82 days Average of Milligrams per liter maximum daily values Pollutant or pollutant property for any I y consecutivecoeuv § (a) Effluent Limitations guidelines pH ...... (1) (a) days shall representing the degree of effluent TSS ...... 30.0 20.0 not exceed reduction attainable by the application of the best conventional pollutant control 'Within the range 6.0 to 9.0. Milligrams per liter (mg/I) technology (BCT). Oil and Grease ...... 42 17 Except as provided in § 125.30-125.32 (c)(1) There shall be no discharge of TSS...... SI6 23 process pH ...... Within 6.0 to any existing point source subject to this wastewater from mines and 90 ...... subpart shall achieve the following mills that extract copper from ores or effluent limitations representing the ore waste materials by the dump, heap, degree of effluent reduction attainable in-situ leach or vat-leach processes (b) No user subject to the provisions by the application of the best except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) of of this subpart shall augment the use of conventional pollutant control this section. process wastewater or otherwise dilute technology (BCT): The limitations shall (2) In the event that the annual the wastewater as a partial or total be the same as those specified for precipitation falling on the treatment substitute for adequate treatment to conventional pollutants (which are facility and the drainage area achieve compliance with this limitation. defined in § 401.16) in § (b) of this contributing surface runoff to the (Sacs. 301 and 304, Clean Water Act, Federal subpart for the best practicable control treatment exceeds the annual Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of technology currently available (BPT). 2. evaporation, a volume of water equal to 1972, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., as amended by Proposed § 440.125 is revised to read as the difference between annual the Clean Water Act of 1977, Pub. L. 95-217) follows: precipitation falling on the treatment 49196 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules

facility and the drainage area pound figures calculated in step 4 are the cost per pound of conventional contributing surface runoff to the flow-weighted using the size distribution pollutants removed from POTWs treatment facility and annual to determine a single POTW cost according to the size distribution of evaporation may be discharged subject comparison figure. This is the same POTWs in the United States. The size to the limitations set forth in paragraph calculation as for the 1979 methololgy distribution used in these calculations is (a) of this section. except for the first step. based on the 1980 Needs Survey.1 The (d)(1) There shall be no discharged of All the POTW costs have been size distribution used was calculated process wastewater from mills that use indexed to third quarter 1976 dollars to based on the number of POTWs which the cyanidation process to extract gold make them comparable to the industry were operating or under construction in or silver except as provided in costs which are in September 1976 1980 (see Table Al). The weighting paragraph (d)(2) of this section. dollars, The specific indices used are factor is calculated by dividing the total (2) In the event that the annual presented in the discussion below. The flow for each group by the total flow for all POTWs. precipitation falling on the treatment POTW cost figure is also updated to facility and the drainage area current year dollars by use of these contributing '"The 1980 Needs Survey: Conveyance, surface runoff to the indices. Treatment, and Control of Municipal Wastewater, treatment exceeds the annual Size Distributionof POTWs. The Combined Sewer Overflows, and Stormwater evaporation, a volume of water equal Runoff; Summaries of Technical Data", FRS-23 EPA to POTW the difference between annual cost figure Is based on weighting 430/9-81-008, February 10. 1981, Table 4. precipitation falling on the treatment TABLE At.-POTW SIZE DISTRIBUTION facility and the drainage area contributing surface runoff to the Size range (mgd) treatment facility and annual From 0 .106 1.06 10.6 50.2 evaporation may be discharged subject TO 0.105 1.05 10.5 50.2 + Total to the limitations set forth in paragraph (a) of this section. Number of plants ...... 5021 7033 2686 415 96 15251 Total flow ...... 259 2675 8836 9290 13354 34415 Appendices Average flow ...... 0.0515 0.3803 3.290 22.39 139.1 2.257 Weighting factor ...... 0075 .0777 0.2567 0.2700 0.3880 0.9999 Note.-Appendices A-D will not appear in the Code of Federal Regulations. Because the cost curves which are advanced secondary treatment (AST) Appendix A-The Cost of Pollutant used to calculate the POTW cost figure system. This is calculated by estimating Removal By Publicly Owned Treatment are most reliable in the flow range of the cost of a new advanced secondary Works one to 50 mgd, the distribution and system and deducting the savings that weights of the POTW distribution are are expected if secondary treatment is Part I of the BCT test requires that the capped by these lower and upper already in place. Total annual costs cost and level of reduction of bounds. A one mgd POTW represents include capital charges, interest, and conventional pollutants by industrial the 0-0.105 mgd size group and the 0.106 operation and maintenance expenses. dischargers be compared with the cost to 1.05 size group of POTWs and a 50 Table A2 gives the treatment cost and level of reduction to remove the mgd POTW represents the 50.2 mgd and curves used in calculating the same pollutants by publicly owned greater size group of POTWs. A 3.29 treatment works (POTWs). The POTW mgd POTW represents the 1.06 to 10.5 incremental costs associated in comparison figure has been calculated mgd size group, and a 22.39 mgd POTW upgrading from second treatment to by evaluating the change in costs and represents to 10.6 to 50.2 mgd size group. advanced secondary treatment. removals between secondary treatment Total Annual POTW Costs. The (30 mg/1 BOD and 30 mg/1 TSS) and Agency based its estimates of annual TABLE A2: TREATMENT COST EQUATIONS advanced secondary treatment (10 mg/1 POTW costs on information from two Index BOD and 10 mg/1 TSS). The difference EPA documents. These documents, one Treatment level Equation factor (to 2 1976 in cost is divided by the difference in for construction costs and one for dollars) pounds of conventional pollutants operation and maintenance costs, 3 removed, resulting in an estimate of the replace two previous documents found CAPITALCOST "dollars per pound" of pollutant to contain critical errors. These new Advanced Secondary Treat- $2.76 x 10 1011. $0.816 ment . documents provide the most up-to-date 0 removed. Savings From Secondary $1.79 x 106 -.. .821 The following summary describes information regarding the costs of Treatment details of the specific calculation of this constructing and operation POTWs. O&MCOST POTW cost figure. It involves five basic The POTW costs used in estimating Advanced Secondary Treat- $0.952 x 10 5 .652 the cost of pollutant removal are the ment t Q'. steps: First, the size distribution of ° Secondary.Treanent '...... $1.01 x 10' ...... 652 POTWs is determined; second, the total total annual costs of upgrading a annual costs for secondary and secondary treatment (ST) system to '0 = flow size in millions of gallons per day. 'Construction Cost Document. Supra note 2, Fig. 4.1, advanced secondary treatment (AST) curve 2. are estimated; third, the pollutant I"Construction Costs for Municipal Wastewater 3Construction Cost Document. Spra, note 2. Figure 4.1, Treatment Plants: 1973-1978", EPA 430/5-80-OXX, curve B. 4O&M Cost Document. removal capability of the system is May, 1980 (hereinafter cited as "Construction Cost Supra, note 3. Figure 3.17. 60&M Cost Document. Supra, note 3. Figure 3.3. calculated; fourth, the incremental costs Document"). in I "Technical Report, Operation and going from secondary to AST are Maintenance All costs are indexed to third quarter divided by the additional pounds of Costs for Municipal Wastewater Facilities", EPA 430/9-81-004 (hereinafter cited as "O&M Cost 1976 dollars by the use of cost indices pollutant removal; fifth, the dollars-per- Document"). Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49197 for POTWs.' Capital costs are amortized TABLE AS.-POTW BENCHMARK 5 The pounds of pollutants removed equal for 30 years at a.10% interest rate. the flow of the POTW times the change CALCULATIONS AST Costs. The costs for AST by flow in concentrations of the pollutants as Incre- size are: they pass through the system. For the Incre- mental mental Re- Dollars in millions calculations presented here the influent Cost moval Per Weight- Weight. concentration is 210 mg/l for BOD and Flow (MGD) ($ (mil- pound ing a d per Flow Annuale 6 million lion Factor pound (MGD) Capital idexed O&M Indexed Total 230 mg/l for TSS. pTO par cost capital cost o&t cost yper ostcost Effluent characteristics of 30 mg/l BOD and 30 mg/l for secondary 1.0 $2.760 $2.397 $0.952 $0.620 $03.01 $0.079 0.122 $0.65 0.0852 $0.06 ...... 3.29 6.742 5.83 2.516 1.64 7.47 treatment were selected because this is 3.29 ...... 1...8...168 .401 .42 .2567 .11 22.39 28.409 24.57 12.03 7.84 32.41 the legal requirement for most 22.39 ...... 527 2.73 .19 .2700 .05 50.0 ...... 809 6.10 50.0 51.896 44.89 23.17 15.11 60.00 secondary treatment plants established .13 .3880 .05 by EPA. Effluent characteristics of 10 Tot ...... 27 Savings from ST Costs. The costs mg/l BOD and 10 mg/l TSS for This cost is indexed for a number of savings for in-place ST for upgrading to advanced secondary treatment are used AST treatment by flow size are: since they represent the best time periods below: performance for advanced secondary Dollars In millions treatment. INDEXED POTW BENCHMARKS Flow Annual. Both the 30 mg/1 and the 10 mg/1 Year/quarter 1st 2nd 3rd 4th (MGD) Capital Indexed O&M Indexed performance levels correspond to the cost capital cost costost cost coat maximum 30-day average performance 1976 ...... 0.27 0.27 of the POTW. The difference in the BOD 1977 ...... 0.28 0.29 .30 .30 1.0 $1.790 $0.156 $0.101 $0.066 $0.222 1978 ...... 30 .30 .31 .33 3.29 4.753 .414 .253 .165 .579 plus TSS effluent levels from ST to AST 1979 ...... 34 .35 .35 .36 22.39 22'903 1.993 1.106 .721 2.714 is 40 mg/i. This change results in an 1980 ...... 37 .40 .42 .42 50.0 44.260 3.852 2.054 1.339 5.191 1981 ...... 42 .45 .45 .46 incremental pollutant removal of .122 million pounds per year for each million 7 Incremental Costs. Incremental costs gallons a day of flow. The incremental Appendix B-Calculation of the for each flow size are obtained by anual pollutant removal for each flow Benchmark for the Industry Cost Test substracting the total annual AST costs size is listed in Table A4. from the savings from existing ST. The Part 2 of the BCT test requires that the resulting incremental costs are listed in TABLE A4.-INCREMENTAL POLLUTANT cost-effectiveness of controlling the Table A3. REMOVAL discharge of conventional pollutants by industrial dischargers be evaluated for TABLE A3.-INCREMENTAL ANNUAL COSTS Flow mgd Million pounds removed each industry. In order to develop a ($ MILLIONS) benchmark that assesses a reasonable 1.0 0.122 relationship between cost and removal, Total annual costs Total annual 3.29 .401 Flow (MGD) incremental 22.39 2.73 EPA has developed an industry cost AST ST cost 50.0 8.10 benchmark which compares the cost per 1.0 $0.301 $0.222 $0.079 pound of conventional pollutant removal 3.29 .747 .579 .168 Incremental Cost of Removal. To in going from primary to secondary 22.39 3.241 2.714 .527 treatment levels with that of going from 50.0 6.000 5.191 .809 calculate the cost of pollutant removal secondary to advanced secondary of upgrading secondary treatment to treatment levels. advanced secondary treatment, the PollutantRemoval by POTWs. The additional costs must be divided by the The following details the specific incremental number of pounds of additional removal of BOD and TSS. calculation of the industry cost conventional pollutants removed by benchmark. The computation requires Specifically the calculation is: advanced secondary treatment beyond seven steps: First, the size distribution secondary treatment must be estimated incremental total annual costs of POTWs is determined; second, the to obtain the incremental annual costs. incremental annuaj pollutant removal total annual costs for primary, secondary and advanced secondary I"Construction Cost Indexes [SIC]" Office of treatment are estimated; third, the Water Program Operations, EPA, first quarter 1976 This calculation is performed for each pollutant removals at each treatment at seq (hereinafter cited as "Construction Cost flow size, then weighted by the factors level are calculated; fourth, the Index"). Two different indices are used. For AST, that appear in Table EPA used the LCAT index; for ST, the SCCT index. Al. Table A5 additional costs upgrading from primary For Operating costs, the reference is: summerizes these calculations. to secondary treatment and from "Index of Direct Costs for Operation, secondary to advanced secondary Maintenance and Repair Based on Composite 5 '"Areawide Assessment Procedures Mannual, treatment are calculated; fifth, these MGD Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants", Appendix H, Point Source Control Alternatives," incremental costs are divided by the 1967, et seq (hereinafter cited as "O&M Cost Index). EPA Laboratories, Cincinnati, Ohio, at H-14. EPA used the average escalation index. 'The calculation of this figure is as follows: respective incremental pounds of 5 ManagementAccounting, Robert Anthony and 40mg/1 x 3.785 1/gal x 2.2 x 10-lb/mg x 365 days/ pollutants removed; sixth, the James Reece, June 1975, Appendix Tables, Table B. yr=.122 million pounds/year per million gallons/ incremental dollar per pound figures for EPA used a multiplier of 0.106. day. the secondary to advanced secondary 49198 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules increment are divided by those for the TABLE B2.-TREATMENT COST CURVES TABLE B3.-INCREMENTAL ANNUAL COSTS: primary to secondary increment; PRIMARY UPGRADE TO SECONDARY-Contin- Indexa- ued seventh, these ratios are weighted by tion Curve (0 flow factor to the size distribution factors to obtain a Treatment level in mgd) obtain [millions of dollars] single benchmark. 1976 dollars Total annual costs Total annual The method for calculating the Flow (mgd) incremental incremental dollar per pound figures in CAPITAL COST Primary Secondary costs going from secondary to advanced Secondary Treatment ...... $ 2.66 x 106 $0.821 2.78 5.21 2.43 secondary treatment has already been 50.0 Savings from Primary Treat- $3.32 x 105 '...... 821 calculated (see Table Al, Appendix A). ment. The calculations for the incremental OsM COST PollutantRemoval by POTWs. The ...... $ x dollar per pound figure in going from Secondary Treatment 1.01 10 5Qv* . .652 Savings from Primary Treat- $5.67 x 101 1- .928 other ha.lf of calculating the cost per primary to secondary treatment are ment. pound of pollutant removal requires the explained in detail below. determination of the number of pounds Size Distribution of POTWs. EPA of conventional pollutants removed by based its size distribution of POTWs on All costs are indexed to third quarter advanced secondary treatment beyond data found in the 1980 Needs Survey for 1976 dollars by the use of cost index secondary treatment. The incremental municipal wastewater treatment. (1) factors developed by EPA for POTWs. (6) Capital costs are amortized over 30 pounds of pollutants removed equal the EPA modified the distribution to exclude flow of the POTW times the reduction years at a 10 percent rate. (7) plants with flows of less than I mgd or Q effluent in concentrations of the more than 50 mgd based on the likely represents flow in millions of gallons a day. pollutants obtained from more advanced errors in cost estimates outside this flow treatment. range. The size distribution used Secondary Treatment Costs. The costs appears in Table 131 for secondary treatment by flow size The primary treatment effluent levels are: are set at 130 mg/I for BOD and 100 mg/l TABLE Bi.-FLow-SIZE DISTRIBUTION for TSS which are commonly used in sewage treatment literature. (8) Effluent size (MOG) Weighting Dollars in millions Flow factor characteristics of 30 mg/l BOD and 30 Flow Annual, Indexed mg/I TSS for secondary treatment were Captal indexed O&M t & m Total 1.0 ...... 0.0852 (mgd) cost capital cost osts cost selected because this is the legal 3.29 ...... 0.2567 cost 22.39 ...... 0.2700 requirement for most POTWs as 50.0 ...... 0 .3880 1.0 2.66 0.231 0.101 0.0658 0.297 established by EPA. Total ...... 0.9999 3.29 6.27 .546 .253 .165 .711 22.39 24.94 2.17 1.11 .721 2.89 The change in concentration of 50.0 44.5 3.87 2.05 1.34 5.21 conventional pollutants is 170 mg/l (230 Total Annual POTW Costs. EPA mg/l minus 60 mg/1). In terms of pound based its estimates of annual POTW Savings from Primary Treatment. The removals, this change transfers to a total costs on information from three EPA costs saved for an existing primary incremental annual pollutant removal of documents. The Construction Cost treatment facility when upgrading to .517 million pounds a year for each mgd Document (2) and the O&M Cost secondary treatment by flow size are: of flow. (9) The incremental annual Document (3) are used to estimate the pollutant removal for each flow size is costs of advanced secondary and listed in Table B4. secondary capital and O&M costs and Dollars In millions Flow Annual, Indexed (mgd) Capital indexed primary treatment capital costs. O&M O&M t e Totat TABLE B4.-INCREMENTAL ANNUAL POLLUTANT cost capital cost O&M cost costs for primary treatment are not REMOVAL: PRIMARY UPGRADED TO SECONDARY included in these documents. In order to de'velop the primary treatment O&M 1.0 0.332 0.0289 0.057 0.0526 0.0815 Flow (mgd) Million pounds removed 3.29 1.20 .104 .130 1.21 .225 annually cost curve, EPA is using a 1978 O&M 22.39 9.53 .829 .492 .466 1.28 cost document.(4] This document was 50.0 22.7 1.98 .860 .798 2.78 1.0 .517 found to contain critical errors in the 3.20 1.70 22.39 11.6 development of the cost curves from the 50.0 25.8 underlying data. The regression of total Incremental Costs. Incremental costs annual cost versus flow size was for each flow size are obtained by calculated by expressing flow size as a subtracting the total annual secondary treatment costs from the savings from incremental Cost of Removal. To function of cost. By switching the calculate the cost of pollutant removal dependent variable (total annual cost) primary treatment costs. The resulting incremental costs are listed in Table B3. for upgrading primary treatment to and the independent variable (flow size) secondary treatment, the additional in the regression analysis, the resulting TABLE B3.-INCREMENTAL ANNUAL COSTS: costs must be divided by the additional cost curves incorrectly estimated the PRIMARY UPGRADE TO SECONDARY removal of BOD and TSS for each flow costs of treatment. EPA has recalculated size. Specifically the calculation is: the O&M cost curve for primary [millions of dollars] treatment, using the points that appear Total annual costs Total annual incremental total annual costs FlowP(mad) incremental in the graph of the curve. (5) Primary ISecondary costs incremental annual pollutant removal Table B2 shows the curve used in $.0815 $ .297 $ .217 Table B5 summarizes these calculating the incremental cost of .225 .711 .486 upgrading a primary treatment facility. 1.28 2.89 1.61 calculations. Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49199

TABLE B5.-INCREMENTAL ANNUAL COST PER (9) The calculation of this figure is as'follows: POUND OF REMOVAL: PRIMARY TO SECOND- ARY TREATMENT 170- x 3.785 1x 2.2 X 106--m X 365- X 106 5.17 X 10f - per mgd I gl g yr day yr (1) (2) (3) (2) -(3) (10) See Table A5, Appendix A. Timber Products, EPA 440/1-81/023. Incremental Incremental Dollarper cost d Economic Impact Analysis of Wet Flow (mgd) annualt$Million) removal milrlionn)removedannual(Ibs. pound Appendix C-Documents Used in the Analysis Process Hardboard and Insulation Board, EPA 440/2-80-089. 1.0 $.217 .517 .42 The data for each of the industry Economic Impact Analysis of Wood 3.29 .486 1.70 .28 22.39 1.61 11.6 .14 categories were taken from the Preserving, EPA 440/2-80-087. 50.0 2.43 25.8 .09 documents listed below: 13. Pulp, Paperand PaperboardMills. 1. DairyProducts. Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills, Dairy Products Processing, EPA 440/ EPA 440/1-80-025-b. 1-74-021-a. of Pulp, Industry Cost Benchmark. The Economic Impact Analysis 2. Grain Mills. Paper, and Paperboard Mills, EPA 440/ industry cost benchmark is obtained by Grain Processing, EPA 440/1/74-:028- II. dividing the dollar per pound increment 2-80-080, Vols. I and a. 14. Inorganic Chemicals from secondary to advanced secondary Animal Feed, Breakfast Cereal and by the dollar per pound Manufacturing. treatment (10) Wheat Starch, EPA 440/1-74/039-a. from primary to secondary Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing increment Corn Wet Milling, EPA 440/1-78/028- Once these ratios have been Point Source Category, EPA 440/1-82/ treatment. b, Supplement. each ratio for each flow size 007. calculated, 3. Fruits and Vegetables. by its size distribution Economic Impact Analysis of is multiplied Apple, Citrus and Potato Products, weight to obtain a single industry cost Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing EPA 440/1-74-027-a. benchmark. Table B6 summarizes these Industry, EPA 440/2-81/023. Economic Analysis of the Fruits and computations. 15. Ore Mining and Dressing. Vegetables Category (Phase II), EPA Ore mining and Dressing (Proposed), 230/1-75-036, Supplement, April 1976. EPA 440/1-82/061-b. TABLE B6-INDUSTRY COST BENCHMARK 4. Seafood. 16. Metal Finishing. Fish Meal, Salmon, Bottom Fish, Clam, Metal Finishing (Proposed), EPA 440/ Incremental dollar per pound Oyster, Sardine, Scallop, Herring, and 1-82/o91-b. Abalone, EPA 440/1-75/041-a. Economic Analysis of Proposed Second- (lo Primary ary to Weight- Weiht. Catfish, Crab, Shrimp and Tuna, EPA Effluent Standards and Limitations for to ad- ing a second-tmdo~ vanced ratio factorsfatr rtisratios' 440/1-74-020-a. the Metal Finishing Industry, EPA 440/ ary second- Qualitative Economic Analysis of the treat- ary 2-82/004. treat- Seafood Industry, May 1982 ment Appendix D-Summary of Data ment 5. Sugar Processing. 1.0 $0.42 $0.65 1.55 .0852 .13 Beet Sugar Processing, EPA 440/1-74- Incre- = 3.29 .28 .42 1.50 .2567 .38 o02-b. Industry subcategory mental PmT I ndsrcost 22.39 .14 .19 1.34 .2700 .38 Cane Sugar Processing, EPA 440/1- bench- ratio 50.0 .09 .13 1.44 .3880 .56 74-002-c. poind) mark 'Industry cost ratio 1.43. 6. Cement Manufacturing. (1) (2) (3) Cement Maufacturing, EPA 440/1-74- 005-a. Grain Mills This benchmark is not indexed by Corn dry milling: time periods because the variations in 7. Feedlots. Small ...... $0.55. Feedlots, EPA 440/1-74-004-a. Large ...... 58 the result are likely to be small. Bulgar wheal...... 8. PhosphateManufacturing. Footnotes Parboiled rice ...... 1.02 Other Non-Fertilizer Phosphate Ready-to-eat (1) See note 1, Appendix A. See also Table Chemicals, EPA 440/1-75/043-a. Small ...... 78 Al, Appendix A, for data on the raw Medium ...... -57 9. Ferroalloys. Large ...... -45 distribution. Slag Processing, EPA Wheat starch and gluten ...... 20 2.5 (2) See note 2, Appendix A. Smelting and Canned and Preserved Fruits (3) See note 3, Appendix A. 440/1-74/008-a. and Vegetables (4) "Analysis of Operations and Calcium Carbide, EPA 440/1-75/068. Apple juice. small...... 1.16 Maintenance Costs for Municipal Electrolytic Ferroalloys, EPA 440/1- La e...... 62 Wastewater Treatment Systems, EPA 430/9- 75/038-a. Apple products: 77-015, May 1978 (hereinafter cited as the 10. Glass Manufacturing. small ...... 3.74 .35 "1978 O&M Cost Document"), Fig. E. 2-1. Pressed and Blown Glass, EPA 440/1- Ciatrus products: (5) The equation that appears in the small ...... 5 1 75-034-a. .39 document is Cost=$.453X104Q'. . This cost Large ...... 2.17 Flat Glass, EPA 440/1-74/001-c. is expressed in 31 quarter 1977 dollars. Frozen potato products: .15 Insulation Fiberglass, EPA 440/1-74-. Small ...... 7.50 (6) See note 9, Appendix A. The primary Large...... 12 12.00 factor is 208/Z22=0.928. O01-b. Dehydrated potato products: (7) See note 10, Appendix A. The capital 11. Meat Products. small . ..- ...... 20 4.00 Large ...... 13 4.33 recovery factor used is 0.106. Red Meat Processing, EPA 440/1-74- Canned and Preserved Fruits: (8) "Areawide Assessment Procedures 102-a. Canned and Preserved Manual, Appendix H, Point Source Control Processor, EPA 440/1-74/031. Vegetables Mushrooms: Alternatives", EPA Laboratories, Cincinnati, Independent Rendering, EPA 440/1- .72 Ohio, P. H-16.This effluent level assumes Small ...... 77/031-.e,. Supplement. Large ...... 59 influent concentrations of 210 mg/l for BOD Sauerkraut and .30 mg/l for TSS. 12. Timber Products. Small ...... 3.50 49200 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules

J I Incre- Compa- Incre- Co pa- Incre- Compa- mental rable Industry robI Industry mental FPOTW/ cost Industry subcategory POTW/ cost Industry subcategory mental POTW/ cost Industry subcategory (per bench- ratio (per bench- ratio (per bench- ratio pound) mark pound) mark ,ound) mark

(1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3)

Large...... 2.90 .27 Breaded shrimp: 3 ...... 53 .30 5.9 Tomatoes: Small ...... 30 4 ...... 31 .30 3.4 Sm all ...... 95 .27 Medium ...... 17 Market bleached kraft: Large...... 49 .27 Large ...... 11 Option: Corn, peas: Tuna 1 ...... 33 .30 1.57 Extra Sm all ...... 1.29 .27 Small ...... 55 2 ...... 61 .30 2.90 Sm all ...... 1.29 .27 Medium ...... 28 3 ...... 63 .30 3.00 Medium ...... 80 .27 Large ...... 21 4 ...... 49 .30 2.33 Large...... 51 .27 Fish meal ...... 1.17 BCT bleached kraft: Corn, peas: Sm all ...... 70 .27 West coast hand butchered Option: Green beans: Medium ...... 1.22 .27 salmon: 1 ...... 31 .30 2.38 Carrots: Large ...... 1.32 .27 Small ...... 1.58 2 ...... 46 .30 3.54 Frozen corn: Extra small ...... 63 .27 Large ...... 70 3 ...... 52 .30 4.00 Peas, green: Sm all ...... 1.57 .27 West coast mech. salmon: 4 ...... 43 .30 3.31 Beans: M edium ...... 1.42 .27 Small ...... 13 Alkaline fine: Carrots: Large ...... 1.10 .27 Large ...... 09 Option: Broccoli: Sm all ...... 1.07 .27 Alaskan bottom fish ...... I ...... 1.05 .30 8.75 Spinach: M edium ...... 99 .27 Non-Alaskan mech.: 2 ...... 74 .30 6.17 Lim a bean: Large ...... 77 .27 Small ...... 27 3 ...... 82 .30 6.83 Cauliflow er ...... ; ...... 27. Large ...... 08 4 ...... 46 .30 3.83 Non-Alaskan conv. bottom Tomato, dry: Extra small ...... -75 Unbleached kraft: fish: Bean: .27 Option: Sm all ...... 1.24 Small ...... 34 .40 30 1.43 .27 .24 1 ...... Medium ...... 76 Medium ...... 2 ...... 64 .30 2.29 .27 Large ...... 15 Large...... 60 (i) 3 ...... 62 .30 2.21 .27 Hand-shucked clam: ...... (01 C herry, green: Sm all ...... 1.50 4 ...... 67 .30 2.39 .27 Mechanized clam: Bean, pear: Medium ...... 90 Dissolving sulfite pulp: .27 Small ...... 01 Plum : Large ...... 2.10 Option: .27 Medium ...... 01 C herry: Sm all ...... 5.25 .70 .30 4.67 .27 Pacific coast hand-shucked 1 ...... Caneberry: Large ...... 1.20 (i) (,i) .30 .30 2.00 oyster ...... Strawberry ...... 53 .30 3.53 Atlantic & Gulf Coast hand- Canned and Miscellaneous (I) (I) .43 .30 2.87 Specialties shucked oyster ...... Steamed and canned oyster. .03 Papergrade sulfite: Potato chips: .27 Sardine: Option: Extra Sm all ...... 1.50 Small ...... 7.84 1 ...... 20 .30 .91 Sm all ...... 84 ,27 2 ...... 42 .30 1.91 .27 Medium ...... 4.79 Medium ...... 1.14 Large 3.96 3 ...... 38 .30 1.73 .74 .27 ...... ('i) Large...... Non:Alaskan scallop ...... (,) 4 ...... 42 .30 1.91 Canned and preserved Non-Alaskan hernng filet ...... 04 Groundwood-Thermomech. seafoods Abalone processing ...... (i) Option: 1 ...... 08 .30 .50 Farm-raised catfish: Sugar Processing .27 2 ...... 64 .30 4.00 Sm all ...... 1.36 Beet sugar ...... 03 3.0 3 ...... 55 .30 3.44 Medium ...... 1.12 .27 Crystalline cane sugar: 4 ...... 62 .30 3.88 Large...... 84 .27 Small ...... 91 Groundwood-CMN papers: Cony. blue crab ...... 27 Large ...... 58 Option: Mach. blue crab: Liquid cane sugar ...... 64 1 ...... 44 .30 2.59 Sm all ...... 07 .27 2 ...... 1.06 .30 6.24 Medium ...... 06 .27 Cement Manufacturing 3 ...... 92 .30 5.41 Large ...... 04 .27 Leaching ...... 4.40 .27 ...... 30 3.82 Non-remote Alaskan crab- 4 ...... 65 Feedlots Groundwood-Fine papers: meat: Option: Sm all ...... 15.17 .27 D uck ...... (I) (2) .27 1 ...... 73 .30 4.87 Medium ...... 12.92 Ferroalloys Manufacturing Large ...... 10.98 .27 2 ...... 1.13 .30 7.53 Remote Alaskan crabmeat: Open electric furnaces, wet... 84 27 3 ...... 97 .30 6.47 .27 Covered elec. furnace ...... 83 .27 4 ...... 75 .30 5.00 Sm all ...... 07 1.0 Medium ...... : .04 .27 S lag ...... 02 .27 Deink: Large...... 05 .27 Covered calcium carbide ...... 1.58 .27 Option: Non-remote Alaskan whole Electrolytic manganese ...... 1.45 .27 1 ...... 14 .30 1.56 crab: Electrolytic chromium ...... 1.98 .27 2 ...... 60 .30 6.67 .27 3 ...... Sm all ...... 19.78 Glass Manufacturing .52 .30 5.78 .68 7.56 Medium ...... 14.43 .27 (I) (I) 4 ...... 30 .27 Insulation fiberglass ...... Tissue from wastepaper: Large...... 10.39 ...... Plate .33 Option: Aemote Alaskan whole crab: Flo a t ...... 14.42 .27 1 ...... 51 .30 1.50 Sm all ...... : ...... 13 Auto. glass tempering ...... 27 2.88 2 ...... 2.00 .30 5.88 Medium ...... 10 Auto. glass laminating ...... 5.58 .27 3 ...... 1.80 .30 5.29 Large ...... 07 Glass container mftg ...... 3.80 (1) Dungeness and tanner crab: 4 ...... 47 .30 1.38 Glass tubing ...... 2.76 Sm all .27 Paparboard from wastepaper: ...... 3.23 Television picture tuba ...... 8.56 .27 Option: Medium ...... 2.10 Incandescent lamp ...... 27 26.29 1 ...... 79 .30 1.80 Large ...... 1.47 Hand pressed and blown Non-remote shrimp: 2 ...... 1.84 .30 4.18 glass ...... (4) Sm all ...... 33 .27 3 ...... 1.05 .30 2.39 Medium ...... 25 .27 Meat products 4 ...... 79 .30 1.80 Large ...... 18 .27 Small processor ...... 0 .27 0 Wastepaper molded products: Remote Alaskan shrimp: Renderers ...... 0 .27 0 Option: Sm all ...... 27 1 ...... 64 .30 .51 .05 Phosphates M edium ...... 04 .27 2 ...... 2.85 .30 2.28 Large ...... 03 .27 Sodium phosphates ...... (') ) 3 1) 3 ...... 1.66 .30 1.33 Northern shrimp: Timber 4 ...... 55 .30 .44 Small ...... 05 .27 .24 .30 .15 Builders paper and roofing .27 Wet process hardboird ...... M edium ...... 04 .27 felt: Large...... 03 Pulp, paper, and paperboard Option: Southern-non-breaded shrimp: .27 Dissolving kraft: - 1 ...... 44 .30 2.32 Sm all ...... 07 .27 Option: 2 ...... 3.16 .30 16.6 M edium ...... 05 .27 2!...... 1.04 .30 11.8 3 ...... 1.30 .30 6.84 Large ...... 04 2 ...... 48 .30 5.3 4 ...... 51 .30 2.68 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 210 / Friday, October 29, 1982 / Proposed Rules 49201

Coma- industry Industry subcategory mental POTWl cost (per bench- ratio pound) mark'

(1) (2) (3)

Nonintegrted-Fine papers: Option: 1 ...... 37 .30 1.54 2 ...... 78 .30 3.25 3 ...... 68 .30 2.83 4 ...... 45 .30 1.96 Nonintegrated-Tissue papers: Option: 1...... 45 .30 1.45 2 ...... 5.62 .30 18.1 3 ...... 2.67 .30 8.61 4 ...... 1.56 .30 5.03 Nonintegrated-Ughtweight: Option: 1 ...... 83 .30 1.98 2 ...... 5.23 .30 12.4 3 ...... 2.58 .30 6.14 4 ...... 1.44 .30 3.43 Semi-Chemical: Option: 1 ...... 65 .30 1.76 2 ...... 54 .30 1.46 3 ...... 65 .30 1.76 4 ...... 1.02 .30 2.76 Unbleached Kraft and Semi- Chemical: Option: 1 ...... 42 .30 2.00 2 ...... 48 .30 2.29 3 ...... 49 .30 2.33 4 ...... 98 .30 4.67 Nonintegrated filter and non- woven papers: Option: I ...... 83 .30 .19 2 ...... 6.09 .30 1.39 3 ...... 3.33 .30 .76 4 ...... 1.44 .30 .33 Nonintegrated paperboard Option: 1 ...... 4.51 .30 11.6 2 ...... 14.63 .30 37.5 3 ...... 9.56 .30 24.5 4 ...... 3.45 .30 8.85 Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing Chlor-alkali-diaphragm cell. .53 .30 ...... Hydrofluoic acid ...... 32 .30 ...... Ore Mining and Dressing Iron ore ...... 27 .42 ...... Aluminum ore ...... 46 .42 ...... Radium, uranium, vanadium ore ...... 47 .42 ...... Titanium ore ...... 40 .42 ...... Tungsten ore ...... 37 .42 ...... Copper, lead, zinc, gold, silver, platinum, and molyb- denum ...... 34 .42 ...... Metal Finishing Metal finishing ...... 10.88...... 'No costs (except housekeeping) associated with meeting BAT. 'Not amenable to analysis. 3BAT technology applies to wastewater of wet-scrubbers only, costs and removals not available. 4 Costa unknown. *Minimal costs associated with meeting BAT. "Note: EPA reviewed all the cost data for the BCT guidelines. In some cases, the cost per pound figures changed from what appeared in the Federal Register on January 6, 1981 (46 FR 1430). 'The calculations presented here apply to both the Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories. 'The calculations presented here apply to the Blow Pit Wash, and Drum Wash Papergrade Sufite subcategories.

(FR Doc. 82-28780 Filed 10-28-82; 8:45 am] BILUNG CODE 6560-50-M