[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 117 (Friday, June 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37783-37788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15298]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-6717-5 ]
RIN 2040-AC20
Effluent Guidelines Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Effluent Guidelines Plan.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Section 304(m) of the Clean Water Act requires EPA to publish
an Effluent Guidelines Plan every two years. Today's notice describes
the Agency's ongoing effluent guidelines development efforts and
proposes EPA's plans for developing new and revised effluent
guidelines, which regulate industrial discharges to surface waters and
to publicly owned treatment works. The Agency requests comment on the
proposal and will publish a final plan after the comment period ends.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 17, 2000.
ADDRESSES: The public record for this notice is located in the EPA
Water Docket, Room EB 57 East Tower, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC
20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Lund, Engineering and Analysis
Division (4303), telephone 202-260-7811.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments and Record
Please send an original and 3 copies of your comments and
enclosures (including references) to Comment Clerk, Docket Number W-00-
14, Water Docket (MC4101), USEPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Comments must be received or post-marked by
midnight July 17, 2000.
Commenters who want EPA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
should enclose a self-addressed, stamped envelope. No facsimiles
(faxes) will be accepted. Comments may also be submitted electronically
to [email protected]. Electronic comments must be submitted as
an ASCII, WP5.1, WP6.1 or WP8 file that does not contain special
characters or encryption. Electronic comments must be identified by the
docket number W-00-14. You may also submit comments and data on disks
in WP 5.1, 6.1, 8 or ASCII file format, or electronically at many
online Federal Depository Libraries.
The public record for this notice has been established under docket
number W-00-14 and is available for review in the EPA Water Docket,
East Tower Basement, Room EB 57, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, D.C.
from 9 to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.
Please call 202/260-3027 to schedule an appointment to see docket
materials. The EPA public information regulation (40 CFR Part 2)
provides that a reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
Outline
I. Regulated Entities
II. Legal Authority
III. Introduction
IV. Effluent Guidelines Program Background
A. Legal Framework
B. Components of an Effluent Guideline Regulation
C. Effluent Guideline Regulations Promulgated Since the Last
304(m) Plan
1. Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
2. Industrial Laundries
3. Landfills and Commercial Hazardous Waste Combustors
V. Recent Improvements in the Development of Effluent Guideline
Regulations
VI. Today's Proposed Effluent Guidelines Plan
A. Rulemaking Activities Started in 1999
1. Meat Products
2. Aquaculture
B. Effluent Guidelines Currently Under Development
VII. Future Direction of the Effluent Guidelines Program
A. Targeting the Most Significant Environmental Problems
B. Targeting Industry Sectors That May Be Candidates for
Pollution Prevention and Multi-Media Rulemaking
C. Targeting Sources That are Difficult to Permit
D. Involving Stakeholders in the Year 2002 Section 304(m) Plan
VIII. Request for Comments
IX. Economic Impact Assessment; E.O. 128866
I. Regulated Entities
Today's proposed plan does not contain regulatory requirements.
Rather, it identifies industrial categories that EPA has already chosen
for new or revised effluent guidelines regulation and sets forth the
schedules for those rulemaking efforts. Entities that could be affected
by the forthcoming effluent limitations guidelines and standards
identified in this proposed plan are:
[[Page 37784]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category of Entity Examples of potentially affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry/Commercial/ Pulp, Paper and Paperboard; Synthetic-
Agriculture. Based Drilling Fluids (oil and gas
production); Centralized Waste
Treatment; Metal Products and Machinery
(including electroplating, metal
finishing); Transportation Equipment
Cleaning (truck tanks, railroad tank
cars, barge tanks); Iron and Steel
Manufacturing; Coal Mining; builders and
developers engaged in construction,
development, and redevelopment; Feedlots
(swine, poultry, dairy and beef cattle);
Aquaculture (fish hatcheries and farms);
Meat Products (slaughtering, rendering,
packing, and processing of red meat and
poultry).
Federal Government........... Metal Products and Machinery (including
electroplating, metal finishing);
builders and developers engaged in
construction, development, and
redevelopment.
State Government............. Metal Products and Machinery (including
electroplating, metal finishing);
builders and developers engaged in
construction, development, and
redevelopment.
Local Government............. Metal Products and Machinery (including
electroplating, metal finishing);
builders and developers engaged in
construction, development and
redevelopment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Legal Authority
Today's notice is published under the authority of section 304(m)
of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1314(m).
III. Introduction
Today's notice announces the Agency's proposed section 304(m) plan
for 2000, including the two new effluent guidelines regulations that
EPA started in 1999 (Meat Products and Aquaculture). Today's notice
also outlines a preliminary framework by which EPA, working with its
State partners, the regulated community, and concerned citizens, can
build upon the successes of its effluent guidelines program for the
next decade and beyond. EPA invites the public to comment on all
aspects of today's notice and particularly welcomes comments regarding
the ways in which EPA can use its effluent guidelines program to
achieve sustained environmental improvements.
With the 1972 passage of the landmark Clean Water Act, EPA was
charged with developing effluent limitations guidelines and standards
that would provide a minimum, technology-based threshold for ongoing
improvements in effluent quality. The legislative history of CWA
section 304(b), which is the heart of the effluent guidelines program,
describes the need to press toward higher levels of control through
research and development of new processes, modifications, replacement
of obsolete plans and processes, and other improvements in technology,
taking into account the cost of controls. See Statement of Senator
Muskie (Oct. 4, 1972), reprinted in Legislative History of the Clean
Water Act of 1972, at 170.
To date, EPA has promulgated effluent limitations guidelines for
more than 50 industrial categories affecting approximately 30,000
facilities that discharge directly to the Nation's waters. If EPA
includes pretreatment controls for sources that discharge into publicly
owned treatment works (POTWs), EPA's effluent limitations guidelines
and standards regulate the effluent from approximately 45,000
facilities. These technology-based regulations are responsible for
preventing the discharge of more than a billion pounds of priority
toxic pollutants each year. These toxic pollutants include chemicals
known to cause or contribute to cancer, hinder mental and motor
development in children, impact the central nervous system, and damage
major organs, such as the kidney and liver.
These regulations have helped to reverse the degradation of water
quality that accompanied industrialization in this country by reducing
the discharge of pollutants that kill or impair aquatic organisms,
degrade aquatic ecosystems, or cause human health problems through
ingestion of contaminated water, fish, or shellfish. Rivers that once
were impaired now sustain thriving ecosystems. Waterways once suitable
for little more than transportation are now valued recreational
resources, often leading to expanded tourism and increased value of
waterfront property.
These regulations have accomplished water quality improvements
through cost-effective control of pollutants. This in turn has allowed
growth and expansion of industry concurrent with an improved quality of
life for generations to come.
While EPA is very proud of these accomplishments, we recognize that
water quality problems have not been eliminated. Despite successes in
reducing water pollution, approximately 40 percent of the Nation's
waters assessed by the States and Tribes do not meet State or Tribal
water quality standards. In 1998, States identified more than 20,000
such waters in their section 303(d) lists of impaired waters,
comprising approximately 300,000 miles of impaired rivers and streams
and 7.9 million acres of lakes. The overwhelming majority of Americans
live within ten miles of a polluted waterbody. The pollutants most
frequently identified as causing water impairment are siltation, excess
nutrients, and harmful pathogens. Toxics pollutants (including metals,
mercury and pesticides) also contribute to water quality impairments.
As EPA establishes new or revised effluent limitations guidelines for
pollutants discharged by categories or classes of sources, we expect
that fewer waters will need additional water quality-related controls
to meet water quality standards.
As discussed in greater detail in Section VII below, EPA intends to
continue to use the effluent guidelines program to provide even greater
protection of human health and the environment. EPA expects that, from
1995 to 2005, the effluent guidelines program will prevent an
additional nine million pounds of priority toxic pollutants and 1.5
billion pounds of conventional and nonconventional pollutants from
entering the Nation's waters each year. EPA believes that most
stakeholders recognize the continuing role of effluent guidelines in
helping achieve the objectives of the Clean Water Act, although EPA
also recognizes that there are many paths. For this reason, EPA
believes it is critical to engage in an ongoing dialogue with the
interested public about the future role of the program. EPA intends
today's notice to start that dialogue.
IV. Effluent Guidelines Program Background
A. Legal Framework
The Clean Water Act directs EPA to promulgate effluent limitations
guidelines and standards that, for most pollutants, reflect the level
of pollutant control achievable by the best available technologies
economically achievable for categories or subcategories of industrial
point sources. See CWA sections 301(b)(2), 304(b), 306, 307(b) and
307(c). For point sources that
[[Page 37785]]
introduce pollutants directly into the Nation's waters (i.e., direct
dischargers), the limitations and standards promulgated by EPA are
implemented in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permits. See CWA sections 301(a), 301(b) and 402. For sources that
discharge to POTWs (i.e., indirect dischargers), EPA promulgates
pretreatment standards that apply directly to those sources and are
enforced by POTWs backed by State and Federal authorities. See CWA
sections 307(b) and (c).
Section 304(m) requires EPA to publish a plan every two years that
consists of three elements. First, under section 304(m)(1)(A), EPA is
required to establish a schedule for the annual review and revision of
existing effluent guidelines in accordance with section 304(b). Section
304(b) applies to effluent limitations guidelines for direct
dischargers and requires EPA to revise such regulations as appropriate.
Second, under section 304(m)(1)(B), EPA must identify categories of
sources discharging toxic or nonconventional pollutants for which EPA
has not published effluent limitations guidelines under 304(b)(2) or
new source performance standards (NSPS) under section 306. Finally,
under 304(m)(1)(C), EPA must establish a schedule for the promulgation
of effluent limitations guidelines under 304(b)(2) and NSPS for the
categories identified under subparagraph (B) not later than three years
after being identified in the 304(m) plan. Section 304(m) does not
apply to pretreatment standards for indirect dischargers, which EPA
promulgates pursuant to sections 307(b) and 307(c) of the Clean Water
Act.
On October 30, 1989, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., and
Public Citizen, Inc., filed an action against EPA in which they
alleged, among other things, that EPA had failed to comply with CWA
section 304(m). Plaintiffs and EPA agreed to a settlement of that
action in a consent decree entered on January 31, 1992. The consent
decree, which has been modified several times, established a schedule
by which EPA is to propose and take final action for eleven point
source categories identified by name in the decree, see Consent Decree,
pars. 2(a) and 4(a), and for eight other point source categories
identified only as new or revised rules, numbered 5 through 12, see
Consent Decree par. 5(a).
The schedule has been modified several times since 1992. The last
date for EPA action under the decree, as modified, is June 2004. The
decree also established deadlines for EPA to complete studies of eight
identified and three unidentified point source categories. See Consent
Decree, par. 3(a). The decree further provides that the foregoing
requirements shall be set forth in EPA's section 304(m) plans. See
Consent Decree, pars. 3(a), 4(a), 5(a). Under the decree, EPA is
directed to use the studies as well as other available information to
select the eight point source categories for which EPA has agreed to
issue new or revised rules under paragraph 5(a). Finally, the consent
decree provides that section 304(m) plans issued subsequent to the
decree that are consistent with its terms shall satisfy EPA's
obligations under section 304(m) with respect to the publication of
such plans. See Consent Decree, par. 7(b).
The decree also required EPA to establish an Effluent Guidelines
Task Force to make recommendations for improvements to the effluent
guidelines program. See Consent Decree, par. 8. EPA did so in 1992. The
Task Force, which was created to offer advice to the EPA Administrator
on a process for expediting the promulgation of effluent guidelines,
among other topics, consists of members appointed by the Agency from
industry, citizen groups, state and local governments, the academic and
scientific communities, and EPA's Office of Research and Development.
The Task Force has held several public meetings each year since 1992
and has submitted recommendations to the EPA Administrator.
B. Components of an Effluent Guideline Regulation
The principal components of most effluent guideline regulations are
numerical wastewater discharge limitations controlling specified
pollutants for a given industrial point source category or subcategory.
These are typically concentration-based limits (specified in units such
as milligrams of pollutant per liter of water) or production-based mass
limits (specified in units such as milligrams of pollutant per unit of
production). Numerical limits also cover parameters such as pH and
temperature.
When developing an effluent guideline regulation, EPA often
subcategorizes an industrial category based on differences in raw
materials, manufacturing processes, characteristics of the wastewaters,
or type of product manufactured. Sometimes, EPA establishes
subcategories based on economic impacts, non-water quality
environmental impacts or other appropriate factors that justify the
imposition of specialized requirements on facilities in segments of an
industry. Typically, EPA develops a set of effluent limitations for
each category, subcategory or segment.
In some cases, a regulation may prescribe Best Management Practices
(BMPs) in addition to or in lieu of numerical limits. BMPs may include,
for example, requirements addressing the minimization or prevention of
storm water runoff, plant maintenance schedules, and requirements
addressing the training of plant personnel. See, e.g., 40 CFR 430.03
(BMPs for portions of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard category).
C. Effluent Guideline Regulations Promulgated Since the Last 304(m)
Plan
In addition to the Airport Deicing Preliminary Study, which EPA
completed in December 1999, EPA completed the following regulatory
efforts since the last 304(m) plan:
1. Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
The Administrator published a final rule for the Pharmaceutical
Manufacturing Category in the Federal Register on September 21, 1998
(63 FR 50387).
2. Industrial Laundries
The Administrator published a final decision in the Federal
Register on August 18, 1999 (64 FR 45071) with respect to the proposed
industrial laundries industry effluent guideline. In that notice, the
Administrator announced the Agency's decision not to promulgate
effluent limitations guidelines and standards for that industrial
category.
3. Landfills and Commercial Hazardous Waste Combustors
The Administrator published final rules for the Landfills industry
in the Federal Register on January 19, 2000 (65 FR 3007), and for the
Commercial Hazardous Waste Combustors industry on January 24, 2000 (65
FR 4360).
V. Recent Improvements in the Development of Effluent Guideline
Regulations
EPA has accumulated a great deal of experience and expertise in the
course of preparing more than 50 effluent guidelines. Since the last
304(m) Plan was announced in 1998, EPA has made significant progress in
expediting effluent guideline development. For many of the effluent
guidelines underway, EPA is in the process of revising existing
regulations to address specific environmental issues. In many of these
instances, EPA is focusing on the segments of the industry most
pertinent to those environmental issues
[[Page 37786]]
and is collecting data on pollutants of greatest concern.
In turn, these focused efforts make it possible for EPA, in several
cases, to use existing data instead of requiring regulated entities to
respond to detailed questionnaires. Greater involvement of other
government agencies, other offices within EPA, industry, equipment
vendors, and environmental interest groups is crucial to the success of
this approach. For several rules, including the effluent guidelines for
the Synthetic-Based Drilling Fluids (Oil and Gas Production) category
and the Metal Products and Machinery category, stakeholders expressed
an interest in submitting sampling data for EPA's consideration. The
Office of Water worked with these stakeholders in order to ensure that
the information they submitted met EPA's data quality needs.
The Office of Water also adopted an approach that has been
successfully used in many instances by the Office of Air and Radiation.
This approach, sometimes called the ``presumptive'' approach, involves
the early identification of one technology option through a combination
of stakeholder involvement and early analysis of available information.
This approach is particularly useful for those industry sectors for
which relatively few technologies have been identified or implemented.
As a result, EPA is significantly expediting the proposal of
regulations. On average, this means that EPA now issues its proposed
regulations approximately 30 months from the start of the process,
compared to the traditional 60 month schedule that was common in
earlier years of the program.
VI. Today's Proposed Effluent Guidelines Plan
A. Rulemaking Activities Started in 1999
EPA has learned that States and Regions have a strong interest in
EPA promulgating new or revised regulations to address nutrient
loadings. The new selections reflect the Agency's desire to reduce
nutrient loadings and improve the quality of our Nation's waters.
1. Meat Products
This industry includes approximately 1,300 packing plants, 1,100
plants that perform ``further processing'' of meats, 270 rendering
facilities, and 370 poultry processing facilities. Although guidelines
for the control of water pollution from these facilities were
established in the mid-1970's, those regulations do not include
controls on nutrients. Moreover, no guidelines of any kind were
promulgated for the poultry sector. Some of these facilities contribute
nutrient loadings in environmentally sensitive areas. Improvements in
waste treatment to control nutrients and pathogens are available, but
changes in industry practices to increase food safety, health, and
sanitation concerns may affect the design and cost of those controls.
2. Aquaculture
The Aquaculture category includes close to 5,000 facilities (both
land-based and marine-based) with locations in every state and in
Puerto Rico. It is currently the fastest growing segment of U.S.
agriculture. EPA produced a guidance document for the control of
wastewater from fish hatcheries and farms in 1977, but no national
effluent limitations guidelines have ever been promulgated for this
industry.
Some aquaculture facilities contribute nutrients and pathogens to
environmentally sensitive areas such as the Gulf of Mexico, the
Chesapeake Bay, and other estuaries, rivers, lakes, and streams
throughout the country. Improvements in wastewater treatment within the
Aquaculture category have been used by some facilities to reduce the
pollutant load. EPA's regulatory development will consider the
availability and affordability of effluent limits based on these
wastewater treatment technologies. EPA will develop regulatory options
that apply to the following types of aquatic animal production: ponds,
net pens (including pens in open waters), raceways, and recirculating
systems. EPA will consider establishing limitations to control
nutrients, total suspended solids, human and non-human pathogens,
antibiotics, pesticides, and biological impairments due to the
introduction of non-native species.
B. Effluent Guidelines Currently Under Development
The status of the regulations for new or revised effluent
guidelines are set forth in Table 1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Federal Register Cite/Proposal Date Final action date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transportation Equipment Cleaning......... 63 FR 34685 (June 25, 1998)............... 6/15/00
Centralized Waste Treatment............... 60 FR 5464 (January 27, 1995);............ 8/31/00
64 FR 2279 (January 13, 1999).............
Synthetic-Based Drilling Fluids (Oil and 64 FR 5487 (February 3, 1999)............. 12/00
Gas Production).
Coal Mining............................... 65 FR 19439 (April 11, 2000).............. 12/01
Iron and Steel Manufacturing.............. 10/00..................................... 4/02
Metal Products and Machinery, Phases I and 60 FR 28209 (May 30, 1995)--Phase I only; 12/02
II. 10/00 (Phase I and II).
Construction and Development.............. * 12/00................................... * 12/02
Feedlots (Poultry, Swine, Beef, and Dairy 12/15/00.................................. 12/15/02
Subcategories).
Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard, Phases 2 & 3. 58 FR 66078 (December 17, 1993)........... 2000-2002
Meat Products............................. 12/01..................................... 12/03
Aquaculture............................... 6/30/02................................... 6/30/04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* EPA is discussing extensions to Consent Decree dates with NRDC
VII. Future Direction of the Effluent Guidelines Program
The effluent guidelines program is one of EPA's most successful
environmental protection programs. EPA develops performance standards
based on demonstrated technologies that are affordable for industry as
a whole. Supported by sound data and analysis, the effluent guidelines
program strives for the greatest pollutant reductions that can be
economically achieved within the regulated community. In setting
performance standards, EPA considers pollution prevention approaches in
addition to more traditional treatment technologies, with the result
that the air and soil also benefit from wastewater regulations.
Moreover, this program gives the regulated community considerable
flexibility in achieving the performance standards. Thus, dischargers
are encouraged to develop less expensive alternatives to comply with
the performance standards than those
[[Page 37787]]
identified by the Agency. Invariably, the more cost-effective
technologies and processes often become the industry norm--in this way
yielding even greater environmental results at lower cost than
contemplated by the regulation itself.
In the future, the effluent guidelines program will evolve to face
new challenges. New or revised effluent guidelines can help solve the
serious water quality problems still remaining in the Nation's
waterways, which are most frequently caused by excess nutrients,
sedimentation, pathogens, metals, and toxic pollutants. Also, more
stringent levels of pollution reduction are now economically achievable
in some industrial categories or subcategories due to the emergence of
new or innovative pollution control technologies. To help plan for the
future, EPA intends to use the section 304(m) planning process
established by the Clean Water Act to expand its dialogue with the
interested public regarding how to use the effluent guidelines program
to achieve the greatest environmental benefits.
As discussed above, section 304(m)(1) requires EPA every two years
to identify industry categories for new or revised regulations and to
establish a schedule for final action on those rules. Consistent with
the consent decree pertaining to section 304(m), EPA discharged this
duty in December 1999 when it identified Aquaculture and Meat Products
as categories for new effluent guidelines and established schedules for
those rules. The 2000 section 304(m) plan will report that action. Now,
EPA is beginning the process for developing its section 304(m) plan for
the year 2002.
As EPA looks forward to the 2002 section 304(m) plan, selection
criteria will be critical. Based on recommendations of the Effluent
Guidelines Task Force, EPA has identified criteria for selecting
categories for new or revised effluent guidelines. These include
categories with potential multi-media impacts that may be candidates
for coordinated rulemakings and categories that cause environmental
impacts.
In order to apply these selection criteria, EPA needs to assemble
information for numerous industrial categories. Possible information
sources are discussed below.
A. Targeting the Most Significant Environmental Problems
EPA identified three currently available sources of information to
help determine the most significant environmental problems. First,
EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics has developed a risk
model called ``Risk Screening Environmental Indicators'' (RSEI). This
model can be used to perform screening-level analyses of the potential
risk-related impacts associated with releases reported in the Toxic
Release Inventory. Many of the sources modeled to have the highest risk
to water are in one of the metals industries, such as the Iron and
Steel industry or the Metal Products and Machinery industry, for which
effluent limitations guidelines development or revision is already
underway. Second, pursuant to section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and
EPA's implementing regulations, States must list waters that do not
meet applicable water quality standards after application of
technology-based and other controls. These section 303(d) lists
identify the pollutants and the source categories that may be
responsible for the water quality impairments. Third, pursuant to
section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act, States report the quality of
their waters every two years. The source categories reported as the
cause of impairment in these reports are consistent with those listed
under section 303(d).
EPA notes that there is no overlap between the categories ranking
highest using the RSEI risk model and the categories listed by the
States as contributing to siltation, nutrients, and pathogens. This
finding is not particularly surprising because the assessment factors
differ, e.g., chronic human health impacts in the case of the RSEI risk
model, in contrast to emphases on aquatic ecosystem health as well as
other designated use impairments, in the case of the section 303(d)
lists and 305(b) reports.
B. Targeting Industry Sectors That May Be Candidates for Pollution
Prevention and Multi-Media Rulemaking
Through its sector-based activities, such as the Common Sense
Initiative, EPA recognizes that addressing all environmental concerns
from an industry sector concurrently can improve pollution prevention,
resulting in better environmental results at lower cost than addressing
the environmental releases one media at a time. EPA's Task Force on
Coordinated Rulemaking, which was created to identify and initiate
sector-based rulemakings that would benefit from a cross-Agency, multi-
program coordinated effort, is one attempt to capitalize on this
concept. The Task Force on Coordinated Rulemaking is one potential
source of information on possible sectors for future effluent guideline
development.
Another potential source is EPA's Integrated Urban Strategy of the
National Air Toxics Program. Although this strategy presents a
framework for reducing air toxics (i.e., hazardous air pollutants) in
urban areas, many of the sources that have been identified contribute
pollutants to the water environment as well. The link between
wastewater treatment and air emissions, like the link between air
emission treatment and wastewater, may point to a coordinated approach
for addressing the highest risk sources.
C. Targeting Sources That are Difficult to Permit
Effluent limitations guidelines establish nationally applicable
standards that are implemented through NPDES discharge permits issued
by authorized States and Tribes or EPA. In the absence of these
regulations, permit writers must determine technology-based limitations
using their best professional judgment. Our State and Tribal regulatory
partners are some of the best sources of information about the adequacy
and coverage of existing effluent limitations guidelines. States and
Tribes have helped to identify many of the sectors for which effluent
guidelines are currently being developed or revised.
D. Involving Stakeholders in the Year 2002 Section 304(m) Plan
To help prepare the year 2002 section 304(m) plan, EPA plans to
engage all interested parties in a dialogue about how to make the
section 304(m) planning process succeed--and how to define success. The
Agency has already launched the dialogue through discussions with the
Effluent Guidelines Task Force, whose membership reflect a variety of
stakeholder viewpoints. Based on those discussions, EPA proposes and
solicits public comment regarding the following planning strategy.
First, EPA intends to seek the views of as many interested persons
as possible, with particular emphasis on individuals and organizations
associated with industry, environmental interest groups, and State,
Tribal and local governments. EPA expects to explore issues associated
with the future and objectives of the effluent guidelines program and
criteria EPA should employ in selecting among industry categories for
possible new or revised effluent guidelines regulations. EPA also hopes
to gather specific information regarding pollution problems and
possible sources that will allow EPA to make its selection decisions
for the coming years.
EPA intends to reach out to interested stakeholders primarily by
attending and where possible participating in meetings
[[Page 37788]]
and conferences sponsored by members of these communities, as well as
through its website (http://www.epa.gov/ost) and less formal meetings.
Members of the Effluent Guidelines Task Force have also agreed to
assist EPA in this outreach effort. At this point, EPA envisions that
this outreach will culminate in a one or two day highly focused
national meeting of interested stakeholders in early December 2000 for
the purpose of discussing how EPA can best use the effluent guidelines
program to advance the Nation's most important water pollution
problems, including a discussion of selection criteria and information
sources. EPA also intends to discuss whether EPA's procedures for
implementing the requirements of CWA section 304(m), including the
process for selecting industrial categories for new or revised effluent
guidelines, should be codified in federal regulations. The Effluent
Guidelines Task Force has expressed preliminary support for such a
regulation.
Next, assuming that there is support for EPA to develop a
regulation to implement section 304(m), EPA would hope to propose such
a regulation for public comment in May 2001. EPA expects that the
content of the regulation would be greatly influenced by the
discussions at the national stakeholders meeting. The Effluent
Guidelines Task Force has indicated its willingness to work with EPA in
developing any such proposed section 304(m) regulation. If EPA proposes
a section 304(m) regulation, EPA also envisions proposing for public
comment at the same time its section 304(m) plan for 2002. In this
scenario, EPA expects that the proposed plan would apply the principles
set forth in the accompanying proposed section 304(m) regulation,
thereby giving the public an opportunity to evaluate the proposed
regulation in terms of how EPA would apply it.
Finally, EPA intends to issue a final section 304(m) plan in
February 2002. Again assuming that EPA proceeds with the regulation,
EPA hopes to promulgate at the same time a final regulation to guide
EPA in implementing section 304(m) for the future.
VIII. Request for Comments
EPA invites public comment on today's proposed plan and most
particularly on the section 304(m) planning strategy described
immediately above. The Agency will accept comments until July 17, 2000.
In particular, the Agency wants to learn about other sources of data
that would help it compare wastestream characteristics, treatment
practices, and effects on water quality among different discharger
categories. EPA also requests comments on methodologies by which the
Agency, together with our regulatory partners, technology experts, and
other stakeholders, can annually review the applicability and potential
economic impacts of technological advances on industries regulated by
effluent guidelines. EPA also requests comment on potential
methodologies for identifying categories of sources discharging toxic
or nonconventional pollutants for which effluent limitations guidelines
under 304(b)(2) and NSPS have not been published.
IX. Economic Impact Assessment; Executive Order 12866
Today's notice proposes a plan for the review and revision of
existing effluent guidelines and for the selection of priority
industries for new regulations. This notice is not a ``rule'' subject
to 5 U.S.C. 553 and does not establish any requirements; therefore, EPA
has not prepared an economic impact assessment. EPA will provide
economic impact analyses, regulatory flexibility analyses or regulatory
impact assessments, as appropriate, for all of the future effluent
guideline rulemakings developed by the Agency.
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and, therefore, subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this plan is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is
therefore not subject to OMB review.
Dated: June 2, 2000.
Dana D. Minerva,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Water.
[FR Doc. 00-15298 Filed 6-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P