Federal Register, Volume 66 Issue 50 (Wednesday, March 14, 2001)

[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 14, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14988-14999]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-6175]

[[Page 14987]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Modification of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) General Permit for the Eastern Portion of the Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) of the Gulf of Mexico (GMG280000); Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2001 /
Notices

[[Page 14988]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-6944-5]

Final Modification of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for the Eastern Portion of
the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) of the Gulf of Mexico (GMG280000)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final modification of NPDES general permit for the
Eastern Portion of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) of the Gulf of
Mexico (GMG2800000).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Regional Administrator (RA) of EPA, Region 4 (Region 4),
is today providing notice of final modification of the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general permit for the
OCS of the Gulf of Mexico (General Permit No. GMG280000) for discharges
in the Offshore Subcategory of the Oil and Gas Extraction Point Source
Category (40 CFR part 435, subpart A) as authorized by section 402 of
the Clean Water Act (``CWA'' or the ``Act''), 33 U.S.C. 1342. The
existing general permit, issued by Region 4, and published at 63 FR
55718, October 16, 1998, authorizes discharges from exploration,
development, and production facilities located in and discharging to
all Federal waters of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico seaward of the outer
boundary of the territorial seas.
This permit modification is in accordance with a settlement entered
into by EPA with various parties which filed a petition for review of
the October 16, 1998, general permit in the Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals under the caption Marathon Oil Company et al. v. Browner, Civ.
99-60090. After the permit was issued, and aside from other provisions
within the permit which specify that any operator authorized by the
permit may request to be excluded from coverage and receive an
individual permit pursuant to 40 CFR 122.28(a)(4)(iii), EPA determined
that the method for calculating effluent limitations and monitoring
requirements for produced water discharges that appear as part I.B.3 in
the permit are not appropriate for coverage under a general permit in
the manner set forth in the October 16, 1998, general permit. The
intent of this modification is to establish a table of critical
dilution concentrations for use in determining toxicity limitations.
Those permittees that have produced water discharges that would fall
outside of the limits of the modified permit may use a diffuser to
achieve allowable critical dilution concentrations, or to apply for and
receive individual NPDES permits.
The following provides notice of the final modification of the
general permit including responses to comments. Modifications include:
changing the general permit numerical designation; requiring permittees
to indicate what type of effluents the facility is expected to
discharge within the written notification of intent; allowing approval
of a shorter notice to drill (NTD) notification period in certain
circumstances; inclusion of a new table to be used by those permittees
discharging produced water to calculate the critical dilution
concentration, or the option of using a diffuser to increase mixing;
and the addition of limitations and monitoring requirements for those
permittees discharging chemically treated freshwater or seawater or
condensation as a result of production processes. Any operator seeking
coverage under the general permit may be subject to some or all of the
modifications.
Finally, EPA also is providing today some additional clarifications
and minor corrections of existing general permit language based upon
questions and comments received by the Agency subsequent to the
original permit issuance and draft modification. This revision is
discussed in detail later in this document.

DATES: This general permit modification shall become effective on March
14, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The complete administrative record is available from the
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4; Freedom of
Information Officer; Atlanta Federal Center; 61 Forsyth St. S.W.;
Atlanta, GA 30303-3104. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. William Truman, Environmental
Scientist, telephone number (404) 562-9457, or at the following
address: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4; Water
Management Division; NPDES and Biosolids Permits Section; Atlanta
Federal Center; 61 Forsyth Street S.W.; Atlanta, GA 30303.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. Coverage of General Permit
III. Changes from the August 8, 2000 Proposed General Permit
Modifications (65 FR 48503)
IV. Summary of Responses to Comments on the Proposed Permit
V. Cost Estimate
VI. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.

I. Introduction

In 1972, section 301(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(also referred to as the Clean Water Act) was amended to provide that
the discharge of any pollutants to waters of the United States (U.S.)
from any point source is unlawful, except if the discharge is in
compliance with an NPDES permit.
On October 16, 1998 (63 FR 55718), Region 4, issued a general
permit for discharges of pollutants from exploration, development, and
production facilities located in all Federal waters of the Eastern Gulf
of Mexico seaward of the outer boundary of the territorial seas. The
previous permit (July 9, 1986, reissued by Region 4 in 1991) was issued
jointly by Region 4 and Region 6. Region 6 subsequently, reissued a
permit in 1992 and 1999 for the Western Portion of the Outer
Continental Shelf (Western Planning Area).
For consistency, Region 4, developed a permit similar to those
issued by Region 6, taking into account any site-specific
considerations. Both Regions adopted the same method of determining
produced water toxicity limitations using the Cornell Mixing Zone
Expert System (CORMIX) to calculate critical dilutions. However,
information from the vast number of operating facilities in the Western
Planning Area as compared to the relatively few operating facilities in
the Eastern Planning Area, enabled Region 6 to develop model input
parameters based upon information from a large number of operating
facilities. Region 6 also was able to develop a series of critical
dilution tables based upon this information and critical dilution
tables for a large segment of potential permittees were developed and
included within the Region 6 general permit.
In this modification, EPA is publishing critical dilution tables as
part of the general permit, such as those used in Region 6's general
permit. Due to the fact that fewer than 30 produced water dischargers
exist in Region 4's permit coverage area, Region 4 elected to model the
toxicity limitations using the range of data gathered from the
operators within this area. Region 4 believes this approach will
include all the expected permittees and will avoid the significant
resource demands that would have been required to support a

[[Page 14989]]

critical dilution table for the ranges used by Region 6. The derivation
of critical dilution tables on the scale of those developed by Region 6
would have required over 200 runs of the CORMIX model just to generate
ranges that take into account the variations in discharge flow rate,
discharge pipe diameter, and distance from the pipe to the sea floor.
Currently, EPA is unaware of any facilities in Region 4's area which
fall outside of the critical dilution tables in today's final general
permit. The small number of potential permittees did not justify the
expenditure of available resources to produce numerous tables.
EPA, Region 4, has modified this general permit by including a
critical dilution table comparable to those utilized by the Region 6
general permit. In accordance with 40 CFR 122.28(3)(i) and (c)(1), any
owner or operator with a facility with produced water effluent will be
required to meet the critical dilution values within the limits of the
modified permit, or to apply for and obtain an individual permit in
order to discharge into U.S. waters. Existing discharges of produced
water shall continue to be authorized under the administratively
extended 1986 general permit, if an individual permit application is
received within 120 days of the effective date of the permit
modification. The 1986 general permit coverage shall automatically
terminate on the date final action is taken on the individual NPDES
permit application.
Additionally, EPA has received numerous requests from the regulated
community regarding the need of a NPDES permit for the discharge of
fluids used in the hydrostatic testing of pipelines. These fluids
primarily consist of seawater, biocides, corrosion inhibiting solvents
(CIS), and other treatment chemicals. The Region 6 general permit
addresses this activity under miscellaneous discharges with prescribed
limits on chemical concentration and toxicity. For consistency, Region
4, has modified the general permit to include effluent limitations and
monitoring requirements for chemically treated seawater and freshwater.
EPA, Region 4, will include an additional requirement for
submitting an Notice of Intent (NOI). Under paragraph (4), part I.4.,
Notification Requirements (Existing Sources and New Sources), the
permittee shall provide information on the types of discharges expected
along with data regarding outfall locations.
In addition, to further distinguish permits issued under this
general permit from those previously issued by Regions 4 and 6, Region
4 proposes to modify the general permit number to include an alpha
character in the 6th position. Permit coverage has been assigned as
GMG28A001-A999, GMG28B001-B999, GMG28C001-C999, etc. The permit numbers
for operations currently covered by this permit will change to reflect
the new system.

II. Coverage of General Permit

Section 301(a) of the CWA provides that the discharge of pollutants
is unlawful, except in accordance with the terms of an NPDES permit.
The EPA has determined that oil and gas facilities seaward of the 200
meter water depth in certain parts of the Eastern Portion of the Gulf
of Mexico as described in the NPDES general permit are more
appropriately controlled by a separate general permit, individual
permits, or both, 40 CFR 122.28(c). This determination covers both
existing sources and new sources. This decision is based on the Federal
regulations at 40 CFR 122.28, 40 CFR part 125 (Subpart M--Ocean
Discharge Criteria); the Environmental Impact Statement; and the
Agency's previous decisions in other areas of the Gulf of Mexico's OCS.
As in the case of individual permits, noncompliance with any condition
of a general permit constitutes an enforceable violation of the Act
under section 309 of the Act.
With this permit modification, all lease blocks with operating
facilities discharging produced water are required to meet the critical
dilution limitations allowed under the modified permit, or to apply for
and obtain individual permits in order to discharge into waters of the
U.S. This notice will also clarify and correct certain aspects of the
general permit issued on October 16, 1998.

III. Changes From the August 8, 2000 Proposed General Permit
Modifications (65 FR 48503)

Permittees are now required to submit a NTD within
fourteen (14) days after the drilling rig moves on location.
Produced water toxicity limitation calculation is further
clarified. Produced water discharges must meet the limiting permissible
concentration (LPC) at the edge of a 100 meter mixing zone. The LPC is
defined as 0.1 times the LC50. The LPC must be equal to or
greater than the predicted effluent concentration at the edge of a 100
meter mixing zone. Predicted effluent concentrations, referred to as
``Critical Dilutions,'' are presented in Table 4- and Table 4-A for a
range of discharge rates and pipe diameters.
Permittees wishing to increase mixing may use a diffuser
to meet critical dilution limitations. Permittees shall submit a
certification that the diffuser, seawater addition, or multiple
discharge ports has been installed and state the critical dilution and
corresponding LC50 in the certification. The CORMIX2 model
runs shall be retained by the permittee as part of its NPDES records.
The 403(c) Reopener clause has been deleted.
The critical dilutions for toxicity limitations for the
discharge of freshwater and seawater to which chemicals have been added
shall be determined using Tables 5-A or 5-B. These tables were in the
preamble, but omitted from the draft permit modification.
Species and test methods for performing the required
toxicity test for chemically treated freshwater and saltwater has been
added.
Two new definitions have been added to Part IV.B., for
condensation water and Eastern Portion of the Gulf of Mexico. The
numbering of the definitions was also corrected.

IV. Summary of Responses to Comments on the Proposed Permit

Public notice of the draft permit modification was published at 65
FR 48503 (August 8, 2000) with a notice to consider holding public
hearings on the Region's proposal, if requests for such hearings were
received. No requests for public hearings were received. Copies of
comments received during this action from interested parties have been
considered in a formulation of a final determination regarding Region
4's final action today on the modification of NPDES Permit No.
GMG280000. A summary of the permit related comments are summarized
below.

Summary of Permit Preamble Related Comments

Comment 1: Commenter makes numerous comments in regards to the
addition of chemically treated freshwater and seawater to the category
of ``Miscellaneous Discharges.''
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's editorial comment and has
made the corresponding revision to the preamble in the permit.

Summary of Permit Modification Related Comments

Comment 2: Commenter has stated that there may be a confusion of
terms regarding the use of Western, Central, and Eastern Planning
Areas, and the Western and Eastern Gulf of Mexico. The Planning Areas
are Mineral Management Service (MMS) planning tools for lease sales and
do not have the

[[Page 14990]]

same notation as the Eastern and Western Gulf.
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's editorial comment and has
added a definition to the permit to avoid any confusion. Region 4's
operational jurisdiction, the Eastern Portion of the Gulf of Mexico, is
the Federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico seaward of the territorial
seas of Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.
Comment 3: Commenter denotes that certain information regarding the
history of the general permit and continued permit coverage, though
discussed in the preamble, is not included in the permit. The proposed
language is suggested: Authorization to Discharge Under the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
``In accordance with 40 CFR 122.28(b)(3)(i) and (c)(1), any owner
or operator with a facility with produced water effluent are required
to meet the critical dilution values within the limits of the table, or
to apply for and obtain an individual permit in order to discharge into
U.S. waters. Existing discharges of produced water shall continue to be
authorized under the administratively extended 1986 general permit, if
an individual permit application is received within 120 days of the
effective date of the permit modification. The 1986 general permit
coverage shall automatically terminate on the date final action is
taken on the individual NPDES permit application.''
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested wording for the
permit regarding the background of the general permit. EPA has revised
the language of the permit accordingly.
Comment 4: Regarding the new permit coverage numbering convention,
the following clarification language is suggested:
``The new numbering convention is, e.g., GMG28A001-A999, GMG28B001-
B999, GMG28C001-C999, etc. For all notices of general permit coverage
provided since the effective date of the November 16,1998 permit,
GMG280xxx and GMG289xxx designations shall be changed to GMG28Axxx. The
last three digits of the assigned permit number will remain the same.''
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested wording for the
permit regarding the numbering for general permit coverage. EPA has
revised the language of the permit accordingly.
Comment 5: Stated that EPA should change its proposed
identification system and use American Petroleum Institute (API) and
MMS coding system. Stated that MMS will be analyzing Discharge
Monitoring Reports (DMR) as part of its initiatives to meet the
requirements of Government and Performance Results Act and to take full
advantage of the DMR information submitted to EPA, we ask that
operators link discharge information to discharge locations by using
API and MMS codes.
Response: The current structure of EPA data fields does not allow
the Region the flexibility to implement the American Petroleum
Institute/Minerals Management Service numbers and currently are not
amenable to change.
Comment 6: Commenter states that the site-specific NOI requirements
dealing with bottom surveys are inappropriate for a general permit and
should apply only in limited areas.
Response: EPA believes that in order to provide adequate protection
to the marine environment, site-specific information is needed to
determine the types of communities and habitats present at the site of
discharge. EPA also believes that requiring individual permitting in
order to obtain such information is unnecessarily time consuming and
burdensome. EPA agrees that information exists for some areas of
biological concern to predetermine their locations. However, because
only a small proportion of the seafloor within either the Central or
Eastern Planning Areas have been adequately surveyed, EPA believes that
it cannot be said, with absolute certainty that other areas requiring
more stringent discharge requirements do not exist. We feel that there
is sufficient potential for the existence of important biological
communities in, as of yet, unexplored areas.
Comment 7: Commenter states that in the submittal of the NOI, the
location of the ``outfalls'' should be changed to ``facility,'' and the
added requirement for identifying ``expected discharges'' be deleted.
By the nature of general permit coverage all listed discharges are
permitted.
Response: EPA agrees that coverage under the general permit allows
a permittee to utilize all listed discharges, however, some of the
operations will not have a discharge for some of the listed wastewater
sources. Also, this information will assist EPA in the review of DMR
data for ``specific discharges.'' EPA believes that the information
regarding expected discharges may be useful in future studies regarding
water quality of the Eastern Portion of the Gulf of Mexico and that the
request does not present an undo burden on the permittee. EPA agrees
with the commenter's statement about the change in location data from
``outfall'' to ``facility.''
Comment 8: In discussing the flexibility in placement of a surface
location, both 500 feet and 500 meters are used. The commenter wants to
know if the difference in units is correct or a typographical error.
Response: A final surface location should be within 500 meters of
the proposed surface location. An additional photodocumentation survey
is not required, provided the final location is within 500 meters of an
area previously surveyed. The difference in units was a typographical
error.
Comment 9: Commenter states that in submitting an NOI on a non-
operational or newly acquired lease, an Exploration Plan, Development
and Production Plan, or Development Operations Coordination Document
should be first submitted to MMS.
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's editorial comment and
will revise the language in Part I.A.4. accordingly.
Comment 10: Clarification is provided regarding permit transfers,
but not included in the permit modification. Suggested language should
replace Part II.D.3. of the general permit:
``Should any new owner or operator notify EPA prior to the transfer
of operatorship, no additional NOI documentation need be submitted.
If the facility remains operational, then the NOI by the new
operator should reference the previously submitted NOI, EPA's
authorization to proceed, and the assigned permit number. EPA will then
provide the new operator a notice of inclusion and a newly assigned
permit number.''
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter and will provide language
for the permit regarding the notification of a transfer.
Comment 11: MMS no longer requires a photodocumentation survey in
the Central Planning Area in water depths less than 100 meters. MMS
still requires this documentation in the Eastern Planning Area.
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's editorial comment and has
made the corresponding revision of Part I.A.4(11) in the permit.
Comment 12: The NTD is provided to make EPA aware that drilling
activity is taking place. Providing notice to EPA 14 days after the
drilling rig moves on location provides EPA the information they need
while eliminating the 60-day administrative burden caused by changing
rig schedules.
Response: EPA understands the variations in rig schedules and
unforeseen conditions that may prevent previous notification of a
drilling rig's move-on date. EPA agrees with the

[[Page 14991]]

commenter's suggested wording for the permit regarding the NTD and will
revise the language of the permit accordingly.
Comment 13: The commenter would like to reduce the amount of
paperwork needed regarding the re-notification process for continued
coverage under the general permit after it's expiration.
Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter's suggested wording. As
with individual NPDES permits, EPA has determined that continued
coverage under an expired general permit, if it has not been reissued
before its expiration date, can only be granted if another NOI is
submitted prior to the expiration date of the general permit.
Comment 14: States that the tables developed for produced water
discharges are too restrictive and should reflect the multiple
parameters utilized in the Region 6 critical dilution tables for
produced water.
Response: Due to the fact that fewer than 30 produced water
dischargers exist in Region 4's permit coverage area, Region 4 elected
to model the toxicity limitations using the range of data gathered from
the operators within this area. Region 4 believed this approach will
include all the expected permittees and will avoid the significant
resource demands that would have been required to support a critical
dilution table for the ranges used by Region 6. The derivation of
critical dilution tables on the scale of those developed by Region 6
would have required over 200 runs of the CORMIX model just to generate
ranges that take into account the variations in discharge flow rate,
discharge pipe diameter, and distance from the pipe to the sea floor.
Currently, EPA is unaware of any facilities in Region 4's area which
fall outside of the proposed critical dilution tables. The small number
of potential permittees did not justify the expenditure of available
resources to produce numerous tables.
In accordance with 40 CFR 122.28(3)(i) and (c)(1), any owner or
operator with a facility with produced water effluent will be required
meet the critical dilution values within the limits of the table, or
CORMIX model, or to apply for and obtain an individual permit in order
to discharge into U.S. waters.
Comment 15: Requested further clarification regarding the
calculation of specific produced water discharge toxicity.
Response: The Region recognizes the need to provide additional
clarification regarding the produced water toxicity and will revise the
language in the permit accordingly.
Comment 16: The commenter states that the Agency should allow the
use of diffusers, dilution or split discharges to increase mixing in
order to achieve compliance with the produced water toxicity
limitation.
Response: The permittee determines the produced water toxicity
limitation based on a facility's site-specific water column conditions
and discharge configuration. An operator can utilize any number of
methods to increase the dilution of their wastestream in configuring
their effluent discharge. The configuration that is ultimately utilized
must be used to model the facility-specific toxicity limitation.
Commingling or diluting wastestreams prior to discharging effluent,
however, cannot be used as a method to achieve NPDES permit compliance.
EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested wording for the permit
regarding the use of a diffuser, etc. to meet produced water toxicity
limitations. EPA has revised the language of the permit accordingly.
Comment 17: The commenter suggests language to correct the
frequency at which toxicity tests are required. Tests are required
every 2 months, rather than monthly.
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested wording for the
permit regarding frequency of toxicity testing. EPA has revised the
language of the permit accordingly.
Comment 18: Proposes that the specific use for chemically treated
freshwater or seawater, that was added to miscellaneous discharges, not
be restricted to only the hydrostatic testing of new piping and
pipelines.
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's editorial comment and has
made the corresponding revision to Part I.B. in the permit.
Comment 19: Proposes the addition of a new waste stream outside of
the more general ``miscellaneous discharges'' for discharges of
chemically treated freshwater and seawater. This would separate
miscellaneous discharges into two categories, e.g., those with
limitations of no free oil and the stated exception and those with
limitations of no free oil, the stated exception, treatment chemical
limitations, toxicity testing, and flow recording.
Response: EPA agrees with the proposed addition of a separate
miscellaneous discharge category, and has made the corresponding
revision to Part I.B. in the permit.
Comment 20: Tables 5-A and 5-B were mislabeled in the preamble and
omitted from the permit.
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's observation and has made
the corresponding correction in the permit.
Comment 21: Additional language proposed to define the species and
test methods for performing the required toxicity test for chemically
treated freshwater and seawater. The proposed language is consistent
with the EPA Region 6 permit.
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested wording for the
permit regarding the toxicity testing for chemically treated freshwater
and seawater. EPA has revised the language of the permit accordingly.
Comment 22: Proposed language regarding methods to increase
dilution for produced water discharges should apply to seawater and
freshwater that has been chemically treated.
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested wording. EPA
has revised the language of the permit accordingly.
Comment 23: Commenters have addressed the addition of the 403(c)
Reopener Clause that was the result of the President's Executive Order
No. 13158 on Marine Protected Areas dated May 26, 2000. ``The proposed
403(c) Reopener Clause is in direct contravention of EPA's duly
promulgated regulations as set forth in 40 CFR 122.62-122.64 and 40 CFR
125.123. Sections 40 CFR 122.62-122.64 describe the available causes
for modification or revocation of NPDES permits, of which the proposed
language is clearly not included. Revocation is only allowable if the
permittee requests or agrees with it. Furthermore, the proposed
language is not permissible because it fails to specify that the ``new
data or requirements'' must not have been available at the time of
permit issuance, a requirement of 40 CFR 122.62(a)(2).
In addition, the ocean discharge criteria regulations do not
provide authority for this provision. The Reopener clause at 40 CFR
125.123(d)(4) applies if and only if the Director lacks sufficient
information to determine whether there is unreasonable degradation to
the marine environment prior to permit issuance. In this case, the
Director has already made such a finding prior to the general permit
issuance in October 1998. Therefore, proposed language is not
applicable. Furthermore, such a Reopener clause relates only to
``continued discharges'' not ``increased discharges'' and can only be
based in the case of ``new data,'' not ``new requirements.'' Also, the
provisions of 40 CFR 125.123(d)(4) do not pertain to ``protecting'' the
marine environment or ``special aquatic sites.''

[[Page 14992]]

Additionally, inclusion of such a provision may very well be
inconsistent with statutory (33 U.S.C. 1316(d)) and regulatory (40 CFR
122.29(d)) protection afforded by new sources with respect to complying
with new source performance standards.''
Response: EPA has addressed the issue regarding the Reopener
Clause. Alternate permit modification language has been added to Part
III.B. of the general permit. As future reference, however, pursuant to
40 CFR Sec. 122.64, EPA may revoke or terminate a permit without the
permittee's permission.
Comment 24: Stated that a provision to the permit should be added
requiring permittees to inform all contractors of the discharge
limitations of their permit. Particularly important in the case of
individual permits where discharge limitations may be imposed that are
more stringent than those of the general permit. It is only fair to
ensure that contractors are provided with information regarding the
permit conditions, because of the increasing use of contractors by the
offshore operating companies who will be the permittees.
Response: The operator is liable and responsible for the
information on monitoring requirements and compliance with the
limitations and conditions within the general permit. If the operator
feels that a contractor will impact on compliance with the requirements
of the general permit, then it is incumbent on the operator to bring
this to the attention of the contractor.
Comment 25: The commenter feels that a Reopener clause should be
added to authorize the discharge of drill cuttings from synthetic-based
drilling mud systems. In the final Coastal Effluent Guidelines, the
Agency recognized that additional categories of drilling fluids,
specifically Synthetic Based Mud (SBM) and Enhanced Mineral Oil (EMO),
were warranted. The Eastern OCS general permit should do the same.
Response: EPA is aware that the oil and gas industry has developed
additional drilling fluid types, including synthetic fluid-based muds
(SBM) and has acknowledged this new technology within the permit. EPA
Headquarters is currently developing effluent limitations guidelines
(ELGs) for SBMs. Once the final ELGs are published, EPA Region 4 may
consider modifying the existing permit to incorporate SBMs per the
limitations of the guidelines. For this permit, however, SBMs are not
authorized for discharge. Operators who wish to use SBMs should submit
an individual permit application.
Comment 26: Language added to Part III.B. Definitions to define
``condensation water.''
Response: EPA agrees with the commenter's editorial comment and
will insert the following definition for ``condensation water'' as a
new paragraph (14):
``Condensation water means water that is produced as a result of
condensation during the production process that results in a direct
discharge without the condensate being used for any other purpose prior
to discharge.''

V. Cost Estimate

The cost of compliance with a general permit is lower than that of
an individual permit. Therefore, there is a comparative financial
benefit to coverage under the general permit, even with produced water
requirements, as compared to coverage under an individual permit.

VI. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA), Public Law
104-4, generally requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their ``regulatory actions'' on State, local, and tribal governments
and the private sector. UMRA uses the term ``regulatory actions'' to
refer to regulations. (See, e.g., UMRA section 201, ``Each agency shall
* * * assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions * * * (other
than to the extent that such regulations incorporate requirements
specifically set forth in law)''). UMRA section 102 defines
``regulation'' by reference to section 658 of Title 2 of the U.S. Code,
which in turn defines ``regulation'' and ``rule'' by reference to
section 601 (2) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). That section
of the RFA defines ``rule'' as ``any rule for which the agency
publishes a notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to section 553(b) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), or any other law * * *''
NPDES general permits are not ``rules'' under the APA and thus not
subject to the APA requirement to publish a notice of proposed
rulemaking. NPDES general permits also are not subject to such a
requirement under the CWA. While EPA publishes a notice to solicit
public comments on draft general permits, it does so pursuant to the
CWA section 402(a) requirement to provide an ``opportunity for a
hearing.'' Thus, NPDES general permits are not ``rules'' for RFA or
UMRA purposes.
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under UMRA section 202, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, UMRA section 205 generally requires EPA to identify and
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of UMRA section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
UMRA section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the
least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if
the Administrator publishes an explanation with the final rule why the
alternative was not adopted.
EPA has determined that the proposed permit modification would not
contain a Federal requirement that may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or the private sector in any one year.
The Agency also believes that the permit would not significantly
nor uniquely affect small governments. For UMRA purposes, ``small
governments'' is defined by reference to the definition of ``small
government jurisdiction'' under the RFA. (See UMRA section 102(1),
referencing 2 U.S.C. 658, which references section 601(5) of the RFA.)
``Small governmental jurisdiction'' means government of cities,
counties, towns, etc. with a population of less than 50,000, unless the
agency establishes an alternative definition.
The permit modification would not uniquely affect small governments
because compliance with the modified permit conditions affects small
governments in the same manner as any other entities seeking coverage
under the permit. Additionally, EPA does not expect small government to
operate facilities authorized to discharge by this permit.

VII. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection required by these permits has been
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
provisions of the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., in submission made for
the NPDES permit program and assigned OMB control numbers

[[Page 14993]]

2040-0086 (NPDES permit application) and 2040-0004 (discharge
monitoring reports).
EPA did not prepare an Information Collection Request (ICR)
document for today's permit modification because the information
collection requirements in this permit have already been approved by
OMB in submissions made for the NPDES permit program under the
provisions of the CWA.

VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.

Today's modified general permit is not subject to the RFA, which
generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis for any rule that will have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The RFA only applies to rules
subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the APA or
any other statute. As previously stated, the permit modification
proposed today is not a ``rule'' subject to the RFA. Although this
proposed general permit is not subject to the RFA, EPA nonetheless has
assessed the potential of this rule to adversely impact small entities
subject to this general permit and, in light of the facts presented
above, I hereby certify pursuant to the provisions of the RFA that
these proposed general permit modifications will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This determination is
based on the fact that the vast majority of the parties regulated by
this permit have greater than 500 employees and are not classified as
small businesses under the Small Business Administration regulations
established at 49 FR 5024 (February 9, 1984). For those operators
having fewer than 500 employees, this permit issuance will not have
significant economic impact. These facilities are classified as Major
Group 13--Oil and Gas Extraction SIC Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas.

Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

Dated: March 2, 2001.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

Final Modification of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) General Permit for the Eastern Portion of the Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) of the Gulf of Mexico (GMG280000)

Final Modification of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Permit for the Eastern Portion of the Outer Continental
Shelf (OCS) of the Gulf of Mexico (GMG280000)
For reasons set forth in the preamble, the NPDES General Permit for
the Eastern Portion of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) of the Gulf of
Mexico (GMG280000) (63 FR 55718-55762, October 16, 1998) is modified as
described below. EPA has deleted Appendix A from the general permit
along with several other additional modifications and clarifications.
These modifications will become effective on the date of Federal
Register publication of the modifications.

General Permit Number [Modification]

(1) As of the effective date of the Federal Register publication of
these modifications, the general permit number, originally identified
as GMG280000, is modified to read as GMG28AXXX, where the 6th
significant figure will carry an alphabetic designation. The new
numbering convention is, e.g., GMG28A001-A999, GMG28B001-B999,
GMG28C001-C999, etc. For all notices of general permit coverage
provided since the effective date of the November 16, 1998 permit,
GMG280xxx and GMG289xxx designations shall be changed to GMG28Axxx.
(2) On page 55746, the next to the last paragraph is no longer
applicable and is replaced with a new paragraph to provide additional
information as follows:

Authorization to Discharge Under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System

In accordance with 40 CFR 122.28(b)(3)(i) and (c)(1), any owner
or operator with a facility with produced water effluent is required
to meet the critical dilution values within the limits of the
modified permit, or approved CORMIX modeling, or to apply for and
obtain an individual permit in order to discharge into U.S. waters.
Existing discharges of produced water shall continue to be
authorized under the administratively extended 1986 general permit,
if an individual permit application is received within 120 days of
the effective date of the permit modification. The 1986 general
permit coverage shall automatically terminate on the date final
action is taken on the individual NPDES permit application.

Part I. Requirements for NPDES Permits

(3) On page 55747, paragraph 4 is modified to add additional
information requirements and corrected to update the technical
references, as follows:

Section A. Permit Applicability and Coverage Conditions

4. Notification Requirements (Existing Sources and New Sources)

Written notification of intent (NOI) to be covered in accordance
with the general permit requirements shall state whether the
permittee is requesting coverage under the existing source general
permit or new source general permit and shall contain the following
information:
(1) The legal name and address of the owner or operator;
(2) The facility name and location, including the lease block
assigned by the Department of Interior, or if none, the name
commonly assigned to the lease area;
(3) The number and type of facilities and activity proposed
within the lease block;
(4) The waters into which the facility is or will be
discharging; including a map with longitude and latitude of facility
location and expected discharges identified by the nomenclature used
in Part I., section B.1-11. Additional information may be requested
by the Director regarding miscellaneous discharges.
* * * * *
(10) Technical information on the characteristics of the sea
bottom in accordance with MMS Notice To Lessees 98-20, Shallow
Hazard Requirements, or the most current MMS guidelines for shallow
hazard investigation and analysis.''
(11) MMS live bottom survey in accordance with MMS Notice To
Lessees 99-G16 Live-Bottom Surveys and Reports, or the most current
MMS guidelines for live-bottom surveys and reports.
* * * * *
(4) On page 55747, paragraph 4, is corrected to clarify NOI
notification requirements for a newly acquired lease as follows:

For operating leases, the NOI shall be submitted within sixty
(60) days after publication of the final determination on this
action. Non-operational facilities are not eligible for coverage
under these new general permits. No NOI will be accepted from either
a non-operational or newly acquired lease until such time as an
exploration plan or development production plan has been prepared
and submitted to MMS.
* * * * *

(5) On page 55747, paragraph 4, is modified regarding NTD notice
requirements and clarified to update the Agency address for submission
of notices under the general permit follows:

For drilling activity, the operator shall submit a Notice to
Drill (NTD) within

[[Page 14994]]

fourteen (14) days after the drilling rig moves on location. This
NTD shall contain: (1) The assigned NPDES general permit number
assigned to the facility, (2) the latitude and longitude of the
facility, (3) the water depth, and (4) the estimated length of time
the drilling operation will last. This NTD shall be submitted to
Region 4 at the address above, by certified mail to: Director, Water
Management Division; NPDES and Biosolids Permit Section; U.S. EPA,
Region 4; Atlanta Federal Center; 61 Forsyth Street, S.W.; Atlanta,
GA 30303-8960.
* * * * *
All NOIs, NTDs, NCOs, and any subsequent reports required under
this permit shall be sent by certified mail to the following
address: Director, Water Management Division; NPDES and Biosolids
Permits Section; U.S. EPA, Region 4; Atlanta Federal Center; 61
Forsyth Street, S.W.; Atlanta, GA 30303-8960.
* * * * *
(6) On page 55747, paragraph 4, is modified to remove the reference
to Appendix A and corrected to remove two typographical errors as
follows:

In addition, a notice of commencement of operations (NCO) is
required to be submitted for each of the following activities:
placing a production platform in the general permit coverage area
(within 30 days after placement); and discharging produced water
within the coverage area.

6. Intent To Be Covered by a Subsequent Permit

(7) On page 55747, paragraph 6, is clarified to update the Agency
address for submission of notices under the general permit follows:

This permit shall expire on October 31, 2003. However, an
expired general permit continues in force and effect until a new
general permit is issued. Lease block operators authorized to
discharge by this permit shall by certified mail notify the
Director, Water Management Division; NPDES and Biosolids Permit
Section; U.S. EPA, Region 4; Atlanta Federal Center; 61 Forsyth
Street, S.W.; Atlanta, GA 30303-8960, on or before April 30, 2003,
that they intend to be covered by a permit that will authorize
discharge from these facilities after the termination date of this
permit on October 31, 2003.
Permittees must submit a new NOI in order to continue coverage
under this general permit after it expires. In lieu of providing the
information required by paragraph 4. of this section, the permittee
may submit a list of facilities covered by the general permit and
their associated permit coverage numbers. Facilities that have not
submitted an NOI under the permit by the expiration date cannot
become authorized to discharge under any continuation of this NPDES
general permit. All NOI's from permittees requesting coverage under
a continued permit should be sent by certified mail to: Director,
Water Management Division; NPDES and Biosolids Permits Section; U.S.
EPA, Region 4; Atlanta Federal Center; 61 Forsyth Street, S.W.;
Atlanta, GA 30303-8960.

(8) On page 55749, Section B, paragraph 3 is modified to remove the
reference to Appendix A, correct the arithmetic formula regarding
limiting permissible concentrations, correct the reporting requirement
for oil and grease limitation, and referencing the new produced water
critical dilution tables, as follows:

Section B. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements

3. Produced Water

(b) Limitations. Oil and Grease. Produced water discharges must
meet both a daily maximum limitation of 42 mg/l and a monthly
average limitation of 29 mg/l for oil and grease. A grab sample must
be taken at least once per month. The daily maximum samples may be
based on the average concentration of four grab samples taken within
the 24-hour period. If only one sample is taken for any one month,
it must meet both the daily and monthly limits. If more samples are
taken, they may exceed the monthly average for any one day, provided
that the average of all samples taken meets the monthly limitation.
The gravimetric method is specified at 40 CFR part 136. The highest
daily maximum oil and grease concentration and the monthly average
concentration shall be reported on the monthly DMR.
Toxicity. Produced water discharges must meet the limiting
permissible concentration (LPC) at the edge of a 100 meter mixing
zone. The LPC is defined as 0.1 times the LC50. The LPC
must be equal to or greater than the predicted effluent
concentration at the edge of a 100 meter mixing zone. Predicted
effluent concentrations, referred to as ``Critical Dilutions,'' are
presented in Table 4- and Table 4-A for a range of discharge rates
and pipe diameters. Critical dilution shall be determined using
Tables 4 and 4-A of this permit based on the discharge rate most
recently reported on the discharge monitoring report, discharge pipe
diameter, and water depth between the discharge pipe and the bottom.
Facilities which have not previously reported produced water flow on
the discharge monitoring report shall use the highest monthly
average flow measured during the previous twelve months for
determining the critical dilution from Tables 4 and 4-A of this
permit. LC50 shall be calculated by conducting 96-hour
toxicity tests every 2 months using Mysidopsis bahia and inland
silverside minnow.
(Exception) Permittees wishing to increase mixing may use a
horizontal diffuser, add seawater, or may install multiple discharge
ports. Permittees using increased mixing shall install the system
such that the 96-hour LC50 limit is equal to or greater
than 10 times the critical dilution (LC50 = 10 x
critical dilution). The projected percent effluent (critical
dilution) at the edge of the 100 meter mixing zone will be
calculated using CORMIX2, with the following input conditions:

Density gradient = 0.163 kg/m\3\/m
Ambient seawater density at diffuser depth = 1023.0 kg/m\3\
Produced water density = 1070.2 kg/m\3\
Current speed = 5 cm/sec (200 m); 15 cm/sec (>200m)

Permittees shall submit a certification that the diffuser,
seawater addition, or multiple discharge ports has been installed
and state the critical dilution and corresponding LC50 in
the certification. The CORMIX2 model runs shall be retained by the
permittee as part of its NPDES records. Permittees using vertical
aligned multiple discharge ports shall provide vertical separation
between ports. When multiple discharge ports are installed, the
depth difference between the discharge port closest to the seafloor
and the seafloor shall be the depth difference used as the parameter
to determine critical dilution. The critical dilution value shall be
based on the port flow rate (total flow divided by the number of
discharge ports) and based on the diameter of the discharge port (or
smallest discharge port, if they are different styles).
When seawater is added to produced water prior to discharge, the
total produced water flow, including the added seawater, shall be
used in determining the critical dilution.
* * * * *
(9) On page 55749, paragraph 7 is modified to further define the
exemption for sanitary waste discharges, as follows:

7. Sanitary Waste (Facilities Continuously Manned by 10 or More
Persons)

(b) Limitations. Residual Chlorine. Total residual chlorine is a
surrogate parameter for fecal coliform. Discharges of sanitary waste
must contain a minimum of 1 mg residual chlorine/l and shall be
maintained as close to this concentration as possible. The approved
analytical method is Hach CN-66-DPD. A grab sample must be taken
once per month and the concentration reported.
(Exception) Any facility which properly operates and maintains a
marine sanitation device (MSD) that complies with pollution control
standards and regulations under section 312 of the Act shall be
deemed in compliance with permit limitations for sanitary waste. The
MSD shall be tested annually for proper operation and the test
results maintained at the facility. The operator shall indicate use
of an MSD on the monthly DMR.
* * * * *
(10) On page 55750, paragraph 8 is modified to further define the
exemption for sanitary waste discharges, as follows:

8. Sanitary Waste (Facilities Continuously Manned by 9 or Fewer Persons
or Intermittently by Any Number)

(a) Prohibitions. Solids. No floating solids may be discharged
to the receiving waters. An observation must be made once per day
when the facility is manned, during daylight in the vicinity of
sanitary waste outfalls, following either the morning or midday meal
and at a time during maximum estimated discharge. The number of days
solids are observed shall be recorded.
(Exception) Any facility which properly operates and maintains a
marine sanitation device (MSD) that complies with pollution control
standards and regulations under

[[Page 14995]]

section 312 of the Act shall be deemed in compliance with permit
limitations for sanitary waste. The MSD shall be tested annually for
proper operation and the test results maintained at the facility.
The operator shall indicate use of an MSD on the monthly DMR.
* * * * *
(11) On page 55750, paragraph 10 is modified to include additional
defined ``miscellaneous discharges.'' as follows:

10. Miscellaneous Discharges. Desalination Unit Discharge;
Blowout Preventer Fluid; Uncontaminated Ballast Water;
Uncontaminated Bilge Water; Mud, Cuttings, and Cement at the
Seafloor; Uncontaminated Seawater; Boiler Blowdown; Source Water and
Sand; Uncontaminated Freshwater; Excess Cement Slurry; Diatomaceous
Earth Filter Media; and waters resulting from condensation.
* * * * *
(12) On page 55750, paragraph 11 is added to include additional
effluent limitations and monitoring requirements for the miscellaneous
discharge of chemically treated freshwater and seawater, as follows:

11. Miscellaneous discharges of Freshwater and Seawater which
have been chemically treated.
The discharge of freshwater and seawater to which chemicals have
been added shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as
specified in Tables 2 and 3 and as below.
(a) Free Oil. No free oil shall be discharged. Monitoring shall
be performed using the visual sheen test method once per day when
discharging on the surface of the receiving water or by use of the
static sheen method at the operator's option. Both tests shall be
conducted in accordance with the methods presented at IV.A.3 and
IV.A.4. Discharge is limited to those times that a visual sheen
observation is possible. The number of days a sheen is observed must
be recorded.
(Exception): Miscellaneous discharges may be discharged from
platforms that are on automatic purge systems without monitoring for
free oil when the facility is not manned. Discharge is not
restricted to periods when observation is possible; however, the
static (laboratory) sheen test method must be used during periods
when observation of a sheen is not possible, such as at night or
during inclement conditions. Static sheen testing is not required
for miscellaneous discharges occurring at the sea floor.
(b) Treatment Chemicals. The concentration of treatment
chemicals in discharged chemically treated freshwater and seawater
shall not exceed the most stringent of the following three
constraints:
(1) The maximum concentrations and any other conditions
specified in the EPA product registration labeling if the chemical
is an EPA registered product, or
(2) The maximum manufacturer's recommended concentration, or
(3) 500 mg/l.
(c) Toxicity. The toxicity of discharged chemically treated
freshwater and seawater shall be limited as follows: the 48-hour
minimum and monthly average minimum No Observable Effect
Concentration (NOEC), or if specified the 7-day average minimum and
monthly average minimum NOEC, must be equal to or greater than the
critical dilution concentration specified in this permit in Table 5-
A for seawater discharges and 5-B for freshwater discharges.
Critical dilution shall be determined using Table 5 of this permit
and is based on the discharge rate, discharge pipe diameter, and
water depth between the discharge pipe and the bottom. The monthly
average minimum NOEC value is defined as the arithmetic average of
all 48-hour average NOEC (or 7-day average minimum NOEC) values
determined during the month. Compliance with the toxicity limitation
shall be demonstrated by conducting 48-hour acute toxicity test
using Mysidopsis bahia (Mysid shrimp) and Menidia beryllina (Inland
silverside minnow). The test method is published in ``Methods for
Measuring Acute Toxicity of Effluents to Marine and Freshwater
Organisms'' (EPA/600/4-90/027F). The results for both species shall
be reported on the monthly DMR, within two months of the discharge.
The permittee shall submit a copy of all laboratory reports with the
DMR.
(d) Monitoring Requirements for discharged chemically treated
freshwater and seawater:
Flow. Once per month, an estimate of the flow (MGD) must be
recorded.
Toxicity. The required frequency of testing for continuous
discharges shall be determined as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discharge rate Toxicity testing frequency
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0-499 bbl/day............................. Once per year.
500-4,599 bbl/day......................... Once per quarter.
4,600 bbl/day and above................... Once per month.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intermittent or batch discharges shall be monitored once per
discharge but are required to be monitored no more frequently than
the corresponding frequencies shown above for continuous discharges.
Samples shall be collected after addition of any added
substances, including seawater that is added prior to discharge and
before the flow is split for multiple discharge ports. Samples also
shall be representative of the discharge. Methods to increase
dilution also apply to seawater and freshwater discharges which have
been chemically treated previously described for produced water in
Part I. B.3
If the permittee has been compliant with this toxicity limit for
one full year (12 consecutive months) for a continuous discharge of
chemically treated seawater or freshwater, the required testing
frequency shall be reduced to once per year for that discharge.

Table 5-A.--Critical Dilutions (Percent Effluent) for Toxicity Limitations for Seawater to Which Treatment
Chemicals Have Been Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pipe diameter
Depth difference (meters) Discharge rate (bbl/day) -----------------------------------------------
>0" to 2" >2" to 4" >4" to 6" >6"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All................................... 0 to 1,000.............. 12 24.7 24.5 24.6
>1,000 to 10,000........ 11.2 12.4 12.2 14
>10,000................. 9.6 24 23 20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 5-B.--Critical Dilutions (Percent Effluent) for Toxicity Limitations for Freshwater to Which Treatment
Chemicals Have Been Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pipe diameter
Depth difference (meters) Discharge rate (bbl/day) -----------------------------------------------
>0" to 2" >2" to 4" >4" to 6" >6"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All................................... 0 to 1,000.............. 1.1 1.2 2.9 2.9
>1,000 to 10,000........ 19 39 28 24
>10,000................. 13 63 41 74
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 14996]]

* * * * *

Part II. Standard Conditions for NPDES Permits

Section D. Reporting Requirements

(13) On page 55753, paragraph 3 is modified to further clarify
permit transfers, as follows:

3. Transfers

This permit is not transferable to any person except after
notice to the Regional Administrator. Any new owner or operator
shall submit a notice of intent (NOI) to be covered under this
general permit according to procedures presented at Part I.A.4.
However, if a permittee notifies EPA prior to the transfer of
operatorship, no additional NOI documentation need be submitted by
the new operator. The Regional Administrator may require
modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit to change
the name of the permittee and to incorporate such requirements as
may be necessary under the Act.

* * * * *

Part III. Monitoring Reports and Permit Modification

(14) On page 55754, Section A is corrected to recognize that
monitoring reports are to be submitted by the facility operator, as
follows:

Section A. Monitoring Reports

The operator of each facility shall be responsible for
submitting monitoring results for each facility within each lease
block.

On page 55754, a new paragraph is added to the end of Part III.B.

Part III. Monitoring Reports and Permit Modification

Section B. Permit Modification

This permit may be modified at any time if, on the basis of any
new data, other than revised regulations, guidance, or test methods,
that was not available at the time of permit issuance and would have
justified the application of different permit conditions at the time
of issuance. For NPDES general permits, this includes any
information indicating that cumulative effects on the environment
are unacceptable. Such cumulative effects on the environment may
include unreasonable degradation of the marine environment due to
continued discharges, in which case the Director, Water Division,
Region 4, may determine that additional conditions are necessary to
protect the marine environment. Any permit modification will be
conducted in accordance with 40 CFR Parts 122.62 and 122.63.
* * * * *

Part IV. Test Procedures and Definitions

Section B. Definitions

On page 55755, a new paragraph 14 is inserted to define
condensation water, as follows:

14. Condensation water means water that is produced as a result
of condensation during the production process that results in a
direct discharge without the condensate being used for any other
purpose prior to discharge.

On page 55756, a new paragraph 26 is inserted to define Eastern
Portion of the Gulf of Mexico, as follows:

26. Eastern Portion of the Gulf of Mexico is that area of
Federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico seaward of the outer boundary
of the territorial seas of Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida. This
is EPA, Region 4's jurisdictional division.

On page 55756, a new paragraph 51 is inserted to define Synthetic
Based Drilling Fluids (SBFs) as follows:

51. Synthetic Based Drilling Fluids (SBFs) are drilling fluids
where the continuous phase is a synthetic material of combination of
synthetic materials, with water as the dispersed phase.

The following two paragraphs 55 in Part IV.B. are renumbered as
follows:

58. Uncontaminated Freshwater ``freshwater which is discharged
without the addition of chemicals; examples include: (1) discharges
of excess freshwater that permit the continuous operation of fire
control and utility lift pumps, (2) excess freshwater from pressure
maintenance and secondary recovery projects, (3) water released
during fire protection tests and training, and (4) water used to
pressure test piping.''
59. Upset means an exceptional incident in which there is
unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology-based
permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable
control of the permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to
the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed
treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of
preventive maintenance, or careless or improper operation.
* * * * *
On pages 55755 through 55757, due to the addition of new paragraphs
14, 26, 51 and the renumbering of the two paragraphs 55 to 58 and 59,
the remaining paragraphs are renumbered appropriately.

Appendix A

(15) On page 55761, EPA has deleted appendix A and replaced it
with two new Tables--Critical Dilution Tables 4 and 4-A, as follows:

Table 4-A.--Produced Water Critical Dilutions (Percent Effluent) for
Water Depths of Greater Than 200 Meters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pipe diameter
-----------------------------
Discharge rate (bbl/day) >0'' to >5'' to >7'' to
5'' 7'' 9''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>0 to 500................................. 0.11 0.11 0.11
501 to 1000............................... 0.22 0.22 0.22
1001 to 2000.............................. 0.37 0.37 0.37
2001 to 3000.............................. 0.48 0.48 0.48
3001 to 4000.............................. 0.56 0.56 0.56
4001 to 5000.............................. 0.65 0.66 0.66
5001 to 6000.............................. 0.73 0.78 0.78
6001 to 7000.............................. 0.77 0.78 0.78
7001 to 8000.............................. 0.84 0.86 0.86
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 4-A.--Produced Water Critical Dilutions (Percent Effluent) for
Water Depths of Greater Than 200 Meters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pipe diameter
-----------------------------
Discharge rate (bbl/day) >0'' to >5'' to >7'' to
5'' 7'' 9''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>0 to 500................................. 0.08 0.08 0.08
501 to 1000............................... 0.12 0.12 0.12
1001 to 2000.............................. 0.18 0.18 0.18
2001 to 3000.............................. 0.22 0.22 0.22
3001 to 4000.............................. 0.24 0.25 0.25
4001 to 5000.............................. 0.28 0.28 0.28
5001 to 6000.............................. 0.30 0.30 0.31
6001 to 7000.............................. 0.32 0.32 0.32
7001 to 8000.............................. 0.35 0.35 0.35
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(16) On pages 55757-55758, on Table 2 ``Existing Sources-
Effluent Limitations, Prohibitions, and Monitoring Requirements for
the Eastern Gulf of Mexico NPDES General Permit'' and Table 3 ``New
Sources-Effluent Limitations, Prohibitions, and Monitoring
Requirements for the Eastern Gulf of Mexico NPDES General Permit''
are retitled to ``Existing Sources'' and `` New Sources.'' A
correction is made to the Sanitary Flow Measurement reporting
requirements on both tables to add a ``Recorded/Reported Value'' for
``Estimated Flow'' and to the units used for the ``Flow'' parameter
of the Produced Water Measurement as follows:

[[Page 14997]]

Existing Sources

Table 2.--Effluent Limitations, Prohibitions, and Monitoring Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitoring requirement
Regulated & monitored Discharge limitation/ --------------------------------------------------------------------
Discharge discharge parameter prohibition Measurement Recorded/reported
frequency Sample type/method value
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drilling Fluids.................... Oil-based Drilling No discharge..........
Fluids.
Oil-contaminated No discharge..........
Drilling Fluids.
Drilling Fluids to No discharge..........
Which Diesel Oil has
been Added.
Mercury and Cadmium in No discharge of Once per new source Flame and flameless mg Hg and mg Cd/kg in
Barite. drilling fluids if of barite used. AAS. stock barite.
added barite contains
Hg in excess of 1.0
mg/kg or Cd in excess
of 3.0 mg/kg (dry wt).
Toxicity ^a............ 30,000 ppm daily Once/month........... Grab/96-hr LC50 using Minimum LC50 of tests
minimum. Once/end of well ^b... Mysidopsis bahia; performed and
30,000 ppm monthly Once/month........... Method at 58 FR monthly average
average minimum. 12507. LC50.
Free Oil.............. No free oil........... Once/day prior to Static sheen; Method Number of days sheen
discharge. at 58 FR 12506. observed.
Maximum Discharge Rate 1,000 barrels/hr...... Once/hour............ Estimate............. Max. hourly rate in
bbl/hr.
Mineral Oil........... Mineral oil may be
used only as a
carrier fluid,
lubricity additive,
or pill.
Drilling Fluids Record................ Once/well............ Inventory............ Chemical
Inventory. constituents.
Volume................ Report................ Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly total in bbl/
month.
Within 1000 Meters of No discharge
an Area of Biological
Concern (ABC).
Drill Cuttings..................... Note: Drill cuttings are subject to the same limitations/prohibitions as drilling fluids except Maximum Discharge
Rate.
Free Oil.............. No Free oil........... Once/day prior to Static sheen; Method Number of days sheen
discharge. at 58 FR 12506. observed.
Volume................ Report................ Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly total in bbl/
month.
Produced Water..................... Oil and Grease........ 42 mg/l daily maximum Once/month ^c......... Grab/Gravimetric..... Daily max. and
and 29 mg/l monthly monthly avg.
average.
Toxicity.............. Acute toxicity (LC50); Once/2 months........ Grab/96-hour LC50 Minimum LC50 and LPC
critical dilution as using Mysidopsis for both species and
specified by bahia and inland full laboratory
requirements at Part silverside minnow report.
I.B.3(b). (Method in EPA/600/4-
90/027F).
Flow (MGD)............ ...................... Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly rate.
Within 1000 meters of No Discharge.
an Area of Biological
Concern (ABC).
Deck Drainage...................... Free Oil.............. No free oil........... Once/day when Visual sheen......... Number of days sheen
discharging ^d. observed.
Volume (bbl/month).... ...................... Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly total.
Produced Sand...................... No Discharge.
Well Treatment, Completion, and Free oil.............. No free oil........... Once/day when Static sheen......... Number of days sheen
Workover Fluids (includes packer discharging. observed.
fluids) ^e.
Oil and Grease........ 42 mg/l daily maximum Once/month........... Grab/Gravimetric..... Daily max. and
and 29 mg/l monthly monthly avg.
average.
Priority Pollutants... No priority pollutants ..................... Monitor added
materials.
Volume (bbl/month).... ...................... Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly total.
Sanitary Waste (Continuously manned Solids................ No floating solids.... Once/day, in daylight Observation.......... Number of days solids
by 10 or more persons) ^f. Residential Chlorine.. At least (but as close Once/month........... Grab/Hach CN-66-DPD.. observed.
to 1 mg/l. Concentration.
Flow (MGD)............ ...................... Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly ave.
Sanitary Waste (Continuously manned Solids................ No Floating solids.... Once/day, in daylight Observation.......... Number of days solids
by 9 or fewer persons or observed.
intermittently by any).
Domestic Waste..................... Solids................ No floating solids; no Once/day following Observation.......... Number of days solids
food waste within 12 morning or midday observed.
miles of land; meal at time of
comminuted food waste maximum expected
smaller than 25-mm discharge.
beyond 12 miles.

[[Page 14998]]

Miscellaneous Discharges-- Free Oil No Free Oil........... Once/day when Visual sheen......... Number of days sheen
Desalination Unit; Blowout Treatment Chemicals... Most Stringent of: EPA discharging. observed.
Preventer Fluid; Uncontaminated label registration,
Ballast/Bilge Water; Mud, maximum
Cuttings, and Cement at the manufacturer's
Seafloor; Uncontaminated Seawater; recommended dose, or
Boiler Blowdown; Source Water and 500 mg/l..
Sand; Uncontaminated Fresh Water;
Excess Cement Slurry; Diatomaceous
Earth; Filter Media; Condensation
water.
Miscellaneous discharges of Free Oil.............. No Free Oil........... 1/week............... Visual Sheen......... Number of days sheen
seawater and freshwater to which Toxicity.............. 48-hour ave. minimum Rate Dependent....... Grab................. observed.
treatment chemicals have been NOEC and monthly ave. Lowest NOEC observed
added. minimum NOEC. for either of the
two species.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
^a Toxicity test to be conducted using suspended particulate phase (SPP) of a 9:1 seawater: mud dilution. The sample shall be taken beneath the shale
shaker, or if there are no returns across the shaker, the sample must be taken from a location that is characteristic of the overall mud system to be
discharged.
^b Sample shall be taken after the final log run is completed and prior to bulk discharge.
^c The daily maximum concentration may be based on the average of up to four grab sample results in the 24 hour period.
^d When discharging and facility is manned. Monitoring shall be accomplished during times when observation of a visual sheen on the surface of the
receiving water is possible in the vicinity of the discharge.
^e No discharge of priority pollutants except in trace amounts. Information on the specific chemical composition shall be recorded but not reported
unless requested by EPA.
^f Any facility that properly operates and maintains a marine sanitation device (MSD) that complies with pollution control standards and regulations
under Section 312 of the Act shall be deemed to be in compliance with permit limitations for sanitary waste. The MSD shall be tested yearly for proper
operation and test results maintained at the facility.

New Sources

Table 3.--Effluent Limitations, Prohibitions, and Monitoring Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitoring requirement
Regulated & monitored Discharge limitation/ --------------------------------------------------------------------
Discharge discharge parameter prohibition Measurement Recorded/reported
frequency Sample type/method value
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drilling Fluids.................... Oil-based Drilling No discharge..........
Fluids. No discharge..........
Oil-contaminated
Drilling Fluids.
Drilling Fluids to No discharge
Which Diesel Oil has
been Added.
Mercury and Cadmium in No discharge of Once per new source Flame and flameless mg Hg and mg Cd/kg in
Barite. drilling fluids if of barite used. AAS. stock barite.
added barite contains
Hg in excess of 1.0
mg/kg or Cd in excess
of 3.0 mg/kg (dry wt).
Toxicity \a\.......... 30,000 ppm daily Once/month Once/end Grab/96-hr LC50 using Minimum LC50 of tests
minimum. of well \b\. Mysidopsis bahia; performed and
30,000 ppm monthly Once/month........... Method at 58 FR monthly average
average minimum. 12507. LC50.
Free Oil.............. No free oil........... Once/day prior to Static sheen; Method Number of days sheen
discharge. at 58 FR 12506. observed.
Maximum Discharge Rate 1,000 barrels/hr...... Once/hour............ Estimate............. Max. hourly rate in
bbl/hr.
Mineral Oil........... Mineral oil may be
used only as a
carrier fluid,
lubricity additive,
or pill.
Drilling Fluids Record................ Once/well............ Inventory............ Chemical
Inventory. constituents.
Volume................ Report................ Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly total in bbl/
month.
Within 1000 Meters an No discharge.
Areas of Biological
Concern (ABC).
Drill Cuttings..................... (4) Note: Drill cuttings are subject to the same limitations/
prohibitions as drilling fluids except Maximum Discharge Rate.
Free Oil.............. No free oil........... Once/day prior to Static sheen; Method Number of days sheen
discharge. at 58 FR 12506. observed.
Volume................ Report................ Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly total in bbl/
month.

[[Page 14999]]

Produced Water..................... Oil and Grease........ 42 mg/l daily maximum Once/month \c\....... Grab/Gravimetric..... Daily max. and
and 29 mg/l monthly avg.
monthly average.
Toxicity.............. Acute toxicity (LC50); Once/2 months........ Grab/96-hour LC50 Minimum LC50 and LPC
critical dilution as using Mysidopsis for both species and
specified by the bahia and inland full laboratory
requirements at Part silverside minnow report.
I.B.3(b). (Method in EPA/600/4-
90/027F).
Flow (MGD)............ ...................... Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly rate.
Within 1000 meters of No discharge.
an Area of Biological
Concern (ABC).
Deck Drainage...................... Free Oil.............. No free oil........... Once/day when Visual sheen......... Number of days sheen
discharging \d\. observed.
Volume (bbl/month).... ...................... Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly total.
Produced Sand...................... No Discharge.
Well Treatment, Completion, and Free Oil.............. No free oil........... Once/day when Static sheen......... Number of days sheen
Workover Fluids (includes packer Oil and Grease........ 42 mg/l daily maximum discharging. Grab/Gravimetric..... observed.
fluids) \c\. and 29 mg/l monthly Once/month........... Daily max. and
average. monthly avg.
Priority Pollutants... No priority pollutants ..................... Monitor added
materials.
Volume (bbl/month).... ...................... Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly total.
Sanitary Waste (Continuously manned Solids................ No floating solids.... Once/day, in daylight Observation.......... Number of days solids
by 10 or more persons) \f\. Residential Chlorine.. At least (but as close Once/month........... Grab/Hach CN-66-DPD.. observed.
to 1 mg/l. Concentration.
Flow (MGD)............ ...................... Once/month........... Estimate............. Monthly ave.
Sanitary Waste (Continously manned Solids................ No floating solids.... Once/day, in daylight Observation.......... Number of days solids
by 9 or fewer persons or observed.
intermittently by any) \f\.
Domestic Waste..................... Solids................ No floating solids; no Once/day following Observation.......... Number of days solids
food waste within 12 morning or midday observed.
miles of land; meal at time of
commminuted food maximum expected
waste smaller than 25- discharge.
mm beyond 12 miles.
Miscellaneous Discharges-- Free Oil.............. No free oil........... Once/day when Visual sheen......... Number of days sheen
Desalination Unit; Blowout Treatment Chemicals... Most Stringent of: EPA discharging. observed.
Preventer Fluid; Uncontaminated label registration,
Ballast/Bilge Water; Mud, maximum
Cuttings, and Cement at the manufacturer's
Seafloor; Uncontaminated Seawater; recommended dose, or
Boiler Blowdown; Source Water and 500 mg/l.
Sand; Uncontaminated Freshwater;
Excess Cement Slurry; Diatomaceous
Earth Filter Media; Condensation
water.
Miscellaneous discharges of Free Oil.............. No Free Oil........... 1/week............... Visual Sheen......... Number of days sheen
seawater and freshwater to which Toxicity.............. 48-hour ave. minimum Rate Dependent....... Grab................. observed.
treatment chemicals have been NOEC and monthly ave. Lowest NOEC observed
added. minimum NOEC. for either of the
two species.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
^a Toxicity test to be conducted using suspended particulate phase (SPP) of a 9:1 seawater:mud dilution. The sample shall be taken beneath the shale
shaker, or if there are no returns across the shaker, the sample must be taken from a location that is characteristic of the overall mud system to be
discharged.
^b Sample shall be taken after the final log run is completed and prior to bulk discharge.
^c The daily maximum concentration may be based on the average of up to four grab sample results in the 24 hour period.
^d When discharging and facility is manned. Monitoring shall be accomplished during times when observation of a visual sheen on the surface of the
receiving water is possible in the vicinity of the discharge.
^e No discharge of priority pollutants except in trace amounts. Information on the specific chemical composition shall be recorded but not reported
unless requested by EPA.
^f Any facility that properly operates and maintains a marine sanitation device (MSD) that complies with pollution control standards and regulations
under Section 312 of the Act shall be deemed to be in compliance with permit limitations for sanitary waste. The MSD shall be tested yearly for proper
operation and test results maintained at the facility.

[FR Doc. 01-6175 Filed 3-13-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P