[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 206 (Wednesday, October 25, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54771-54792]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-25776]




  Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 206 / Wednesday, October 25, 1995 / 
Proposed Rules   

[[Page 54771]]


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 403 and 503

[FRL-5315-6]
RIN 2040-AC29


Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On November 25, 1992, pursuant to Section 405 of the Clean 
Water Act (CWA), EPA promulgated the Standards for the Use or Disposal 
of Sewage Sludge (40 CFR parts 257, 403 and 503). In addition, EPA 
amended the General Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR part 403) to 
establish a list of pollutants for which a removal credit may be 
available. Today's action proposes additional amendments to both 
regulations to clarify existing regulatory requirements and provide 
increased flexibility to the permitting authority and the regulated 
community in complying with some requirements.
    The proposed amendments to part 503 would modify various land 
application, surface disposal, pathogen and vector attraction 
reduction, and incineration provisions. Most importantly, the proposed 
rule would delete the requirement for EPA or the State to issue sludge 
permits and would allow the regulated community flexibility to 
determine how to meet the sewage sludge incinerator requirements using 
existing Agency guidance. EPA is also proposing to amend part 403 to 
add a concentation limit for chromium in the list of unregulated 
pollutants eligible for a removal credit. Some of the changes EPA is 
proposing today will lessen the regulatory burden on States, local 
government, Tribes, and the regulated community.
    When EPA promulgated the Sewage Sludge Regulation in 1992, EPA 
asked for public comment on several issues. Today's notice also 
responds to those comments.

DATES: Comments must be received by December 26, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Comment Clerk; Proposed Amendments 
to the Final Sewage Sludge Regulation; Water Docket MC-4101; 
Environmental Protection Agency; 401 M Street, SW; Washington, DC 
20460. Respondents are requested to submit an original and three copies 
of their written comments. Respondents who want receipt of their 
comments acknowledged should include a self-addressed, stamped 
envelope. All submissions must be postmarked or delivered by hand, no 
facsimiles (faxes) will be accepted.
    A copy of the final part 503 rule and comments received on the 
final rule are available for review at EPA's Water Docket; 401 M 
Street, SW; Washington, DC 20460. Other references cited in the 
preamble also are available for review in the Docket. The Docket is 
located in room L-102. For access to Docket materials, call (202) 260-
3027 between 9 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. for an appointment. The EPA public 
information regulation (40 CFR Part 2) provides that a reasonable fee 
may be charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert M. Southworth, Biosolids 
Manager, Health and Ecological Criteria Division (4304), Office of 
Science and Technology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M 
Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460, telephone (202) 260-7157.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
    A. Sewage Sludge Management Program
    B. Revisions to the Part 503 Sewage Sludge Rule
II. Response to Comments on Final Sewage Sludge Rule
    A. Field Monitoring Study
    B. Pollutant Limits for Cadmium
    C. Percent of the MCL for the Ground-Water Pathway
III. Proposed Amendments to Land Application, Surface Disposal, and 
Pathogens and Vector Attraction Reduction Subparts
    A. Ceiling Concentration Limits--Land Application
    B. Frequency of Monitoring
    C. Certification Language
    D. Time of Application
    E. Definition of pH
    F. Class B, Alternative 1--at the Time of Use or Disposal
    G. Class B Site Restriction For Grazing of Animals
    H. Vector Attraction Reduction Equivalency
    I. Vector Attraction Reduction at the Time of Use or Disposal
    J. Technical Corrections
    1. Sec. 503.16(a)(1) and Sec. 503.26(a)(1)--Frequency of 
Monitoring
    2. Sec. 503.17(b)(7)--Recordkeeping for Land Application of 
Domestic Septage
    3. Sec. 503.18--Reporting
    4. Sec. 503.22(b)--General requirements
    5. Sec. 503.32(a)(3)--Pathogens
    6. Appendix B to Part 503--Pathogen Treatment Processes
IV. Proposed Amendments to the Incinerator Subpart
    A. Introduction
    B. Description of Current Regulation and Proposed Amendments
    1. Site-Specific Exemption from Frequency of Monitoring, 
Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements for Pollutants in 
Incineration Subpart
    a. Current Regulation
    b. Proposed Amendment
    2. Pollutant Limits for Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead and 
Nickel
    a. Current Regulation
    b. Proposed Amendment
    3. Management Practices
    a. Current Regulation
    i. Specification for Instruments
    ii. Specification of Maximum Combustion Temperature
    iii. Specification of Air Pollution Control Device Operating 
Parameters
    b. Proposed Amendment
    4. Monitoring Frequencies
    a. Current Regulation
    i. Beryllium, Mercury, and Operating Parameters for Air 
Pollution Control Devices
    ii. Total Hydrocarbons, Oxygen Concentration, and Moisture 
Content
    b. Proposed Amendment
    5. Recordkeeping and Reporting Obligations
    6. Compliance Deadlines
    a. Current Regulation
    b. Proposed Amendment
V. Proposed Amendment to Part 403
VI. Regulatory Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866
    B. Executive Order 12875
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Paperwork Reduction Act
    E. Unfunded Mandates

I. Background

    On November 25, 1992, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
promulgated, pursuant to section 405 of the Clean Water Act, Standards 
for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge (58 FR 9248, February 19, 
1993). This regulation establishes requirements to protect public 
health and the environment when: (1) The sewage sludge is applied to 
the land either to condition the soil or to fertilize crops grown in 
the soil; (2) the sewage sludge is disposed on land by placing it in a 
surface disposal site; (3) the sewage sludge is placed in a municipal 
solid waste landfill unit; or (4) the sewage sludge is incinerated.
    Section 405(f) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) provides that any CWA 
discharge (section 402) permit issued to a publicly owned treatment 
works (POTW) or other treatment works treating domestic sewage (TWTDS) 
must include conditions to implement the sewage sludge regulation 
issued under section 405(d) unless these conditions are included in 
other permits. The other permits may either be other Federal permits or 
a State permit issued under an approved State program.
    In 1989, EPA published regulations that establish State sewage 
sludge management program requirements and procedures for approving 
State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) (40 CFR 
part 123) and non-

[[Page 54772]]
NPDES sewage sludge programs (40 CFR part 501), and that revised the 
NPDES permit requirements and procedures (parts 122-124) to incorporate 
sewage sludge permitting requirements. (See 54 FR 18716 (May 2, 1989); 
59 FR 9404 (February 19, 1993).) State assumption of the sewage sludge 
program is optional. EPA is working with a number of States seeking 
authorization for the Federal sewage sludge permit and management 
program, but has not yet authorized any State sewage sludge program. 
Until State sewage sludge programs are authorized, EPA will administer 
the program.
    EPA is including conditions to implement its sewage sludge 
regulation in EPA-issued NPDES permits as these permits are reissued. 
In all other cases, EPA plans to issue permits to TWTDS over time, and 
has established phased application submittal procedures for the NPDES 
and non-NPDES programs to support this approach. See 40 CFR 122.21 and 
501.15. (For a detailed discussion of EPA's plans for staged permitting 
of sewage sludge generators, users, and disposers, see 58 FR at 9249-50 
and 9357-66, February 19, 1993.)
    In addition to today's proposal, EPA plans several related actions 
in the near term to address sewage sludge issues. These actions include 
changes in the sewage sludge management program and further revisions 
to the part 503 rule. These actions are briefly discussed below.

A. Sewage Sludge Management Program

    As part of its effort to reinvent its permit program, EPA is in the 
process of reviewing its sewage sludge management program. The Agency 
is looking at how to tailor the program more efficiently to reduce the 
burden to the regulated community of complying with Federal sewage 
sludge management program requirements. With this objective in mind, 
EPA is exploring a number of options with stakeholders. Given the wide 
(and successful) regulation of sewage sludge use or disposal by a 
number of States, EPA is reviewing its State sewage sludge program 
authorization regulations to simplify the approval process. In 
addition, the Agency will try to accelerate approval of State programs 
through the use of partial program approvals (i.e., approval may be 
granted by use or disposal practice). EPA will place greater emphasis 
on building a State/Federal partnership rather than on an EPA-directed 
permitting effort while maintaining its goal of protecting public 
health and the environment.
    As noted, EPA will be taking a look at its State program approval 
regulations with an eye to streamlining the approval process. The 
Agency recognizes that State sewage sludge programs may vary from State 
to State depending on local conditions. EPA will be exploring how to 
provide greater flexibility to States to accommodate States' choices 
about the structuring of their regulatory programs and efficient use of 
available local resources where appropriate. To accomplish its 
objective to provide greater flexibility to the States, EPA will 
consider modifications to its sewage sludge permit program regulations 
so as to accommodate more variations in State programs. EPA stresses 
that its willingness to allow greater variation in the State permit 
programs does not mean that the Agency will retreat from public health 
and environmental protection. EPA's policy on authorizing State permit 
programs for sewage sludge will still reflect the need for certain 
minimum requirements. These include requirements for adequate State 
authority to enforce against violators of the sewage sludge regulation. 
In addition, States, as is now the case, must provide for citizen 
participation in both the sewage sludge permitting and enforcement 
efforts.

B. Revisions to the Part 503 Sewage Sludge Rule

    EPA also is considering whether it needs to provide more 
flexibility in the technical standards. A number of parties have 
suggested to the Agency that part 503 should include a provision that 
would relieve a sewage sludge user or disposer from certain regulatory 
requirements in defined circumstances. EPA is now considering what 
specific conditions would warrant relief from regulatory requirements. 
Further, in addition to its effort to provide more flexibility in the 
technical regulation, EPA is reviewing the regulation in response to 
judicial challenges. On November 15, 1994, the United States Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its decision in 
Leather Industries of America, Inc., et al. v. EPA, No. 93-1187. In 
this decision, the court addressed several of the petitions for review 
of the sewage sludge regulation. The D.C. Circuit remanded several 
aspects of the regulation to the Agency for modification or additional 
justification. Concurrent with today's proposal, the Agency is taking 
final action on the remanded pollutant limits for chromium and selenium 
in sewage sludge that is land-applied. Moreover, the Agency will 
address other litigation issues in a future Federal Register notice to 
be published in early 1996.
    The part 503 regulation promulgated in November, 1992, partially 
fulfilled the Agency's commitment under the terms of a consent decree 
that settled a citizens suit to compel issuance of sewage sludge 
regulations. Gearhart, et al. v. Reilly, Civil No. 89-6266-JO (D.Ore). 
Under the terms of that decree, EPA must propose and take final action 
on a second round of sewage sludge regulations by December 15, 2001. 
EPA has already begun the process of evaluating a number of pollutants 
for potential adverse effects to public health and the environment when 
present in sewage sludge. In May, 1993, pursuant to the terms of the 
consent decree in the Gearhart case, the Agency notified the United 
States District Court for the District of Oregon that, based on the 
information then available, EPA would evaluate 31 pollutants for 
possible regulation. The consent decree also stipulates that EPA will 
file with the court a revised list of pollutants for regulation by 
November, 1995. In the event that EPA determines not to regulate some 
or all of these pollutants, EPA will make available the rationale for 
not regulating those pollutants.

II. Response to Comments on Final Sewage Sludge Rule

    In developing the numerical pollutant limits for sewage sludge when 
used or disposed, EPA evaluated the risk of these pollutants through 
exposure assessments. In the preamble to the final part 503 regulation, 
EPA requested public comment on three issues related to these risk 
assessments.

A. Field Monitoring Study

    For its risk assessments, EPA relied on available scientific 
information to evaluate risk to public health and the environment. In 
the case of the Agency's evaluation of ecological risks, the data were 
limited. In the final rule, EPA explained that it would continue to 
assess the adverse potential of sewage sludge, particularly with 
respect to ecosystem risks. EPA stated its intention to conduct an 
environmental evaluation and monitoring study to aid the Agency in its 
efforts to develop a comprehensive ecological risk assessment 
methodology (see 58 FR 9275, February 19, 1993).
    At the present time, EPA's Office of Research and Development is 
funding a number of initiatives in these areas. Under a grant from EPA, 
the Oak Ridge National Laboratory has begun work on an ecological risk 
study as part of a field project evaluating sewage sludge land 
application. In addition, the Ecosystems Research Division (Athens, 
Georgia) in EPA's National Exposure Research Laboratory has started 
work to test the 

[[Page 54773]]
hypothesis that sewage sludge binds metals in an organic matrix, which 
reduces their bioavailability. The Ecosystems Research Division also 
will validate the ground-water model used to develop the pollutant 
limits for the ground-water exposure pathway for land application and 
surface disposal. Further, the Western Ecology Division (Corvallis, 
Oregon) in EPA's National Health and Environmental Effects Research 
Laboratory is examining issues concerning evaluation of phytotoxic 
risk. This will include a review of appropriate measures of 
phytotoxicity and studies concerning plant uptake of metals.
    EPA received a single comment on the proposed field study for 
evaluation of ecological effects. The commenter stressed that it is 
critical that realistic exposure scenarios be used. The Agency agrees 
with that comment. EPA is currently working with the Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory to define the environmental end points of concerns and 
reasonable exposure assumptions for the ecological risk study.

B. Pollutant Limits for Cadmium

    The Agency received a number of public comments on the final 
cadmium pollutant limits for land application. Some comments were 
supportive of the final limits for this pollutant. However, a few 
commenters expressed some concerns. These concerns fell into two 
general categories: (1) The United States Department of Agriculture 
(USDA) expressed concern that the final cadmium limits may jeopardize 
the export of grains to foreign markets, and (2) other commenters 
expressed concern that the risk-based cadmium limits may not be 
protective enough. In arguing for lower cadmium limits, commenters 
indicated that the limiting exposure pathway, the exposure assumptions, 
and the analysis methods used in the risk assessment should be 
reevaluated.
    With respect to the first issue, EPA believes that the current 
cadmium pollutant concentration limit of 39 mg Cd/kg sewage sludge 
generally should not be a concern for the export of most grains. 
However, because it is possible that some local conditions may cause 
cadmium levels to exceed European commodity tolerance levels for grain 
crops, EPA and USDA have agreed to develop a joint advisory statement 
for farmers who may export grain to the European markets. The advisory 
would recommend lower cadmium limits for cropland that may be used to 
produce crops for exports.
    As requested by some commenters, the Agency has reevaluated the 
cadmium risk assessment and has concluded that its risk assessment 
approach for cadmium is conservative and defensible. EPA has thoroughly 
responded to these comments in the record for today's rulemaking. EPA 
continues to believe that the present cadmium pollutant limits are 
sufficiently protective of highly exposed individuals. There may be 
circumstances where site-specific conditions would suggest that a more 
stringent pollutant limit may be more appropriate. However, EPA's 
regulatory policy is to use conservative assumptions that will protect 
highly exposed individuals. This approach ensures protection against 
reasonably anticipated risks, not the risk associated with highly 
unlikely or unusual circumstances. The selection of data, assumptions, 
and analysis methods used in developing the land application cadmium 
pollutant limits are consistent with this policy. After further review, 
EPA concluded that the data and methods used in the risk assessment 
reflect actual growing conditions found throughout the United States.
    As the Agency previously determined, the land application cadmium 
pollutant limit adopted for the final rule adequately protects public 
health and the environment. EPA has not received any new information 
since publication of the final rule that would indicate that a change 
in the current cadmium pollutant limit is warranted. Therefore, the 
current land application ceiling concentration limit of 85 mg/kg, the 
current cumulative pollutant loading rate of 39 kg/ha, the current 
pollutant concentration limit of 39 mg/kg, and the current annual 
pollutant loading rate of 1.9 kg/ha/365 day period remain in effect.
    For additional discussion of the specific risk assessment issues 
and EPA's rationale for the final land application cadmium pollutant 
limits, EPA refers readers to the Response to Comments Document 
available in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.

C. Percent of the MCL for the Ground-Water Pathway

    In the final rule, EPA asked for comment on whether, in its 
exposure assessments, a percentage of the end point to be protected 
(i.e., a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL)) should be used to develop the 
allowable concentration of pollutants in sewage sludge for the ground-
water pathway in both the land application and surface disposal risk 
assessments. EPA did not receive any public comments on this issue and 
is not, therefore, proposing any corresponding change to the 
regulation.

III. Proposed Amendments to Land Application, Surface Disposal, and 
Pathogens and Vector Attraction Reduction Subparts

A. Ceiling Concentration Limits--Land Application

    Today's notice would amend the applicability section of the land 
application requirements to clarify that the ceiling concentration 
limits apply to all sewage sludge that is land-applied. While 
Sec. 503.13(a)(1) requires that all land-applied sewage sludge must 
meet the ceiling concentration limits in Table 1 of Sec. 503.13, the 
current language in Sec. 503.10 (b)(1), (c)(1), (d), (e), (f), and (g) 
does not expressly require meeting the ceiling concentration limits. 
The proposed amendment would remove any ambiguity about the obligation 
to comply with ceiling concentration limits for land-applied sewage 
sludge.

B. Frequency of Monitoring

    Sections 503.16, 503.26, and 503.46 of the current sewage sludge 
regulation require that sewage sludge be monitored for certain 
pollutants. How frequently sewage sludge must be monitored varies with 
the amount of sewage sludge that is used or disposed. The regulation 
allows the permitting authority to reduce the monitoring frequency 
after the sewage sludge has been monitored for two years. In no case, 
however, under the present requirements, may the permitting authority 
authorize monitoring less frequently than once per year for each use or 
disposal practice.
    Today's notice would amend Sec. 503.16, Sec. 503.26, and 
Sec. 503.46 to delete the language requiring monitoring of sewage 
sludge at least once per year. This amendment would provide additional 
flexibility to the permitting authority to reduce the frequency of 
monitoring for sewage sludge to less than once per year.

C. Certification Language

    Sections 503.17 and 503.27 of the current sewage sludge regulation 
require sewage sludge preparers, land appliers, and the owner/operator 
of a surface disposal site to keep certain records, and in the case of 
Class I sludge management facilities and certain POTWs, to report this 
information to the permitting authority. The regulation also requires 
the recordkeepers to certify to compliance with all applicable 
requirements. Failure to certify may result in significant penalties.
    The effect of this requirement may be to discourage self-reporting 
of violations. If monitoring measurements indicate that applicable 
sewage sludge requirements are not being met, a 

[[Page 54774]]
recordkeeper obviously cannot certify to compliance without perjury. 
This puts the recordkeeper in the position of either committing perjury 
or failing to make the certifications. In either event, the 
recordkeeper risks significant penalties.
    EPA is proposing to amend the language for the certification 
statements in Sec. 503.17 and Sec. 503.27. Under today's proposal, the 
recordkeeper would be required to certify only to the accuracy of the 
information that will be used to determine compliance with a part 503 
requirement and its preparation under the certifier's supervision 
rather than to compliance with applicable part 503 requirement.

D. Time of Application

    Sections 503.17 (a)(5)(ii)(C) and (b)(3) of the current regulation 
require the applier of sewage sludge subject to cumulative pollutant 
loading rates and the applier of domestic septage to agricultural land, 
forest, or a reclamation site, respectively, to record the time of 
application as well as supply certain other information needed to track 
the amount of regulated pollutants and the volume of domestic septage 
applied to a site. (See Sec. 503.17(a)(5)(ii)( D) and (E); 
Sec. 503.17(b)(5), which require recordkeeping on the cumulative amount 
of each pollutant applied at the site, the amount of sewage sludge 
applied, and the rate at which domestic septage is applied.) The 
information on cumulative amounts of pollutants applied is needed so 
that subsequent land appliers may determine whether additional amounts 
of sewage sludge can be applied at a site without exceeding the 
cumulative pollutant loading rate for any pollutant.
    Questions have been raised about the meaning of the time of 
application requirement as well as the need for this information. After 
reviewing this issue, EPA has concluded that information on the time of 
application is not needed to track the amount of the part 503 
pollutants applied to a site in bulk sewage sludge or the volume of 
domestic septage applied to the land. EPA has determined that, with 
information identifying the site at which the sewage sludge has been 
applied, the total cumulative load of metals at the site and the 
quantity of sewage sludge, subsequent sewage sludge appliers will have 
all the information needed to comply with the land application 
cumulative pollutant loading rates. The time of application also is not 
needed when domestic septage is applied to agricultural land, forest, 
or a reclamation site. For this reason, today's proposal deletes the 
requirement to record the time of application.
    Today's proposal does not delete the requirement to record the date 
that sewage sludge or domestic septage is applied to site. The date is 
needed to know when the site restrictions for Class B sewage sludge 
begin and when they end. The date of application also is needed to 
determine when site restrictions begin and end when domestic septage is 
applied to agricultural land, forest, and reclamation sites.
    EPA also is proposing today to amend section 503.17(a)(4)(ii) to 
add the requirement that the date of application be kept. This is 
needed because in this recordkeeping scenario, the sewage sludge is 
Class B with respect to pathogens. When a Class B sewage sludge is land 
applied, the date the site restrictions begin and end has to be known. 
Adding the requirement to record the date of application will provide 
the information needed to know when the site restrictions begin.

E. Definition of pH

    EPA is proposing to clarify the definition of pH in Sec. 503.31 in 
response to a recommendation received from the National Lime 
Association (NLA). The NLA recommended that EPA clarify the definition 
of pH to indicate that the pH is expressed at 25 deg. C, the reference 
temperature for reporting pH values in the scientific literature.
    The pH is very sensitive to temperature, especially at pHs of 12 
and above. Certain of the pathogen alternatives and vector attraction 
reduction options call for raising the pH of sewage sludge or domestic 
septage to 12 or higher by alkali addition. Concern has been expressed 
that the pH readings taken after the addition of alkali will be high 
for temperatures below 25 deg. C and low for temperatures above 25 deg. 
C (i.e., there is an inverse relationship between temperature and pH). 
See discussion in 58 FR 46052, August 31, 1993.
    Based on the above, the Agency has concluded that the pH of the 
sewage sludge or domestic septage must be measured at 25 deg. C or, if 
measured at a different temperature, must be converted to an equivalent 
value at 25 deg. C. See Smith and Farrell, which provides the following 
equation:

pH correction=0.03 pH units/1.0 deg. C X (Temp deg. Cmeas-25 deg. 
C).

    EPA is proposing to amend the regulation accordingly.

F. Class B, Alternative 1--at the Time of Use or Disposal

EPA has concluded that the requirement in Class B, Alternative 1 does 
not have to be met at the time sewage sludge is used or disposed. This 
alternative, which requires that the fecal coliform density in the 
sewage sludge be less than either 2,000,000 Most Probable Number per 
gram of total solids or 2,000,000 Colony Forming Units per gram of 
total solids, can be met any time before the sewage sludge is used or 
disposed. The site restrictions that have to be met when a Class B 
sewage sludge is land applied and the surface disposal management 
practices provide the environment time to reduce remaining pathogens in 
a Class B sewage sludge to below detectable levels. This proposed 
change makes Class B, Alternative 1 consistent with Class B, 
Alternatives 2 and 3.

G. Class B Site Restriction for Grazing of Animals

    When sewage sludge is used or disposed at a site, the current rule 
(Sec. 503.32(b)(5)(v) and Sec. 503. 24(l)) prohibits grazing of animals 
at the site in certain circumstances. Controlling access to limit the 
exposure of all animals is difficult, if not impossible, to implement. 
EPA is accordingly proposing to amend the text of Sec. 503.32(b)(5)(v)) 
to remove ambiguity in the language. The Agency's intention is to 
prohibit intentional, not inadvertent, grazing of animals.
    Note, however, that the land application site restriction and 
surface disposal management practices that restrict public access may 
prevent access to the site for many types of animals depending on how 
public access is restricted (e.g., by a fence).

H. Vector Attraction Reduction Equivalency

    Sewage sludge has a number of characteristics that may attract 
disease-spreading agents like birds, flies and rats. Consequently, the 
regulation includes requirements to reduce the potential for attracting 
these disease-spreading agents--so-called ``vector attraction 
reduction'' requirements. The rule provides a number of options for 
achieving the required vector attraction reduction.
    The Agency has received requests for additional flexibility in 
meeting these requirements similar to that provided in the current 
regulation for Class A and Class B pathogen reduction requirements. 
Processes other than those prescribed in the regulation may be used to 
reduce pathogens if the 

[[Page 54775]]
permitting authority determines they are equivalent to a Process to 
Further Reduce Pathogens (PFRP) or a Process to Significantly Reduce 
Pathogens (PSRP). See 58 FR 9400, February 19, 1993.
    Under the current system, the permitting authority must decide 
whether a pathogen reduction process is equivalent. Often, the 
permitting authority requests assistance in making this decision from 
EPA's Pathogen Equivalency Committee (PEC). The PEC, which consists of 
representatives from EPA's Office of Research and Development and from 
EPA's Office of Water, provides technical assistance on pathogen issues 
and makes recommendations on equivalency determinations. The PEC only 
makes recommendations on pathogen equivalency determinations. Thus, the 
final decision rests with the permitting authority.
    EPA is proposing in today's notice to amend Sec. 503.15(c), 
Sec. 503.25(b) and Sec. 503.33(a) so as to allow the same flexibility 
with respect to the vector attraction reduction options that require 
treatment of the sewage sludge. EPA is not proposing to authorize an 
equivalency determination for the barrier vector attraction reduction 
options (i.e., Options 9 and 10 for land application and Options 9, 10 
and 11 for surface disposal) because EPA is unaware of any barrier 
options other than those already provided in part 503. Commenters 
should submit any information they may have about other options. As 
with equivalency for pathogen reduction, the final decision on vector 
attraction reduction equivalency will be the responsibility of the 
permitting authority. EPA's PEC may assist the permitting authority in 
making vector attraction reduction equivalency determinations.

I. Vector Attraction Reduction at the Time of Use or Disposal

    Under the current regulation, the vector attraction reduction 
options that require treatment of the sewage sludge (i.e., Options 1 
through 8) may be met any time before the sewage sludge is used or 
disposed. Options 9, 10, and 11 must be met at the time the sewage 
sludge is used or disposed. EPA has reviewed these options and 
concluded that certain modifications may be needed to protect public 
health and the environment and to introduce additional flexibility.
    When any of the first five options is employed, the sewage sludge 
does not become more attractive to vectors if it is stored before it is 
used or disposed. Thus, Options 1 through 5 may appropriately be met 
any time before the sewage sludge is used or disposed. However, EPA has 
concluded that this may not be true in the case of Options 6, 7, and 8.
    Vector attraction reduction achieved by pH adjustment (i.e., Option 
6) is not permanent. Adjusting the pH of the sewage sludge to 12 does 
not change the characteristics of the sewage sludge significantly, but 
instead causes stasis in biological activity. If the pH should drop, 
the surviving bacterial spores could become active and the sewage 
sludge could putrefy and attract vectors. The target pH conditions in 
Option 6 allow the sewage sludge to be stored for several days before 
it is used or disposed without the pH dropping.
    If quicklime or slaked lime is used to adjust the pH, the pH is not 
expected to fall below 12 for up to 25 days after the addition of the 
lime. If a different alkali (e.g., cement kiln dust or wood ash) is 
used to adjust the pH, the period before which the pH drops may be 
different because other alkali materials are more soluble than lime. 
Thus, less undissolved material is available to maintain the pH as it 
starts to drop.
    Because the pH of the sewage sludge could drop after the target 
conditions in Option 6 are reached, the Agency is proposing in today's 
rulemaking to require that vector attraction reduction Option 6 must be 
met at the time the sewage sludge is used or disposed.
    Two approaches could be used to meet this proposed requirement. 
First, the target pH conditions could be met at any time. Just prior to 
use or disposal (e.g., within one or two days), the pH of the sewage 
sludge could be checked. If the pH of a representative sample of the 
sewage sludge is 11.5 or above, vector attraction reduction is 
achieved. If the pH is below 11.5, the pH has to be adjusted again to 
reach the target conditions in Option 6 or another vector attraction 
reduction option (e.g., incorporation) has to be met. The other 
approach is to meet the target conditions in Option 6 at the time of 
use or disposal. For example, the pH could be adjusted two days prior 
to when the sewage sludge is used or disposed and the target conditions 
could be met during those two days.
    Vector attraction reduction Options 7 and 8 require that the 
percent solids in the sewage sludge be above a certain value. If the 
percent solids drops (i.e., moisture content increases), vectors could 
be attracted to the sewage sludge. Thus, today's proposal also would 
require that vector attraction reduction Options 7 and 8 be met at the 
time the sewage sludge is used or disposed.
    Vector attraction reduction Option 10 requires incorporation of 
sewage sludge into the soil within six hours after it is land applied 
or surfaced disposed. This reduces the attraction of vectors to the 
sewage sludge by placing a barrier between the sewage sludge and the 
vectors. In some cases, it may not be feasible to incorporate the 
sewage sludge into the soil within six hours after it is land applied 
or surface disposed. Today's proposal would allow the permitting 
authority the flexibility to address those cases on a site-specific 
basis.
    Today's proposal would amend Sec. 503.33 (b)(6), (b)(7), and (b)(8) 
by adding language making it clear that these requirements must be met 
at a defined time rather than any time before the sewage sludge is used 
or disposed.
    The proposal also would amend Sec. 503.33(b)(10)(i) to add language 
to authorize the permitting authority to specify a different time 
period during which sewage sludge has to be incorporated into the soil 
after it is land applied or surface disposed. This would allow the 
permitting authority to consider site-specific conditions (e.g., the 
remoteness of a land application site) that may affect the time period 
during which sewage sludge can be incorporated into the soil.

J. Technical Corrections

    Today's proposal also contains several technical corrections. The 
following proposed amendments are minor in nature and provide 
clarification on some of the technical requirements of the final part 
503 regulation.

1. Sec. 503.16(a)(1) and Sec. 503.26(a)(1)--Frequency of Monitoring

    Sections 503.16(a)(1) and 503.26(a)(1) contain the requirement for 
monitoring for pollutants, pathogen densities, and vector attraction 
reduction. Those sections incorrectly indicate there are pathogen 
density requirements in Sec. 503.32 (b)(3) and (b)(4). Today's notice 
deletes the reference to Sec. 503.32 (b)(3) and (b)(4) from 
Sec. 503.16(a)(1) and Sec. 503.26(a)(1).
    Sections 503.16(a)(1) and 503.26(a)(1) also incorrectly indicate 
that the frequency of monitoring requirements apply to vector 
attraction reduction Option 5 in Sec. 503.33(b)(5). Today's notice 
deletes the reference to vector attraction reduction Option 5 from 
Sec. 503.16(a)(1) and Sec. 503.26(a)(1).

2. Sec. 503.17(b)(7)--Recordkeeping for Land Application of Domestic 
Septage

    Today's notice amends Sec. 503.17(b)(7) by changing an incorrect 
reference. 

[[Page 54776]]


3. Sec. 503.18--Reporting

    Today's notice corrects the omission of a reporting date in the 
current rule by inserting February 19th in Sec. 503.18(a)(2).

4. Sec. 503.22(b)--General Requirements

    Today's notice amends Sec. 503.22(b) correcting the statutory 
reference and by inserting the appropriate date.

5. Sec. 503.32(a)(3)--Pathogens

    Today's notice amends Sec. 503.32(a)(3) to clarify that this option 
excludes composting. Class A, Alternative 1 was designed for thermal 
processes such as anaerobic digestion and does not apply to composting.

6. Appendix B to Part 503--Pathogen Treatment Processes

    The description of Process to Further Reduce Pathogens (PFRP) No. 6 
(Gamma ray irradiation) is corrected to insert the phrase ``at dosages 
of at least 1.0 megarad at room temperature (ca. 20 deg. C)'' that was 
inadvertently omitted.

IV. Proposed Amendments to the Incineration Subpart

A. Introduction

    A sewage sludge incinerator is a treatment works treating domestic 
sewage as defined in 40 CFR 122.2 and 501.2. In most cases, the 
treatment works generating the sewage sludge operates the sewage sludge 
incinerator so that a permit issued to the generating treatment works 
will contain the part 503 requirements applicable to its incinerator.
    Subpart E of part 503, 40 CFR 503.40-503.48, establishes the 
technical requirements for the incineration of sewage sludge. Under 
section 405 of the CWA, EPA must establish adequately protective 
pollutant limits for the use or disposal of sewage sludge. However, 
where numerical pollutant limits are not feasible, EPA may adopt design 
or operational standards. EPA has done both for incinerated sewage 
sludge. EPA established pollutant limits that restrict the level of 
certain pollutants in the sewage sludge to ensure that pollutants in 
emissions from a sewage sludge incinerator will not exceed safe levels. 
In the case of organic pollutants, EPA established an operational 
standard for total hydrocarbons (THC) in the emissions rather than 
limits on organic pollutants in the sewage sludge fed to the 
incinerator.
    Subpart E establishes these requirements for the firing of sewage 
sludge: (1) A general requirement in Sec. 503.42, (2) compliance with 
the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) 
for beryllium and mercury (Sec. 503.43); (3) sewage sludge pollutant 
limits for lead, arsenic, cadmium, chromium and nickel (Sec. 503.43); 
(4) an operational standard for total hydrocarbons (THC) in the stack 
emissions (Sec. 503.44); (5) management practices (Sec. 503.45); and 
(6) frequency of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements 
(Sec. 503.46-503.48).
    Under the regulation, as discussed in more detail below, site-
specific variables are used to determine the specific requirements for 
an individual sewage sludge incinerator. These variables include the 
type of incinerator, type of air pollution control device(s) (APCD), 
incinerator combustion temperature, dispersion factor, incinerator 
control efficiency, and incinerator stack height. Thus, for example, 
allowable pollutant concentrations in the sewage sludge will vary 
depending on dispersion of the emissions from the incinerator stack. 
This, in turn, is a function of meteorological conditions around the 
incinerator site as well as the height of the incinerator exit gas 
stack.
    Under current 40 CFR 503.43, the pollutant limits for all sewage 
sludge incinerators depend on actual site-specific conditions rather 
than default values or standard factors that necessarily overgeneralize 
sewage sludge incinerator site conditions. Thus, the regulation 
provides flexibility to tailor pollutant limits for individual sewage 
sludge incinerators based on actual conditions at the incinerator. (For 
example, the allowable lead concentration in incinerated sewage sludge 
depends on a dispersion factor. However, the dispersion factor must be 
determined from an air dispersion model which in turn requires site-
specific data.) As a result, while the current regulation describes 
what the standard is and how it is determined, the actual requirements 
are not detailed in the regulation. Instead, the regulation calls for 
determination of site-specific factors in accordance with instructions 
from the permitting authority (e.g., section 503.43(a)(2)(i), ``when * 
* * specified by the permitting authority * * *'').
    The current regulation also requires continuous emission monitoring 
of certain incinerator operating conditions to ensure compliance with 
the part 503 requirements. Again, the sewage sludge incinerator 
requirements in current 40 CFR 503.45 call for the permitting authority 
to ``specify'' the criteria for installation, calibration, operation, 
and maintenance of the instruments used to measure and record these 
conditions (e.g., combustion temperature). Other current management 
practices require the permitting authority to ``specify'' maximum 
combustion temperature and values for the operating parameters for the 
sewage sludge incinerator air pollution control device(s), which also 
may vary from sewage sludge incinerator to sewage sludge incinerator. 
Finally, current subpart E requires the permitting authority to specify 
the frequency of monitoring for beryllium and mercury and for the 
operating parameters for the air pollution control devices.
    In summary, the subpart E part 503 requirements provide for 
consideration of site-specific factors by directing the permitting 
authority to specify parameters required to determine applicable 
requirements. The result of this site-by-site tailoring of incinerator 
requirements is that the determination of an individual incinerator's 
applicable requirements are deferred until the permitting authority's 
decision. Put another way, the regulation already contains a provision 
requiring that incinerators meet the specific requirements, but until 
the permitting authority specifies the underlying site-specific factors 
for the individual sewage sludge incinerator, compliance or non-
compliance with the requirements cannot be determined. This approach is 
different from the other sewage sludge use or disposal requirements in 
part 503, which are designed to be self-implementing.

B. Description of Current Regulation and Proposed Amendments

1. Site-specific Exemption From Frequency of Monitoring, Recordkeeping, 
and Reporting Requirements in Incineration Subpart
a. Current Regulation
    Section 503.43 establishes pollutant limits for metals in sewage 
sludge that is incinerated. As discussed further below, these pollutant 
limits vary for each incinerator based on site-specific factors (e.g., 
location, control efficiency).
    Since publication of the part 503 regulation, EPA has reviewed 
information on the pollutant limits, determined as prescribed in 
Sec. 503.43, for a number of different sewage sludge incinerators. In 
many cases, the pollutant limits are considerably higher--often several 
orders of magnitude--than the actual concentration of metals in the 
sewage sludge being incinerated. This indicates that the incinerator 
operating conditions and site conditions will permit safe incineration 
of sewage sludge with high 

[[Page 54777]]
concentration of pollutants. Given the resulting ample margin of safety 
between the calculated pollutant limit and the actual concentrations of 
metals in incinerated sewage sludge, EPA is considering introducing 
additional flexibility into the incinerator requirements.
b. Proposed Amendment
    To reduce the burden of compliance with the part 503 requirements, 
EPA is proposing to amend the applicability section (Sec. 503.40) of 
the incineration subpart to not subject an incinerator to a pollutant 
limit and the associated frequency of monitoring, recordkeeping, and 
reporting requirements for the pollutant in certain circumstances, if 
approved by the permitting authority. Under the approach proposed 
today, the sewage sludge would not have to be monitored for a 
particular pollutant and records of the concentration of a pollutant in 
sewage sludge would not have to be kept if the calculated pollutant 
limit exceeds the highest average daily concentration for that 
pollutant in the sewage sludge for the months in the previous calendar 
year.
    The proposed approach assumes that the incinerator continues to be 
operated as it was operated during its performance test. If it is not 
operated in that manner, the permitting authority may reimpose the 
frequency of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for 
the particular pollutant.
    EPA requests comments on the proposed site-specific exemption from 
the frequency of monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements 
for sewage sludge incinerators. EPA also requests comments on other 
approaches that should be considered.
    For example, should the Agency limit the exemption to circumstances 
in which the calculated pollutant limit is significantly higher than 
the average daily concentration of the pollutant in the incinerated 
sewage sludge? If so, how should the Agency define significantly 
higher? An order of magnitude higher than the actual concentration in 
the sewage sludge, 50 percent higher, or some other percentage?
2. Pollutant Limits for Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead and Nickel
a. Current Regulation
    40 CFR 503.43 establishes limits on the allowable ``daily 
concentration'' of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead and nickel in 
sewage sludge that is incinerated. The allowable limits are calculated 
using equations set forth in the regulation and are dependent on a 
number of factors that vary with specific conditions at an incinerator 
site. For all five regulated metals, the regulation requires 
determination of the following two factors that are dependent on site-
specific conditions. These are: (1) A dispersion factor (DF)--how 
pollutants are dispersed when they exit the incinerator stack, and (2) 
the incinerator's control efficiency (CE)--how efficiently the 
incinerator removes pollutants in the sewage sludge that is 
incinerated. The regulation requires use of an air dispersion model to 
determine the DF and a performance test to establish the CE, both of 
which must be ``specified by the permitting authority.'' In addition, 
if authorized by the permitting authority, the regulation provides for 
the calculation of an alternative allowable chromium limit based on a 
site-specific measurement of the fraction of hexavalent chromium to 
total chromium in an incinerator's stack emissions. The preamble to the 
final part 503 regulation explains in more detail at 58 FR 9355, 
February 19, 1993, how allowable concentrations are determined. EPA did 
not rely on assumed values for dispersion factors and control 
efficiency because the Agency concluded that use of such values would 
overgeneralize site conditions and establish more restrictive 
conditions than dictated by protection of public health and the 
environment (see 58 FR at 9355).
b. Proposed Amendment
    The proposal would revise 40 CFR 503.43(c)(1) and (d)(1) to clarify 
that the sewage sludge must meet the average daily concentration for a 
pollutant based on the number of days in a month that the incinerator 
operates. This clarification is consistent with EPA's risk assessment 
for incinerators, which was based on average daily values. (See the 
definition of risk specific concentration (RSC) in Sec. 503.41(i), 
which is used in the calculation of the allowable average daily sewage 
sludge concentration.)
    The proposal also would revise 40 CFR 503.43(c)(2), (c)(3), (d)(4), 
and (d)(5) to remove the requirement for the permitting authority to 
prescribe the air dispersion model used in determining the DF, and the 
performance test to determine CE. In addition, the proposal would 
delete the requirement in current Sec. 503(d)(3) that requires the 
permitting authority to authorize an allowable chromium limit based on 
site-specific hexavalent chromium stack emissions.
    EPA is proposing these changes to modify the regulation to make it 
self-implementing and thus reduce the burden on the regulated community 
as well as the Agency's own limited permitting resources. In the 
current form, the regulation requires that the permitting authority 
determine appropriate models and performance tests parameters before 
pollutant limits can be calculated. This approach assumed a process in 
which the person who fires sewage sludge in a sewage sludge incinerator 
worked closely with a permitting authority in deciding what models and 
performance test procedures would be appropriate.
    Recognizing that such a process can be very resource-intensive, EPA 
is today proposing a different approach. Under this approach, allowable 
pollutant limits must be calculated using the equation provided in the 
regulation. To establish these limits, the dispersion factor must be 
determined through an air dispersion model and the incinerator control 
efficiencies must be determined through a performance test of the 
incinerator. The choice of appropriate models and the specifications 
for the performance tests rests with the person who fires sewage sludge 
in a sewage sludge incinerator. These choices will, of course, be 
reviewed by the permitting authority. Sewage sludge incinerators should 
retain all records that show how allowable pollutant limits were 
calculated.
    Proposed new Sec. 503.43(e)(1) describes the factors that should be 
considered in selecting an air dispersion model. The air dispersion 
model must be appropriate for the geographical, physical, and 
population conditions at the sewage sludge incinerator site. Its 
selection must be consistent with good air pollution control practices 
for minimizing air emissions. New dispersion modeling to establish the 
DF is required where, as provided in proposed 40 CFR 503.43(e)(4), 
geographic or physical conditions at the incinerator site warrant.
    Under proposed 40 CFR 503.43(e)(2), a person who fires sewage 
sludge in a sewage sludge incinerator must submit a proposed air 
dispersion modeling protocol to the permitting authority no later than 
30 days from the date of publication of a final rule promulgating such 
an amendment. This will provide the permitting authority the 
opportunity to review the submitted protocol to insure that it 
accurately models conditions at the incinerator site. The permitting 
authority must notify the operator within 30 days if the selected model 
may not be used to determine the DF because it is inappropriate. If the 
person who fires sewage sludge does not hear from the permitting 
authority to the 

[[Page 54778]]
contrary, that person may use the submitted protocol to calculate its 
DF.
    EPA has published several guidance documents that contain 
recommendations as to how to select appropriate air dispersion models. 
These models take into account such site-specific factors as stack 
height, stack diameter, stack gas temperature, exit velocity, and 
surrounding terrain. See U.S. EPA, ``Guideline on Air Quality Models 
(Revised)'' (EPA-450/2-78-027R) (July 1993). This information also is 
available in Appendix W to 40 CFR Part 51. See also U.S. EPA, 
``Technical Support Document for Sewage Sludge Incineration'' at 
Section 5.6.1 (EPA 822/R-93-003) (November 1992).
    In many cases, the appropriate air dispersion factor can be 
determined using the ISCLT2 air dispersion model. The ISCLT2 model is a 
steady-state Gaussian plume model that can be used to assess pollutant 
emissions from a wide variety of sources including sewage sludge 
incinerators in the long-term mode. It is appropriate for both rural or 
urban areas, and either flat or rolling terrain whenever the terrain 
elevation is lower than the stack height. The model can account for the 
following factors: settling and dry deposition of particles; downwash; 
area, line and volume sources; plume rise as a function of downwind 
distance; separation of point sources (multiple stacks); and limited 
terrain adjustment. If ground level terrain in the impact area exceeds 
the stack height, complex and intermediate terrain modeling also must 
be addressed.
    As noted, this proposed rulemaking also would revise Sec. 503.43 
(c)(3) and (d)(5) to delete the requirement that the permitting 
authority specify how to determine the CE. Proposed Sec. 503.43 (c)(3) 
and (d)(5) provide, instead, that the CE for equation (4) and equation 
(5), respectively, shall be determined from a performance test of the 
sewage sludge incinerator. Proposed paragraph (e)(1) of Sec. 503.43 
requires that the performance test be appropriate for the type of 
sewage sludge incinerator and that the test be conducted in a manner 
consistent with good air pollution control practices for minimizing air 
emissions. The performance test measures the degree to which the sewage 
sludge incinerator and associated air pollution control devices remove 
a given pollutant. As discussed below, performance tests also are 
required because they generate data on which to base the parameter 
operating ranges for the incinerator.
    Proposed paragraph (e)(3) also specifies procedures to be followed 
in conducting performance tests of sewage sludge incinerators. These 
procedures parallel those in 40 CFR 60.8, a regulation that describes 
the general procedures for conducting performance testing under the 
Clean Air Act. EPA believes that it is necessary to specify minimal 
procedures for conducting performance testing now that subpart E of 
part 503 is self-implementing.
    Proposed 40 CFR 503.43(e)(3) would require performance testing 
under representative incinerator operating conditions for metals 
emissions, with the highest expected feed rate of sewage sludge within 
design specifications. Further, the permitting authority must be 
notified at least 30 days prior to the test so the permitting authority 
may observe the test. Each performance test must consist of at least 
three separate runs at the same operating conditions. For the purpose 
of establishing a control efficiency for a pollutant, the arithmetic 
mean of the results of the three runs should be used.
    EPA has prepared guidance on the performance test used to develop 
the incinerator control efficiency for a pollutant. Section 5.6.2 and 
appendix E of the ``Technical Support Document for Sewage Sludge 
Incineration'' (EPA 822/R-93-003) (November 1992) discuss performance 
testing to derive the control efficiency for the five metals limited 
for sewage sludge incinerators under part 503 (arsenic, cadmium, 
chromium, lead, and nickel). EPA also published guidance on performance 
testing in the September, 1994 draft version of the ``Guidance for 
Writing Permits for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge.''
    As noted, this proposed rulemaking would delete the requirement in 
current Sec. 503.43(d)(3) for the permitting authority authorization of 
a site-specific chromium risk specific concentration (RSC) used in the 
equation (5) calculation. Either the national default RSC or the RSC 
calculated using equation (6) can be used in equation (5) to develop a 
pollutant limit for chromium.
    EPA has developed a methodology for determining hexavalent chromium 
emissions from stationary sources. See U.S. EPA, ``Laboratory and Field 
Evaluations of a Methodology for Determining Hexavalent Chromium 
Emissions from Stationary Sources'' (EPA/600/3-91/052) (1992). Persons 
who choose to calculate RSC values for chromium using equation (6) must 
use a scientifically defensible methodology for determining hexavalent 
chromium emissions.
    EPA also proposes to make a technical change to Sec. 503.43(c)(3) 
to correct the number of the referenced equation to (4). In addition, 
EPA proposes to make three technical changes to Sec. 503.43(d) (1) and 
(2). These changes will correct two typographical errors in the 
definition of terms in (d)(1) and in the reference to Equation ``6'' in 
(d)(2).
    Given the proposed deadlines for complying with this regulation, 
EPA would encourage incinerators that do not have a permit to begin the 
effort to determine the pollutant limits for the incinerator. Prior to 
the effective date of this regulation, if EPA has been notified about 
the model used to determine the DF and if EPA was notified 30 days in 
advance of a performance test, following promulgation, the information 
on the DF model will not have to be resubmitted and a second 
performance test will not have to be conducted. However, in the event 
that conditions and circumstances change significantly at the 
incinerator after the allowable pollutant limits are calculated, the 
requirements in today's proposed rule will apply when the final 
regulation becomes effective.
    The control efficiency of a sewage sludge incinerator is derived 
from a comparison of the mass of a pollutant in the sewage sludge fed 
to the incinerator to the mass of the pollutant in the exit gas from 
the incinerator stack. Thus, to determine the control efficiency, 
representative samples of the sewage sludge fed to the incinerator and 
the exit gas from the incinerator stack have to be collected and 
analyzed for the pollutants in 40 CFR 503.43. Under Sec. 503.8(b)(4), 
EPA requires the use of a specific test methodology for analyzing the 
metals concentrations in the sewage sludge fed to the incinerator: 
``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,'' 
EPA Publication SW-846, Second Edition (1982) with Updates I (April 
1984) and II (April 1985) and Third Edition (November 1986) with 
Revision I (December 1987).
    EPA does not currently require the use of a specific test 
methodology for calculating the metals emissions in exit gases from 
sewage sludge incinerator stacks. EPA does require, however, the use of 
a specific methodology for the determination of metals emissions 
(chromium, cadmium, arsenic, lead, and zinc) in exhaust gases from 
hazardous waste incinerators and other similar combustion processes as 
part of the Methods Manual for Compliance with the BIF Regulations in 
40 CFR part 266, appendix IX. (The method also is available in ``EPA 
Methods Manual for Compliance with the BIF Regulations'' (EPA 530-SW-
91-010).) Under the Clean Air Act, EPA has proposed to add 

[[Page 54779]]
method 29, ``Determination of Metals Emissions from Stationary 
Sources,'' to appendix A of part 60, and to propose amendments to 
method 101A of appendix B of part 61. (59 FR 48259, September 20, 
1994). Method 29 is being proposed so that it can be used to determine 
mercury, cadmium, and lead emissions from municipal waste combusters 
under subpart Ea of part 60. (Method 29 is already applicable to 
arsenic, chromium, and nickel.) Public comment is specifically 
requested on the propriety of requiring use of one of these methods 
(assuming the air method is finalized as proposed) to analyze emissions 
from sewage sludge incinerator stacks for the metals regulated under 
Sec. 503.43(c) and (d).
3. Management Practices
a. Current Regulation
i. Specification for Instruments
    40 CFR 503.45 contains seven management practices for incineration 
of sewage sludge. These include requirements to install four 
instruments to measure and record data to determine compliance with the 
THC operational standard. Key operating parameters for sewage sludge 
incinerators are monitored continuously to indicate that adequate 
combustion conditions are maintained in the incinerator (consistent 
with the conducted performance test) and to minimize metal and THC 
emissions. The regulation requires that the four monitoring instruments 
be installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained, as specified by the 
permitting authority.
    40 CFR 503.44 contains an operational standard for the total 
hydrocarbons (THC) concentration in the exit gas from a sewage sludge 
incinerator. By controlling THC, EPA controls the emission of organic 
pollutants in the sewage sludge fed to the incinerator and created 
during the incineration process. Under Sec. 503.44(c), the monthly 
average concentration for total hydrocarbons in the sewage sludge 
incinerator exit gas may not exceed 100 parts per million on a 
volumetric basis, when corrected for zero-percent moisture and to 
seven-percent oxygen using equations (7) and (8) of Sec. 503.44.
    As revised in February 1994, 40 CFR 503.40(c) provides the option 
of continuous monitoring of the carbon monoxide concentration in the 
exit gas in lieu of continuous monitoring of the THC concentration in 
the exit gas if specified conditions are met. See 59 FR 9095, February 
25, 1994. As discussed at 59 FR 9098, the alternative of monitoring for 
carbon monoxide is effective pending changes after an EPA study of the 
matter. At the completion of the study, which EPA contemplates will 
address monitoring for carbon monoxide or other parameters (including 
temperature) to measure compliance with the THC operational standard in 
lieu of monitoring THC continuously, EPA will decide whether further 
amendments to part 503 are needed.
    Under 40 CFR 503.45, an instrument must be installed, calibrated, 
operated, and maintained, as specified by the permitting authority, 
that continuously measures and records the following information: the 
total hydrocarbon concentration in the exit gas, the oxygen 
concentration in the exit gas, and information to determine the 
moisture content in the exit gas; and the combustion temperatures in 
the sewage sludge incinerator. By continuously measuring the oxygen 
content and information needed to determine moisture content of the 
exit gas, the THC emission value can be corrected to seven-percent 
oxygen and for zero-percent moisture.
    Where incinerators have monitors that automatically correct for 
moisture content (e.g., continuous CO monitors), a correction for 
moisture content need not be made. In addition, CO and THC monitors and 
measuring devices may be shared if there is more than one sewage sludge 
incinerator at the treatment works.
ii. Specification of Maximum Combustion Temperature
    40 CFR 503.45(e) requires the permitting authority to specify the 
maximum combustion temperature for a sewage sludge incinerator based on 
information obtained from the performance test of the sewage sludge 
incinerator. This practice ensures that the maximum combustion 
temperature does not significantly exceed the combustion temperature 
during the performance test of the incinerator.
iii. Specification of Air Pollution Control Device Operating Parameters
    Another management practice for sewage sludge incineration, which 
is described in Sec. 503.45(f), requires that an air pollution control 
device be operated within the values for the operating parameters 
specified by the permitting authority and that those values be based on 
information obtained during the performance test of the sewage sludge 
incinerator. The regulation contemplates that sewage sludge 
incinerators will have limits and monitoring requirements for selected 
parameters that are consistent with the performance of air pollution 
control devices. Examples of air pollution control devices include 
venturi scrubbers, impingement scrubbers, mist eliminators, dry 
scrubbers, fabric filters, and wet electrostatic precipitators. For 
example, pressure drop, liquid flow rate, gas temperature, and gas flow 
rate are recommended parameters for assessing performance for venturi 
scrubbers.
b. Proposed Regulation
    This proposed rulemaking would revise 40 CFR 503.45 (a)(1) and (b)-
(d) to delete the requirement for the permitting authority to specify 
the manner in which the described instruments are to be installed, 
calibrated, operated, and maintained. Under proposed Sec. 503.45(h)(1), 
the person who fires sewage sludge in a sewage sludge incinerator must 
select the instruments described in Sec. 503.45 (a)(1) and (b)-(d) that 
are appropriate for the type of sewage sludge incinerator and the 
instruments must be installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained 
consistent with good air pollution control practice for minimizing 
emissions.
    In the final part 503 rule, EPA required the permitting authority 
to specify the manner in which these instruments were to be installed, 
calibrated, operated, and maintained because, at that time, there was 
only limited EPA guidance in this area. In June 1994, however, EPA 
published new guidance entitled ``THC Continuous Emission Monitoring 
Guidance for Part 503 Sewage Sludge Incinerators'' (EPA 833-B-94-003). 
The guidance contains recommended installation, calibration, operation, 
and maintenance procedures for the instruments specified in 
Sec. 503.45(a)-(c). With regard to the instrument required under 
Sec. 503.45(d) for continuous measurement of combustion temperatures, 
see the ``Technical Support Document for Sewage Sludge Incineration'' 
at section 7.4 (EPA 822/R-93-003).
    EPA is today also proposing to delete the current requirement for 
the permitting authority to specify the maximum combustion temperature 
for a sewage sludge incinerator and the values for the operating 
parameters for the air pollution control devices in current Sec. 503.45 
(e) and (f). Both sections already provide that the specified values 
are to be based on information obtained during the performance test of 
the sewage sludge incinerator.
    Proposed Sec. 503.45(e) states that the operation of the sewage 
sludge incinerator shall not significantly 

[[Page 54780]]
exceed the maximum combustion temperature for the sewage sludge 
incinerator and that the maximum combustion temperature for the sewage 
sludge incinerator shall be based on information obtained during the 
performance test of the sewage sludge incinerator. EPA recognizes the 
variability during operation of a sewage sludge incinerator and intends 
that the maximum temperature be an average temperature. EPA requests 
comment on the type of averaging and on a range above the maximum seen 
in the performance test that should be allowed.
    Proposed Sec. 503.45(f) states that the operation of the sewage 
sludge incinerator shall not cause the values for the operating 
parameters for the sewage sludge incinerator air pollution control 
device to be exceeded. Proposed Sec. 503.45(f) also requires that the 
air pollution control device selected be appropriate for the particular 
sewage sludge incinerator; that the operating parameters for the air 
pollution control device indicate adequate performance of the device; 
and that the values for the operating parameters for the sewage sludge 
incinerator air pollution control devices be based on results of the 
performance test of the sewage sludge incinerator. No changes should be 
made in the values for the air pollution control device operating 
parameters after the performance test. EPA intends that the values for 
the operating parameters for the sewage sludge incinerator air 
pollution control devices be a range. EPA requests comment on 
appropriate ranges around those seen in the performance test that 
should be allowed for each parameter.
    EPA has developed guidance describing common air pollution control 
devices, the parameters for various air pollution control device 
technologies that indicate adequate performance of the device, and the 
common measuring devices for the respective parameters. See the 
``Technical Support Document for Sewage Sludge Incineration'' sections 
2.3, 7.5, and appendix M (EPA 822/R-93-003).
    As noted above, EPA has developed guidance describing recommended 
parameters for various air pollution control device technologies that 
indicate adequate performance of the device. EPA is considering whether 
it is appropriate to standardize, by regulation, which parameters can 
be used to indicate adequate performance for a particular air pollution 
control device. EPA would appreciate receiving comments concerning 
whether such a regulation is necessary and whether the parameters that 
are listed in appendix M to the ``Technical Support Document for Sewage 
Sludge Incineration,'' as cited above, for each air pollution control 
device continue to be appropriate. If developed, such a regulation 
could allow flexibility in the selection of alternative parameters, 
unless the permitting authority specifies otherwise.
4. Frequency of Monitoring
a. Current Regulation
i. Beryllium, Mercury, and Operating Parameters for Air Pollution 
Control Devices
    40 CFR 503.43 (a) and (b) provide that the firing of sewage sludge 
in a sewage sludge incinerator may not violate the National Emission 
Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP) for beryllium in subpart 
C and for mercury in subpart E of 40 CFR part 61, if applicable. To 
support this pollutant limit, 40 CFR 503.46(a) requires monitoring for 
mercury and beryllium as specified by the permitting authority.
    The NESHAP in 40 CFR 61.32(a) establishes an emission standard for 
beryllium of no more than 10 grams of beryllium emitted over a 24-hour 
period; or, alternatively, upon the approval of the Administrator, 40 
CFR 61.32(b) establishes an ambient concentration limit for beryllium 
in the vicinity of the stationary source of 0.01 g/m\3\, 
averaged over a 30-day period. To comply with Sec. 61.32(a), Sec. 61.33 
imposes a one-time start-up stack sampling requirement for beryllium 
emissions. If the option of compliance with Sec. 61.32(b) is chosen, 
Sec. 61.34 requires the stationary source to locate air sampling sites 
in accordance with a plan approved by the Administrator and to operate 
monitoring sites continuously.
    With regard to mercury, the NESHAP in 40 CFR 61.52(b) establishes 
an emission standard of 3200 grams of mercury per 24-hour period. 
Sections 61.53(d) and 61.54 establish two alternatives means of 
establishing compliance with the emission standard: (1) an emissions 
test or (2) a sewage sludge sampling test. If the incinerator chooses 
sewage sludge sampling, Sec. 61.54 requires the sewage sludge to be 
sampled according to method 105 in appendix B to part 61 and includes 
an equation to determine the mercury emissions from the sewage sludge 
sampling results:
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TP25OC95.000

EHg=Mercury emissions, g/day.
M=Mercury concentration of sewage sludge on a dry solids basis, 
g/g.
Q=Sewage sludge charging rate, Kg/day.
Fsm=Weight fraction of solids in the collected sewage sludge after 
mixing.
1000=Conversion factor, Kg g/g2.

Sections 61.53(d) and 61.54 impose a one-time start-up sampling 
requirement. Section 61.55 imposes an annual monitoring requirement for 
incinerators for which mercury emissions exceed 1,600 grams per 24-hour 
period, demonstrated either by stack sampling according to Sec. 61.53 
or sewage sludge sampling according to Sec. 61.54.
    Part 503 also imposes a monitoring obligation for sewage sludge 
incinerator air pollution control device operating parameters. Current 
40 CFR 503.46(c) requires monitoring for these parameters as specified 
by the permitting authority.
ii. Total Hydrocarbons, Oxygen Concentration, and Information To 
Determine Moisture Content
    Section 503.46(b) requires that the total hydrocarbons (THC) 
concentration and oxygen concentration in the exit gas from a sewage 
sludge incinerator stack and information used to determine moisture 
content in the exit gas be monitored continuously. Oxygen content and 
information used to determine moisture content have to be measured 
continuously because that information is needed to correct the measured 
exit gas THC concentrations to seven percent oxygen and for zero 
percent moisture.
    Sections 503.45 (a) and (b) require that a continuous emissions 
monitor (CEM) for THC and oxygen, respectively, be installed, 
calibrated, operated, and maintained. As mentioned previously, today's 
proposal deletes the requirement for the permitting authority to 
specify how to install, calibrate, operate, and maintain these CEMs.
b. Proposed Regulation
    This proposed rulemaking would incorporate the monitoring 
frequencies for beryllium and mercury now contained in 40 CFR Part 61 
and establish specific monitoring frequencies for the sewage sludge air 
pollution control device operating parameters. With regard to 
monitoring for beryllium and mercury, EPA proposes to revise current 40 
CFR 503.46(a)(1), which requires the permitting authority to specify 
monitoring frequencies for beryllium and mercury, to provide that 
beryllium shall be monitored as required under subpart C of 40 CFR part 
61 and mercury as required under subpart E of 40 CFR part 61. For 
beryllium, this represents a one-time start-up stack 

[[Page 54781]]
sampling requirement or, alternatively, a continuous air sampling 
requirement. For mercury, this represents a one-time start-up stack or 
sewage sludge sampling requirement, with annual monitoring for those 
sources for which mercury emissions exceed 1600 grams per 24-hour 
period, as specified in 40 CFR 61.53-.55. Because this monitoring is 
already required under the air program, the proposed regulation would 
not impose an additional monitoring burden on the regulated community.
    EPA requests comments concerning whether it is appropriate to 
establish a periodic monitoring frequency for beryllium and mercury for 
sewage sludge incinerators. In contrast to the Clean Air Act, EPA has 
historically required periodic monitoring to determine compliance with 
Clean Water Act requirements.
    For mercury, some options that EPA is considering are:
    1. A periodic (quarterly or annual) stack or sewage sludge sampling 
requirement, depending on whether the incinerator has selected the 
emissions or sewage sludge sampling alternative specified in 40 CFR 
61.53(d) or 61.54. The sampling obligation could apply to all sewage 
sludge incinerators that emit mercury, and could be conducted according 
to the test methods specified in the NESHAP (method 101A in appendix B 
to part 61 for stack sampling or method 105 in appendix B to part 61 
for sewage sludge sampling). One disadvantage with this approach is the 
cost of conducting stack sampling for metals emissions, which can be in 
the range of several thousand dollars per sampling event. In contrast, 
the cost of sampling sewage sludge for most metals, including mercury, 
is normally less than $80 per sample. Sewage sludge sampling would not 
impose any additional burden because part 503 already requires sewage 
sludge sampling of other metals.
    2. A periodic (monthly or quarterly or annual) requirement to 
sample sewage sludge for mercury. The difference between options 1 and 
2 is that all sewage sludge incinerators would monitor the sewage 
sludge for mercury, even those incinerators that choose to conduct 
stack sampling to meet the NESHAP requirements. All sewage sludge 
incinerators may use the equation specified in Sec. 61.54(d) to assess 
whether the mercury concentration measured in the sewage sludge meets 
the NESHAP emission standard. EPA also requests comments concerning the 
use of the Sec. 61.54 equation for purposes of part 503 sewage sludge 
sampling for beryllium. The advantage of this option is that the cost 
of NESHAPs sampling sewage sludge is reduced to a minimal analytic cost 
alone, as discussed above.
    3. Periodic sewage sludge monitoring based on the amount of sewage 
sludge fed to the sewage sludge incinerator. Option 3 represents a 
variation on Option 2. Option 3 would require sewage sludge sampling 
for all incinerators, as above. The frequency of monitoring, however, 
would vary for particular sewage sludge incinerators based on annual 
amount of sewage sludge fired in an incinerator as it does for other 
pollutants. This could be accomplished by revising current 40 CFR 
503.46(a)(2) to add mercury as a pollutant for which monitoring can be 
conducted according to the requirements of Table 1 of Sec. 503.46. 
Table 1 currently establishes a range of monitoring frequencies from 
once per year to once per month, depending on the amount of sewage 
sludge fired in a sewage sludge incinerator (metric tons per 365-day 
period) for the pollutants arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead and nickel. 
Current Sec. 503.46(a)(3) also allows the permitting authority to 
reduce the frequency of monitoring to a minimum of once per year after 
the sewage sludge has been monitored for two years at the frequency 
stated in Table 1. [See discussion above in section III.B on a proposed 
amendment to allow the permitting authority to reduce the frequency of 
monitoring for each use or disposal practice to less than once a year 
after the sewage sludge has been monitored for two years.] EPA also 
could include mercury on the list of pollutants for which the 
permitting authority may decrease the frequency of monitoring. This 
approach to monitoring for mercury appears to be simple to implement 
and relatively inexpensive. As is the case for the pollutants currently 
monitored according to Table 1, it links frequency of monitoring to 
amount of sewage sludge fired in an incinerator, which would decrease 
monitoring obligations and related costs for smaller sewage sludge 
incinerators.
    For beryllium, EPA may consider imposing a periodic stack sampling 
obligation (such as annual monitoring), for those few incinerators that 
must comply with the emission standard specified in 40 CFR 61.32(a). 
(There is no need to impose a periodic monitoring obligation for those 
incinerators that conduct air sampling under 40 CFR 61.32(b). Section 
61.34 requires continuous operation of monitoring sites.) Again, the 
disadvantage of conducting stack sampling is the cost, which can range 
to several thousand dollars per sampling event. As discussed above, the 
sampling of sewage sludge for a metal such as beryllium is much lower 
in cost. However, such sampling is not an option that is available 
under the beryllium NESHAP. EPA would appreciate receiving comments 
concerning whether it is appropriate and feasible to develop a 
conversion factor so that, for purposes of part 503, results of 
sampling sewage sludge for beryllium can be compared to the emission 
standard.
    Proposed Sec. 503.46(c) requires that the air pollution control 
device operating parameters be monitored daily. EPA believes that the 
burden on the regulated community to meet a daily monitoring obligation 
is minimal. To insure the proper operation of the sewage sludge 
incinerator, due to the variable characteristics of the sewage sludge 
fed to the incinerator, the operating parameters for the applicable air 
pollution control operating devices are monitored on at least a daily 
(if not hourly or continuous) basis. EPA envisions that, among other 
acceptable approaches, this monitoring obligation, where the monitoring 
is not conducted on a continuous basis, could be met by recording the 
values for the operating parameters for the air pollution control 
devices in a daily log book. Retention of this logbook would fulfill 
the recordkeeping obligations of 40 CFR 503.47(g) and the logbook 
records could form the basis for the annual report to be submitted 
under Sec. 503.48.
    Other frequencies of monitoring that EPA considered for this 
management practice are: (1) Monitoring as appropriate for the air 
pollution control device and (2) monitoring per manufacturer's 
instructions for the air pollution control device. It appears likely, 
however, that in many instances these options would result in the same 
monitoring frequency or the monitoring obligation might be greater than 
a daily monitoring obligation. EPA sees no need for reason to impose a 
greater than daily minimum monitoring obligation.
    The Agency is proposing to amend section 503.46(b) to allow the 
permitting authority to specify an alternative to continuous monitoring 
of the exit gas from a sewage sludge incinerator for THC, oxygen, and 
information needed to determine moisture content. In some cases, 
continuous monitoring may not be necessary to show compliance with the 
THC operational standard of 100 parts per million on a volumetric 
basis. EPA is considering two options for determining when the 
monitoring frequency may be reduced. Both of these options assume that 
the emissions will be monitored for THC periodically, but not 
continuously. 

[[Page 54782]]

    The first option bases the frequency of monitoring for THC, oxygen, 
and information used to determine moisture content on the amount of 
sewage sludge fired in a sewage incinerator annually. For example, if 
the amount fired is 25 metric tons per year or less, the permitting 
authority could require periodic monitoring for THC, oxygen, and 
information to determine moisture content and then require that the 
incinerator be operated consistent with the way it was operated during 
the monitoring episode. The monitoring frequency for oxygen and 
information used to measure moisture content should be consistent with 
the monitoring frequency for THC because the oxygen concentration and 
moisture content information are used to adjust the measured THC 
values. This approach is similar to the current part 503 frequency of 
monitoring approach for pollutants in the incineration subpart, which 
is based on the amount of sewage sludge fired in a sewage sludge 
incinerator annually. The lower the amount of sewage sludge fired, the 
less frequent samples of sewage sludge have to be collected and 
analyzed for pollutants.
    The second option for determining whether to reduce the frequency 
of monitoring for THC is the number of days in a year that the 
incinerator operates. For example, if the incinerator operates less 
than 100 days per year, the frequency for THC monitoring may be 
something less than continuously. This is similar to Option 1 in that 
the more days an incinerator operates, the more sewage sludge is 
expected to be fired in the incinerator.
    EPA specifically solicits public comment on the question of what is 
the appropriate monitoring frequency for beryllium, mercury, and the 
operating parameters for air pollution control devices. EPA also is 
requesting comments on the proposal to monitor THC, oxygen content, and 
information needed to determine moisture content less than 
continuously. Should less than continuous monitoring be allowed for 
those parameters?
    EPA also is requesting comments on the above options to determine 
when less than continuous monitoring for THC (also oxygen and 
information needed to determine moisture content) should be allowed. 
Should less than continuous monitoring be allowed when the amount of 
sewage sludge incinerated annually or the number of days the 
incinerator operates during the year is below a certain value? Or, 
should some other parameter be used to decide whether the frequency can 
be reduced? If it is based on the amount of sewage sludge fired 
annually or number of days the incinerator operates during the year, 
what should be the amount or number of days below which less than 
continuous monitoring will be allowed?
    In addition, should less than continuous monitoring be allowed if 
carbon monoxide (CO) is monitored in the exit gas in lieu of monitoring 
THC? A part 503 amendment published in the Federal Register on February 
24, 1994 (59 FR 9095) allows CO to be monitored in lieu of monitoring 
THC in certain situations.
5. Reporting and Recordkeeping Obligations
    This proposed rulemaking does not change the current recordkeeping 
and reporting requirements in 40 CFR 503.47 and 503.48. The information 
retained under Sec. 503.47 and reported under Sec. 503.48 would 
continue to form the basis for permitting authority oversight, 
including enforcement, of subpart E requirements.
6. Compliance Deadlines
a. Current Regulation
    Current 40 CFR 503.2 establishes the deadlines for compliance with 
the requirements of part 503. Paragraph (a) provides that compliance 
with all standards must be achieved as expeditiously as practicable, 
but no later than February 19, 1994. Where compliance with the 
standards requires construction of new pollution control facilities, 
compliance with the standards must be achieved as expeditiously as 
practicable, but no later than February 19, 1995.
    Paragraphs (b) and (c) establish the deadlines for compliance with 
the frequency of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements 
under part 503. Paragraph (b) provides that the THC operational 
standard is effective on February 19, 1994, or, if compliance with the 
operational standard for THC requires the construction of new pollution 
control facilities, by February 19, 1995. Paragraph (c) provides that 
all other requirements for frequency of monitoring, recordkeeping, and 
reporting imposed under part 503 were effective on July 20, 1993.
b. Proposed Regulation
    EPA proposes to require compliance with the new requirements of 
subpart E of part 503 as expeditiously as practicable, but no later 
than 90 days from the publication date of the final rule. When new 
pollution control facilities must be constructed to comply with the 
revised requirements for sewage sludge incineration in subpart E, 
compliance shall be achieved as expeditiously as practicable, but no 
later than 12 months from the date of publication of the final rule. 
The compliance deadline in proposed Sec. 503.2(d) only applies where 
the permitting authority has not already specified requirements for the 
incinerator. EPA requests comment on the compliance deadlines.

V. Proposed Amendment to Part 403

    EPA is today proposing to amend 40 CFR part 403, Appendix G--
Section II (Additional Pollutants Eligible for Removal Credits). EPA is 
proposing to amend the General Pretreatment Regulations so that a 
removal credit may be authorized for chromium in sewage sludge that is 
land applied, given compliance with other regulatory requirements, as 
long as the chromium concentration in the sewage sludge does not exceed 
12,000 mg/kg.
    Many industrial facilities discharge large amounts of pollutants to 
POTWs where their wastewaters mix with wastewater from other sources, 
domestic sewage from private residences and run-off from various 
sources prior to treatment and discharge by the POTW. The introduction 
of pollutants to a POTW from industrial discharges may pose several 
problems. These include potential interference with the POTW's 
operation or pass-through of pollutants if inadequately treated. 
Congress, in section 307(b) of the Act, directed EPA to establish 
pretreatment standards to prevent these potential problems. Congress 
also recognized that, in certain instances, POTWs could provide some or 
all of the treatment of an industrial user's wastewater that would be 
required pursuant to the pretreatment standard. Consequently, Congress 
established a discretionary program for POTWs to grant `` removal 
credits'' to their indirect dischargers. The credit, in the form of a 
less stringent pretreatment standard, allows an increased concentration 
of a pollutant in the flow from the indirect discharger to the POTW.
    Section 307(b) of the CWA establishes a three-part test a POTW 
would need to meet to obtain removal credit authority for a given 
pollutant. A removal credit may be authorized only if (1) the POTW 
``removes all or any part of such toxic pollutant,'' (2) the POTW's 
ultimate discharge would ``not violate that effluent limitation, or 
standard which would be applicable to that toxic pollutant if it were 
discharged'' directly rather than through a POTW and (3) the POTW's 
discharge would ``not prevent sludge use and disposal by such [POTW] in 
accordance with section [405]. * * *'' Section 307(b).

[[Page 54783]]

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has 
interpreted the statute to require EPA to promulgate comprehensive 
sewage sludge regulations before any removal credits could be 
authorized. NRDC v. EPA, 790 F.2d 289, 292 (3rd Cir. 1986) cert. 
denied. 479 U.S. 1084 (1987). Congress made this explicit in the Water 
Quality Act of 1987, which indicated that EPA could not authorize any 
removal credits until it issued the sewage sludge use or disposal 
regulation required by section 405(d)(2)(a)(ii). EPA has promulgated 
removal credit regulations that are codified at 40 CFR part 403.7.
    At the same time EPA promulgated the part 503 regulation, EPA 
amended its General Pretreatment Regulations to add a new Appendix G 
that includes two tables of pollutants that would be eligible for a 
removal credit so long as the other procedural and substantive 
requirements of 40 CFR part 503 and 40 CFR 403.7 are met. The first 
table (Appendix G--Section I) lists, by use or disposal practice, the 
pollutants that are regulated in part 503 and eligible for a removal 
credit. The second table (Appendix G--Section II) lists, by use or 
disposal practice, additional pollutants that are eligible for a 
removal credit if the concentration of the pollutant does not exceed a 
prescribed concentration. The pollutants in Appendix G--Section II are 
the pollutants that EPA evaluated and decided not to regulate during 
development of the part 503 regulation. See 58 FR at 9381-5. EPA 
included chromium in Appendix G--Section I because the Agency 
established pollutant limits in the Part 503 regulation for sewage 
sludge that is land applied, surface disposed, or incinerated.
    In the final part 503 regulation, EPA limited the chromium content 
of land-applied sewage sludge to prevent possible plant injury. On 
November 15, 1994, the D.C. Circuit remanded the chromium pollutant 
limits for modification or additional justification, concluding that 
EPA lacked an adequate evidentiary basis for its risk-based chromium 
limit. Leather Industries of America, Inc. v. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 40 F.3d 392 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Elsewhere in today's Federal 
Register, in response to the remand, EPA is promulgating a final rule 
that deletes chromium from the pollutants that are regulated when 
sewage sludge is applied to the land. EPA has concluded that there is 
no current basis for establishing chromium limits in land-applied 
sewage sludge. EPA's decision not to regulate chromium in land-applied 
sewage sludge is based on its reevaluation of the Agency's land 
application risk assessment for chromium developed during the part 503 
rulemaking. This reassessment showed that chromium is unlikely to be 
present in sewage sludge in concentrations that present a risk to 
public health or the environment.1

    \1\For the Part 503 regulation, in descending order of 
stringency, the risk assessment cumulative loading rates for 
chromium are 3,000 kg/hectare (Pathway 8--plant toxicity), 5,000 kg/
hectare (Pathway 11--tractor operator) and 12,000 kg/hectare 
(Pathway 14--groundwater). See Technical Support Document for the 
Land Application of Sewage Sludge Table 5.4-5, p. 5-435. Having 
determined that current information would not support regulation of 
chromium to prevent plant injury, EPA took a second look at Pathways 
11 and 14. EPA revised the Pathway 11 analysis and determined that a 
significantly less stringent cumulative pollutant loading rate than 
5,000 kg/hectare would protect a tractor operator from potential 
injury from inhaled chromium. A complete explanation of EPA's 
reanalysis may be found in the docket for this rulemaking.
    Given the fact that the Pathway 11 and Pathway 14 risk limits 
(expressed as a chromium concentration in sewage sludge) exceeded 
the 99th percentile sludge concentration by at least an order of 
magnitude, EPA decided not to establish land application pollutant 
limits for chromium.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the same time EPA deleted chromium limits from its part 503 land 
application requirements, EPA took two other actions. First, the Agency 
removed chromium from the list of regulated pollutants for land 
application in Appendix G--Section I for which a removal credit is 
available. Second, to ensure the continued eligibility of chromium for 
a removal credit, EPA added a footnote in Appendix G--Section II 
stating the chromium concentration in Section II for land application 
would be determined on a case-by-case basis. Case-by-case 
determinations would continue to be made until EPA determines a safe 
concentration for chromium in sewage sludge that is land applied--the 
action being proposed here.
    In the 1993 amendments to part 403, EPA included pollutants that it 
evaluated for risk and decided not to regulate in Appendix G--Section 
II at the highest concentration evaluated as safe based on the 
concentrations developed during the risk assessment for the final part 
503 regulation. See 58 FR 9382. Consequently, EPA reviewed its land 
application risk assessment to determine the safe level for chromium. 
Based on the results of the 1993 risk assessment and the results of the 
revaluation of Pathway 11, EPA is proposing to include a number for 
land-applied chromium in Appendix G--Section II at a concentration of 
12,000 mg/kg. EPA has concluded that this is the highest level EPA 
identified as safe for the following reasons.
    As explained above, EPA reevaluated its 1993 land application risk 
assessment for Pathway 11 and determined that a cumulative pollutant 
loading rate for chromium for land-applied sewage sludge well in excess 
of the 5,000 kg/hectare loading rate calculated in the 1993 assessment 
presents little threat to a tractor operator because of the low 
hexavalent chromium concentration in the sewage sludge. Consequently, 
the next pathway in EPA's land application risk assessment at which 
chromium may present a threat to public health and the environment is 
Pathway 14, the ground-water pathway. (Technical Support Document for 
the Land Application of Sewage Sludge, November 1992, Table 5.4-5, p. 
5-435). The 1993 risk assessment concluded that as long as the total 
amount of chromium applied to the land in sewage sludge did not exceed 
12,000 kg/hectare, the potential for adverse affects on the ground 
water beneath a land application site is low. EPA is asking for public 
comment on whether a concentration of 12,000 mg/kg2 is the 
appropriate level at which chromium should be included on Appendix G--
Section II.

    \2\In the case of those pollutants EPA evaluated in the 1993 
risk assessment and decided not to regulate, EPA established Section 
II pollutant concentrations that are derived from the 1993 risk 
assessment cumulative pollutant loading rates. To convert a 
cumulative pollutant loading rate to a pollutant concentration, EPA 
assumed that 10 metric tons of sewage sludge would be applied to a 
hectare of land each year for 100 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Regulatory Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) 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 

[[Page 54784]]
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive 
Order.''
    Executive Order 12866 requires EPA to prepare an assessment of the 
costs and benefits of any ``significant regulatory action.'' It has 
been determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is not subject, 
therefore, to OMB review. Further, because the effect of today's rule 
is to modify current requirements and provide additional flexibility to 
the regulated community, costs to the regulated community should be 
reduced or at least remain unchanged. OMB has waived review of this 
proposed rule.

B. Executive Order 12875

    Under Executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993), 
entitled Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership, the Agency is 
required to develop an effective process to permit elected officials 
and other representatives of State, local, and tribal governments to 
provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory 
proposals.
    EPA sought the involvement of those persons who are intended to 
benefit from or expected to be burdened by this proposal before issuing 
a notice of proposed rulemaking. Following informal consultation, in 
January 1995, EPA circulated a draft of the proposed changes for 
comment to the regulated community, environmentalists, and States. EPA 
received a small number of comments, which have been addressed in 
today's rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, 
whenever an agency is required to publish a General Notice of 
Rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make 
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that 
describes the impact of the rule on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). 
No regulatory flexibility analysis is required, however, if the head of 
the Agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant impact 
on a substantial number of small entities.
    This action to amend the part 403 and part 503 regulations proposed 
today provides added flexibility and technical clarification for some 
of the requirements. It will only provide beneficial opportunities for 
entities that may be affected by the rule. Accordingly, I certify that 
this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. This regulation, therefore, does 
not require a regulatory flexibility analysis.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements for part 503 were approved 
by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. (See 
58 FR 9377, February 19, 1993.) There are no new reporting, 
notification, or recordkeeping (information) provisions in this 
proposed rule.

E. Unfunded Mandates

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L. 
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 section 202 of the UMRA, 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, or tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
one year. When such a statement is needed for an EPA rule, section 205 
of the UMRA 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 section 205 do 
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted.
    Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal 
governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a 
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying 
potentially affected small governments, giving them meaningful and 
timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with 
significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, 
educating, and advising them on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    EPA has determined that today's amendments to part 503 do not 
contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 
million or more for State, local or tribal governments or the private 
sector in any one year. With one exception, the proposed amendments 
either clarify existing regulatory requirements or provide additional 
flexibility to the regulated community in complying with current 
regulatory requirements.

[[Page 54785]]

    For example, EPA is proposing a number of changes to reduce the 
reporting and recordkeeping burden of the current requirements. These 
would include amendments to authorize the permitting authority to 
reduce the required frequency of monitoring of sewage sludge or, in the 
case of incinerated sewage sludge, to exempt certain facilities 
entirely from monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. 
EPA also is proposing to amend the current regulation to delete the 
requirement for land appliers of sewage sludge to record the time of 
day sewage sludge is applied. In addition, the proposal would modify 
the certification provision of the current substantive requirement to 
certify certain information to the permitting authority. Under the 
proposal, the certifier would certify to the accuracy of the submitted 
information and not, as is the case at present, to the submitter's 
compliance with regulatory requirements.
    EPA is proposing to delete language from the current regulation 
that required the permitting authority to specify certain factors used 
to calculate site-by-site pollutant limits for sewage sludge 
incinerators and to specify how to install, calibrate, operate and 
maintain incinerator continuous emission monitors. The proposal also 
includes technical amendments that would correct inaccurate cross-
references and add omitted reporting dates and inadvertently omitted 
phrases. Therefore, to the extent that the proposed regulation would 
reduce the costs of complying with current part 503 requirements, the 
proposed changes will lessen the regulatory burden on State, local, or 
tribal governments.
    One proposed change may result in a small annual increase in costs 
to State, local, or tribal governments in certain circumstances. The 
current regulation provides that sewage sludge that is applied to land 
for a beneficial purpose or disposed at surface disposal sites must, 
among other conditions, meet requirements for reducing the pathogen 
content of the sewage sludge. Sewage sludge must meet either Class A or 
Class B pathogen requirements. The regulation provides a number of 
alternatives for achieving the Class A and Class B requirements. These 
alternatives include treatment processes that reduce the density of 
enteric viruses, viable helminth ova and Salmonella, sp. bacteria in 
the sewage sludge. In addition, in the case of the Class A 
alternatives, the density of either fecal coliform or Salmonella sp. 
bacteria in the sewage sludge may not exceed prescribed levels at the 
time the sewage sludge is used or disposed. Today's proposal would 
change the description of one of the Processes to Further Reduce 
Pathogens to require that a certain dose of gamma rays be used. The 
dosage was inadvertently deleted from the process description in the 
final rule.
    As noted above, there are either no (or reduced) costs associated 
with the other changes proposed today. Thus, today's proposed rule is 
not subject to the requirements in sections 202 and 205 of the Act.
    EPA has determined that this proposal contains no regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments that may operate publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) 
generating sewage sludge. The proposed amendments would not 
significantly affect small governments because as explained above, the 
proposed amendments would either provide additional flexibility in 
complying with pre-existing regulatory requirements or clarify these 
requirements. The proposed amendments also would not uniquely affect 
small governments because the increased flexibility provided by the 
proposed changes would be available to POTWs operated by small 
governments to the same extent as to other sewage sludge users or 
disposers.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 403

    Environmental protection, Incineration, Land application, 
Pollutants, Removal Credits, Sewage sludge, and Surface disposal.

40 CFR Part 503

    Environmental Protection, Frequency of monitoring, Incineration, 
Incorporation by reference, Land application, Management practices, 
Pathogens, Pollutants, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sewage 
sludge, Surface disposal and Vector attraction reduction.

    Dated: October 10, 1995.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as set forth below:

PART 403--GENERAL PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS FOR EXISTING AND NEW 
SOURCES OF POLLUTION

    1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 403 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Sec. 54(c)(2) of the Clean Water of 1977, (Pub. L. 
95-217) sections 204(b)(1)(C), 208(b)(2)(C)(iii), 301(b)(1)(A)(ii), 
301(b)(2)(A)(ii), 301(b)(2)(C), 301(h)(5), 301(i)(2), 304(e), 
304(g), 307, 308, 309, 402(b), 405, and 501(a) of the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act (Pub. L. 92-500) as amended by the Clean Water 
Act of 1977 and the Water Quality Act of 1987 (Pub. L. 100-4).

    2. Appendix G to part 403 is proposed to be amended by revising 
section ``II.'' to read as follows:

Appendix G--Pollutants Eligible for A Removal Credit

    I. * * *

                                                                        

[[Page 54786]]
                             II. Additional Pollutants Eligible for a Removal Credit                            
                                   [Milligrams per kilogram--dry weight basis]                                  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Use or disposal practice (SD)        
                            Pollutant                             ----------------------------------------------
                                                                       LA      Unlined\1\    Lined\2\       I   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenic..........................................................  .........  ...........   \3\100      ........
Aldrin/Dieldrin (Total)..........................................        2.7  ...........  ...........  ........
Benzene..........................................................    \3\16.0      140        3,400      ........
Benzo(a)pyrene...................................................       15.0   \3\100       \3\100      ........
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate.......................................  .........   \3\100       \3\100      ........
Cadmium..........................................................  .........   \3\100       \3\100      ........
Chlordane........................................................       86.0   \3\100       \3\100      ........
Chromium.........................................................   12,000.0  ...........   \3\100      ........
Copper...........................................................  .........    \3\46       \3\100       1,400.0
DDD, DDE, DDT (Total)............................................        1.2    2,000        2,000      ........
2,4 Dichlorophenoxy-acetic acid..................................  .........        7            7      ........
Fluoride.........................................................      730.0  ...........  ...........  ........
Heptachlor.......................................................        7.4  ...........  ...........  ........
Hexachlorobenzene................................................       29.0  ...........  ...........  ........
Hexachlorobutadiene..............................................      600.0  ...........  ...........  ........
Iron.............................................................    \3\78.0  ...........  ...........  ........
Lead.............................................................  .........   \3\100       \3\100      ........
Lindane..........................................................       84.0    \3\28        \3\28      ........
Malathion........................................................  .........        0.63         0.63   ........
Mercury..........................................................  .........   \3\100       \3\100      ........
Molybdenum.......................................................  .........       40           40      ........
Nickel...........................................................  .........  ...........   \3\100      ........
N-Nitrosodimethylamine...........................................        2.1        0.088        0.088  ........
Pentachlorophenol................................................       30.0  ...........  ...........  ........
Phenol...........................................................  .........       82           82      ........
Polychlorinated biphenyls........................................        4.6      <50          <50      ........
Selenium.........................................................  .........        4.8          4.8         4.8
Toxaphene........................................................       10.0    \3\26        \3\26      ........
Trichloroethylene................................................    \3\10.0    9,500        \3\10      ........
Zinc.............................................................  .........    4,500        4,500      4,500.0 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Sewage sludge unit without a liner and leachate collection system.                                           
\2\Sewage sludge unit with a liner and leachate collection system.                                              
\3\Value expressed in grams per kilogram--dry weight basis.                                                     
                                                                                                                
KEY:                                                                                                            
  LA--land application                                                                                          
  SD--surface disposal                                                                                          
  I--incineration                                                                                               



PART 503--STANDARDS FOR THE USE OR DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE SLUDGE

    1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 503 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Sections 405(d) and (e) of the Clean Water Act, as 
amended by Pub. L. 95-217, Sec. 54(d), 91 Stat. 1591 (33 U.S.C. 1345 
(d) and (e)); and Pub. L. 100-4, Title IV, Sec. 406(a), (b), 101 
Stat., 71, 72 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.).
* * * * *
    2. Section 503.2 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 503.2  Compliance period.

* * * * *
    (d) Compliance with the requirements for sewage sludge incineration 
in subpart E that were revised on [date of publication of the final 
regulations] shall be achieved as expeditiously as practicable, but in 
no case later than [90 days from the date of publication of the final 
regulations]. When new pollution control facilities must be constructed 
to comply with the revised requirements for sewage sludge incineration 
in subpart E, compliance with the revised requirements shall be 
achieved as expeditiously as practicable but no later than [12 months 
from date of publication of the final regulations].
    3. Section 503.10 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1), (c)(1), 
(d), (e), (f), and (g) to read as follows:


Sec. 503.10  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Bulk sewage sludge. The general requirements in Sec. 503.12 and 
the management practices in Sec. 503.14 do not apply when bulk sewage 
sludge is applied to the land if the bulk sewage sludge meets the 
ceiling concentrations in Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant 
concentrations in Table 3 of Sec. 503.13; the Class A pathogen 
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and one of the vector attraction 
reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an 
equivalent vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined by 
the permitting authority.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) The general requirements in Sec. 503.12 and the management 
practices in Sec. 503.14 do not apply when a bulk material derived from 
sewage sludge is applied to the land if the derived bulk material meets 
the ceiling concentrations in Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant 
concentrations in Table 3 of Sec. 503.13; the Class A pathogen 
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and one of the vector attraction 
reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an 
equivalent vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined by 
the permitting authority.
* * * * *
    (d) The requirements in this subpart do not apply when a bulk 
material derived from sewage sludge is applied to the land if the 
sewage sludge from 

[[Page 54787]]
which the bulk material is derived meets the ceiling concentrations in 
Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant concentrations in Table 3 of 
Sec. 503.13; the Class A pathogen requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and 
one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 
(b)(1) through (b)(8) or an equivalent vector attraction reduction 
requirement, as determined by the permitting authority.
    (e) Sewage sludge sold or given away in a bag or other container 
for application to the land. The general requirements in Sec. 503.12 
and the management practices in Sec. 503.14 do not apply when sewage 
sludge is sold or given away in a bag or other container for 
application to the land if the sewage sludge sold or given away in a 
bag or other container for application to the land meets the ceiling 
concentrations in Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant 
concentrations in Table 3 of Sec. 503.13; the Class A pathogen 
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and one of the vector attraction 
reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an 
equivalent vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined by 
the permitting authority.
    (f) The general requirements in Sec. 503.12 and the management 
practices in Sec. 503.14 do not apply when a material derived from 
sewage sludge is sold or given away in a bag or other container for 
application to the land if the derived material meets the ceiling 
concentrations in Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant 
concentrations in Table 3 of Sec. 503.13; the Class A pathogen 
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and one of the vector attraction 
reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an 
equivalent vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined by 
the permitting authority.
    (g) The requirements in this subpart do not apply when a material 
derived from sewage sludge is sold or given away in a bag or other 
container for application to the land if the sewage sludge from which 
the material is derived meets the ceiling concentrations in Table 1 of 
Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant concentrations in Table 3 of Sec. 503.13; 
the Class A pathogen requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and one of the 
vector attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through 
(b)(8) or an equivalent vector attraction reduction requirement, as 
determined by the permitting authority.
    4. Section 503.15 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), 
and (c)(3) to read as follows:


Sec. 503.15  Operational standards--pathogens and vector attraction 
reduction.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) One of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8); a requirement that is equivalent to 
one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 
(b)(1) through (b)(8), as determined by the permitting authority; or 
the vector attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(9) or 
(b)(10) shall be met when bulk sewage sludge is applied to agricultural 
land, forest, a public contact site, or a reclamation site.
    (2) One of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an equivalent vector attraction 
reduction requirement, as determined by the permitting authority, shall 
be met when bulk sewage sludge is applied to a lawn or home garden.
    (3) One of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an equivalent vector attraction 
reduction requirement, as determined by the permitting authority, shall 
be met when sewage sludge is sold or given away in a bag or other 
container for application to the land.
* * * * *
    5. Section 503.16 is amended by revising the text preceding the 
table in paragraph (a)(1) and revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 503.16  Frequency of monitoring.

    (a) Sewage sludge. (1) The frequency of monitoring for the 
pollutants listed in Table 1, Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4 of 
Sec. 503.13; the pathogen density requirements in Sec. 503.32(a) and in 
Sec. 503.32(b)(2); the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(4) and Sec. 503.33 (b)(6) through (b)(8) 
shall be the frequency in Table 1 of Sec. 503.16.
* * * * *
    (2) After the sewage sludge has been monitored for two years at the 
frequency in Table 1 of Sec. 503.16, the permitting authority may 
reduce the frequency of monitoring for pollutant concentrations and for 
the pathogen density requirements in Sec. 503.32(a)(5)(ii) and 
(a)(5)(iii).
* * * * *
    6. Section 503.17 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(ii), 
(a)(1)(iv), (a)(2)(ii), (a)(2)(iv), (a)(3)(i)(B), (a)(3)(ii)(A), 
(a)(4)(i)(B), (a)(4)(i)(D), (a)(4)(ii)(A), (a)(5)(i)(B), (a)(5)(i)(D), 
(a)(5)(ii)(C), (a)(5)(ii)(F), (a)(5)(ii)(H), (a)(5)(ii)(J), 
(a)(5)(ii)(L), (a)(6)(iii), (a)(6)(v), (b)(3), (b)(6), and (b)(7) and 
by adding a new paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(E) to read as follows:


Sec. 503.17  Recordkeeping.

    (a) Sewage sludge.
    (1) * * *
    (ii) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the Class A pathogen requirements 
in Sec. 503.32(a) and the vector attraction reduction requirement in 
[insert one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through Sec. 503.33(b)(8) or an equivalent vector 
attraction reduction requirement, as determined by the permitting 
authority] has been prepared under my direction and supervision in 
accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified personnel 
properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware that there 
are significant penalties for false certification including the 
possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (iv) A description of how one of the vector attraction reduction 
requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an equivalent 
vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined by the 
permitting authority, is met.
    (2) * * *
    (ii) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the Class A pathogen requirements 
in Sec. 503.32(a) and the vector attraction reduction requirement in 
[insert one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(8) or an equivalent vector attraction 
reduction requirement, as determined by the permitting authority] has 
been prepared under my direction and supervision in accordance with the 
system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and 
evaluate this information. I am aware that there are significant 
penalties for false certification including the possibility of fine and 
imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (iv) A description of how one of the vector attraction reduction 
requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an equivalent 
vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined by the 
permitting, is met.
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (B) The following certification statement: 

[[Page 54788]]

    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the pathogen requirements in 
Sec. 503.32(a) has been prepared under my direction and supervision in 
accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified personnel 
properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware that there 
are significant penalties for false certification including the 
possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the management practices in 
Sec. 503.14 and the vector attraction reduction requirement in [insert 
either Sec. 503.33 (b)(9) or (b)(10)] has been prepared under my 
direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed to 
ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this 
information. I am aware that there are significant penalties for false 
certification including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the Class B pathogen requirements 
in Sec. 503.32(b) and the vector attraction reduction requirement in 
[insert one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an equivalent vector attraction 
reduction requirement, as determined by the permitting authority, if 
one of those requirements is met] has been prepared under my direction 
and supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that 
qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am 
aware that there are significant penalties for false certification 
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (D) When one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or when an equivalent vector 
attraction reduction requirement, as determined by the permitting 
authority, is met, a description of how the vector attraction reduction 
requirement is met.
    (ii) * * *
    (A) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the management practices in 
Sec. 503.14, the site restrictions in Sec. 503.32(b)(5), and the vector 
attraction reduction requirement in [insert either Sec. 503.33 (b)(9) 
or (b)(10) if one of those requirements is met] has been prepared for 
each site on which bulk sewage sludge is applied under my direction and 
supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that 
qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am 
aware that there are significant penalties for false certification 
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (E) The date bulk sewage sludge is applied to each site.
    (5) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the pathogen requirements in 
[insert either Sec. 503.32(a) or Sec. 503.32(b)] and the vector 
attraction reduction requirement in [insert one of the vector 
attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) 
or an equivalent vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined 
by the permitting authority, if one of those requirements is met] has 
been prepared under my direction and supervision in accordance with the 
system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and 
evaluate this information. I am aware that there are significant 
penalties for false certification including the possibility of fine and 
imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (D) When one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an equivalent vector attraction 
reduction requirement, as determined by the permitting authority, is 
met, a description of how the vector attraction reduction requirement 
is met.
    (ii) * * *
    (C) The date bulk sewage sludge is applied to each site.
* * * * *
    (F) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the requirements to obtain 
information in Sec. 503.12(e)(2) has been prepared for each site on 
which bulk sewage sludge is applied under my direction and supervision 
in accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified 
personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware 
that there are significant penalties for false certification including 
the possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (H) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the management practices in 
Sec. 503.14 has been prepared for each site on which bulk sewage sludge 
is applied under my direction and supervision in accordance with the 
system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and 
evaluate this information. I am aware that there are significant 
penalties for false certification including the possibility of fine and 
imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (J) The following certification statement when the bulk sewage 
sludge meets the Class B pathogen requirements in Sec. 503.32(b):
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the site restrictions in 
Sec. 503.32(b)(5) has been prepared under my direction and supervision 
in accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified 
personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware 
that there are significant penalties for false certification including 
the possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (L) The following certification statement when the vector 
attraction reduction requirement in either Sec. 503.33 (b)(9) or 
(b)(10) is met:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the vector attraction reduction 
requirement in [insert either Sec. 503.33(b)(9) or Sec. 503.33(b)(10)] 
has been prepared under my direction and supervision in accordance with 
the system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather 
and evaluate this information. I am aware that there are significant 
penalties for false certification including the possibility of fine and 
imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (6) * * *
    (iii) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the management practice in 
Sec. 503.14(e), the Class A pathogen requirement in Sec. 503.32(a), and 
the vector attraction 

[[Page 54789]]
reduction requirement in [insert one of the vector attraction reduction 
requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through Sec. 503.33(b)(8) or an 
equivalent vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined by 
the permitting authority] has been prepared under my direction and 
supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that 
qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am 
aware that there are significant penalties for false certification 
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (v) A description of how one of the vector attraction reduction 
requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an equivalent 
vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined by the 
permitting authority, is met.
    (b) * * *
    (3) The date domestic septage is applied to each site.
* * * * *
    (6) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the pathogen requirements [insert 
either Sec. 503.32(c)(1) or Sec. 503.32(c)(2)] and the vector 
attraction reduction requirement in [insert Sec. 503.33(b)(9), 
Sec. 503.33(b)(10), or Sec. 503.33(b)(12)] has been prepared under my 
direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed to 
ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this 
information. I am aware that there are significant penalties for false 
certification including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
    (7) A description of how the pathogen requirements in either 
Sec. 503.32 (c)(1) or (c)(2) are met.
* * * * *
    7. Section 503.18 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 503.18  Reporting.

    (a) * * *
    (2) The information in Sec. 503.17 (a)(5)(ii)(A) through 
(a)(5)(ii)(g) on February 19th of each year when 90 percent or more of 
any of the cumulative pollutant loading rates in Table 2 of Sec. 503.13 
is reached at a site.
* * * * *
    8. Section 503.22 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 503.22  General requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) An active sewage sludge unit located within 60 meters of a 
fault that has displacement in Holocene time; located in an unstable 
area; or located in a wetland, except as provided in a permit issued 
pursuant to either section 402 or 404 of the CWA, shall close by March 
22, 1994, unless, in the case of an active sewage sludge unit located 
within 60 meters of a fault that has displacement in Holocene time, 
otherwise specified by the permitting authority.
* * * * *
    9. Section 503.25 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 503.25  Operational standards--pathogens and vector attraction 
reduction.

* * * * *
    (b) Vector attraction reduction--sewage sludge (other than domestic 
septage). One of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8); a requirement that is equivalent to 
one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 
(b)(1) through (b)(8), as determined by the permitting authority; or 
one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 
(b)(9) through (b)(11) shall be met when sewage sludge is placed on an 
active sewage sludge unit.
* * * * *
    10. Section 503.26 is amended by revising the text preceding the 
table in paragraph (a)(1), and revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 503.26  Frequency of monitoring.

    (a) Sewage sludge (other than domestic septage).
    (1) The frequency of monitoring for the pollutants in Tables 1 and 
2 of Sec. 503.23; the pathogen density requirements in Sec. 503.32(a) 
and in Sec. 503.32(b)(2); and the vector attraction reduction 
requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(4) and Sec. 503.33 
(b)(6) through (b)(8) for sewage sludge placed on an active sewage 
sludge unit shall be the frequency in Table 1 of Sec. 503.26.
* * * * *
    (2) After the sewage sludge has been monitored for two years at the 
frequency in Table 1 of Sec. 503.26, the permitting authority may 
reduce the frequency of monitoring for pollutant concentrations and for 
the pathogen density requirements in Sec. 503.32 (a)(5)(ii) and 
(a)(5)(iii).
* * * * *
    11. Section 503.27 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(ii), 
(a)(1)(iv), (a)(2)(ii), (b)(1)(i), and (b)(2)(i) to read as follows:


Sec. 503.27  Recordkeeping.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the pathogen requirements in 
[insert Sec. 503.32(a), Sec. 503.32(b)(2), Sec. 503.32(b)(3), or 
Sec. 503.32(b)(4) when one of those requirements is met] and the vector 
attraction reduction requirement in [insert one of the vector 
attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) 
or an equivalent vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined 
by the permitting authority, when one of those requirements is met] 
have been met. This determination has been made under my direction and 
supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that 
qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information used 
to determine that the [pathogen requirements and vector attraction 
reduction requirements] have been met. I am aware that there are 
significant penalties for false certification including the possibility 
of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (iv) A description of how one of the vector attraction reduction 
requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) or an equivalent 
vector attraction reduction requirement, as determined by the 
permitting authority, is met when one of those requirements is met.
    (2) * * *
    (ii) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the management practices in 
Sec. 503.24 and the vector attraction reduction requirement in [insert 
one of the requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(9) through Sec. 503.33(b)(11) 
if one of those requirements is met] has been prepared under my 
direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed to 
ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this 
information. I am aware that there are significant penalties for false 
certification including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the vector attraction reduction 
requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(12) has been prepared under my direction 
and supervision in 

[[Page 54790]]
accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified personnel 
properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware that there 
are significant penalties for false certification including the 
possibility of fine and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) The following certification statement:
    ``I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will 
be used to determine compliance with the management practices in 
Sec. 503.24 and the vector attraction reduction requirements in [insert 
Sec. 503.33(b)(9) through Sec. 503.33(b)(11) when one of those 
requirements is met] has been prepared under my direction and 
supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that 
qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am 
aware that there are significant penalties for false certification 
including the possibility of fine or imprisonment.''
* * * * *
    12. Section 503.31 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 503.31  Special definitions.

* * * * *
    (g) pH means the logarithm of the reciprocal of the hydrogen ion 
concentration measured at 25 deg.C or measured at another temperature 
and then converted to an equivalent value at 25 deg.C.
* * * * *
    13-15. Section 503.32 is amended by revising the heading for 
paragraph (a)(3) and revising paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (b)(5)(v) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 503.32  Pathogens.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Class A--Alternative 1 (Not applicable for composting). * * *
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Class B--Alternative 1.
    (i) Seven representative samples of the sewage sludge that is used 
or disposed shall be collected.
* * * * *
    (5) * * *
    (v) Animals shall not be grazed on the land for 30 days after 
application of sewage sludge.
* * * * *
    16-17. Section 503.33 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) 
through (a)(4) and paragraphs (b)(6) through (b)(8) and paragraph 
(b)(10)(i) to read as follows:


Sec. 503.33  Vector attraction reduction.

    (a)(1) One of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through Sec. 503.33(b)(8); a requirement that is 
equivalent to one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8), as determined by the permitting 
authority; or the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(9) or (b)(10) shall be met when bulk sewage sludge is 
applied to agricultural land, forest, a public contact site, or a 
reclamation site.
    (2) One of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through Sec. 503.33(b)(8) or an equivalent vector 
attraction reduction requirement, as determined by the permitting 
authority, shall be met when bulk sewage sludge is applied to a lawn or 
a home garden.
    (3) One of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through Sec. 503.33(b)(8) or an equivalent vector 
attraction reduction requirement, as determined by the permitting 
authority, shall be met when sewage sludge is sold or given away in a 
bag or other container for application to the land.
    (4) One of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through Sec. 503.33(b)(8); a requirement that is 
equivalent to one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8), as determined by the permitting 
authority; or one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in 
Sec. 503.33 (b)(9) through (b)(11) shall be met when sewage sludge 
(other than domestic septage) is placed on an active sewage sludge 
unit.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (6) The pH of sewage sludge shall be raised to 12 or higher by 
alkali addition and, without the addition of more alkali, shall remain 
at 12 or higher for two hours and then at 11.5 or higher for an 
additional 22 hours at the time the sewage sludge is used or disposed; 
at the time the sewage sludge is prepared for sale or given away in a 
bag or other container for application to the land; or at the time the 
sewage sludge is prepared to meet the requirements in Sec. 503.10 (b), 
(c), (e), or (f).
    (7) The percent solids of sewage sludge that does not contain 
unstabilized solids generated in a primary wastewater treatment process 
shall be equal to or greater than 75 percent, based on the moisture 
content and total solids prior to mixing with other materials, at the 
time the sewage sludge is used or disposed; at the time the sewage 
sludge is prepared for sale or given away in a bag or other container 
for application to the land; or at the time the sewage sludge is 
prepared to meet the requirements in Sec. 503.10 (b), (c), (e), or (f).
    (8) The percent solids of sewage sludge that contains unstabilized 
solids generated in a primary wastewater treatment process shall be 
equal to or greater than 90 percent, based on the moisture content and 
total solids prior to mixing with other materials, at the time the 
sewage sludge is used or disposed; at the time the sewage sludge is 
prepared for sale or given away in a bag or other container for 
application to the land; or the time the sewage sludge is prepared to 
meet the requirements in Sec. 503.10 (b), (c), (e), or (f).
* * * * *
    (10) (i) Sewage sludge applied to the land surface or placed on a 
surface disposal site shall be incorporated into the soil within six 
hours after application to or placement on the land, unless otherwise 
specified by the permitting authority.
* * * * *
    18. Section 503.40 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 503.40  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (d) The frequency of monitoring requirements for a pollutant in 
Sec. 503.46 (a)(2) and (a)(3), the recordkeeping requirement for a 
pollutant in Sec. 503.47(b), and the reporting requirement for a 
pollutant in Sec. 503.48 do not apply when the following conditions are 
met, if approved by the permitting authority.
    (i) The average daily concentration for the pollutant calculated 
pursuant to Sec. 503.43(c) or Sec. 503.43(d) exceeds the highest 
average daily concentration for the pollutant measured in the sewage 
sludge for the months in the previous calendar year.
    (ii) The incinerator is operated within the operating parameters 
established during the performance test required by Sec. 503.43(c)(3) 
or Sec. 503.43(d)(5).
    19. Section 503.43 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(1), 
(c)(2), (c)(3), (d)(1), the text preceding the table in paragraphs 
(d)(2) and (d)(3), revising paragraph (d)(4), and (d)(5), and by adding 
a new paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec. 503.43  Pollutant limits.

* * * * *
    (c) Pollutant limit--lead.
    (1) The average daily concentration of lead in sewage sludge fed to 
a sewage sludge incinerator shall not exceed the concentration 
calculated using Equation (4).
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TP25OC95.001


[[Page 54791]]

Where:

C=Average daily concentration of lead in sewage sludge in milligrams 
per kilogram of total solids (dry weight basis) for the days in the 
month that the sewage sludge incinerator operates.
NAAQS=National Ambient Air Quality Standard for lead in micrograms per 
cubic meter.
DF=Dispersion factor in micrograms per cubic meter per gram per second.
CE=Sewage sludge incinerator control efficiency for lead in hundredths.
SF=Sewage sludge feed rate in metric tons per day (dry weight basis).

    (2) The dispersion factor (DF) in equation (4) shall be determined 
from an air dispersion model.
    (i) When the sewage sludge stack height is 65 meters or less, the 
actual sewage sludge incinerator stack height shall be used in the air 
dispersion model to determine the dispersion factor (DF) for equation 
(4).
    (ii) When the sewage sludge incinerator stack height exceeds 65 
meters, the creditable stack height shall be determined in accordance 
with 40 CFR 51.100(ii) and the creditable stack height shall be used in 
the air dispersion model to determine the dispersion factor (DF) for 
equation (4).
    (3) The control efficiency (CE) in equation (4) shall be determined 
from a performance test of the sewage sludge incinerator.
    (d) * * *
    (1) The average daily concentration for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, 
and nickel in sewage sludge fed to a sewage sludge incinerator each 
shall not exceed the concentration calculated using equation (5).
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TP25OC95.002

Where:

C=Average daily concentration of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, or nickel 
in sewage sludge in milligrams per kilogram of total solids (dry weight 
basis) for the days in the month that the incinerator operates.
CE=Sewage sludge incinerator control efficiency for arsenic, cadmium, 
chromium, or nickel in hundredths.
DF=Dispersion factor in micrograms per cubic meter per gram per second.
RSC=Risk specific concentration, in micrograms per cubic meter.
SF=Sewage sludge feed rate in metric tons per day (dry weight basis).
    (2) The risk specific concentrations for arsenic, cadmium, and 
nickel used in equation (5) shall be obtained from Table 1 of 
Sec. 503.43.
* * * * *
    (3) The risk specific concentration for chromium used in equation 
(5) shall be obtained from Table 2 of Sec. 503.43 or shall be 
calculated using equation (6).
* * * * *
    (4) The dispersion factor (DF) in equation (5) shall be determined 
from an air dispersion model.
    (i) When the sewage sludge incinerator stack height is equal to or 
less than 65 meters, the actual sewage sludge incinerator stack height 
shall be used in the air dispersion model to determine the dispersion 
factor (DF) for equation (5).
    (ii) When the sewage sludge incinerator stack height is greater 
than 65 meters, the creditable stack height shall be determined in 
accordance with 40 CFR 51.100(ii) and the creditable stack height shall 
be used in the air dispersion model to determine the dispersion factor 
(DF) for equation (5).
    (5) The control efficiency (CE) in equation (5) shall be determined 
from a performance test of the sewage sludge incinerator.
    (e) Air Dispersion Modeling and Performance Testing
    (1) The air dispersion models and performance tests used to 
determine the pollutant limits in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this 
section shall be consistent with good air pollution control practices 
for minimizing air emissions. The air dispersion model shall be 
appropriate for the geographical, physical, and population 
characteristics at the sewage sludge incinerator site. The performance 
test shall be appropriate for the type of sewage sludge incinerator.
    (2) A proposed air dispersion modeling protocol shall be submitted 
to the permitting authority no later than 30 days from [date of 
publication of the final regulation]. The protocol shall include a 
clear and complete description of the proposed model and rational 
including data that supports the validity of the chosen approach. The 
submitted air dispersion modeling protocol may be used to develop the 
air dispersion factor if the permitting authority concurs or does not 
respond within 30 days from submission.
    (3) The following procedures, at a minimum, shall apply in 
conducting performance tests:
    (i) The performance test shall be conducted under representative 
incinerator conditions at the highest expected sewage sludge feed rate 
within design specifications.
    (ii) The permitting authority shall be provided notice at least 30 
days prior to any performance test so the permitting authority may have 
the opportunity to observe the test. This notice shall include a test 
protocol with incinerator operating conditions and a list of test 
methods to be used.
    (iii) Performance testing facilities shall contain safe sampling 
platforms and safe access to them.
    (iv) Each performance test shall consist of three separate runs 
using the applicable test method. For the purpose of establishing a 
control efficiency, the arithmetic mean of the results of the three 
runs shall apply.
    (4) The pollutant limits in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section 
shall be submitted to the permitting authority no later than 30 days 
after completion of the air dispersion modelling and performance test.
    (5) Significant changes in geographic or physical characteristics 
at the incinerator site or in incinerator operating conditions will 
require new air dispersion modeling or performance testing to determine 
a new dispersion factor or new control efficiency that will be used to 
establish revised pollutant limits.
    20. Section 503.45 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), (b), 
(c), (d), (e), and (f), and by adding a new paragraph (h) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 503.45  Management practices.

    (a)(1) An instrument that continuously measures and records the 
total hydrocarbons concentration in the sewage sludge incinerator stack 
exit gas shall be installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained for 
each sewage sludge incinerator.
* * * * *
    (b) An instrument that continuously measures and records the oxygen 
concentration in the sewage sludge incinerator stack exit gas shall be 
installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained for each sewage sludge 
incinerator.
    (c) An instrument that continuously measures and records 
information used to determine the moisture content in the sewage sludge 
incinerator stack exit gas shall be installed, calibrated, operated, 
and maintained for each sewage sludge incinerator.
    (d) An instrument that continuously measures and records combustion 
temperatures shall be installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained 
for each sewage sludge incinerator.
    (e) Operation of the sewage sludge incinerator shall not cause a 
significant exceedence of the maximum combustion temperature for the 
sewage sludge incinerator. The maximum combustion temperature for the 
sewage 

[[Page 54792]]
sludge incinerator shall be based on information obtained during the 
performance test of the sewage sludge incinerator to determine 
pollutant control efficiencies.
    (f) Appropriate air pollution control devices shall be installed 
for the sewage sludge incinerator. Operating parameters for the air 
pollution control devices shall be selected that indicate adequate 
performance of the device. The values for the operating parameters for 
the air pollution control device shall be based on information obtained 
during the performance test of the sewage sludge incinerator to 
determine pollutant control efficiencies. Operation of the sewage 
sludge incinerator shall not cause a significant exceedence of the 
values for the selected operating parameters for the air pollution 
control device.
* * * * *
    (h) The instruments required in Sec. 503.45(a)-(d) shall be 
appropriate for the type of sewage sludge incinerator and shall be 
installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained consistent with good 
air pollution control practice for minimizing air emissions.
    21. Section 503.46 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), 
(a)(3), (b) and (c) to read as follows:


Sec. 503.46  Frequency of monitoring.

    (a) Sewage sludge.
    (1) The frequency of monitoring for beryllium shall be as required 
under subpart C of 40 CFR part 61 and for mercury as required under 
subpart E of 40 CFR part 61.
* * * * *
    (3) After the sewage sludge has been monitored for two years at the 
frequency in Table 1 of Sec. 503.46, the permitting authority may 
reduce the frequency of monitoring for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, 
lead, and nickel.
    (b) Total hydrocarbons, oxygen concentration, information to 
determine moisture content, and combustion temperatures.
    The total hydrocarbons concentration and oxygen concentration in 
the exit gas from a sewage sludge incinerator stack, the information 
used to measure moisture content in the exit gas, and the combustion 
temperatures for the sewage sludge incinerator shall be monitored 
continuously, unless otherwise specified by the permitting authority.
    (c) Air pollution control device operating parameters. The 
frequency of monitoring for the air pollution control device operating 
parameters shall be at least daily.
* * * * *
    22. Appendix B to 40 CFR part 503 is amended by revising the 
description of ``Process to Further Reduce Pathogen'' paragraph (6) to 
read as follows:

Appendix B to Part 503--Pathogen Treatment Processes

* * * * *

B. Processes To Further Reduce Pathogens (PFRP)

* * * * *
    (6) Gamma ray irradiation--Sewage sludge is irradiated with 
gamma rays from certain isotopes, such as 60Cobalt and 
137Cesium, at dosages of at least 1.0 megarad at room 
temperature (ca. 20 deg. C).

[FR Doc. 95-25776 Filed 10-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P