[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