[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 144 (Tuesday, July 28, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40279-40282]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20146]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-6131-5]


Notice of Proposed NPDES General Permit for Discharges From 
Ready-Mixed Concrete Plants, Concrete Products Plants and Their 
Associated Facilities in Texas (TXG110000)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of draft NPDES general permit.

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

SUMMARY: EPA Region 6 is proposing to issue a general NPDES permit 
authorizing discharges of facility waste water and contact storm water 
from ready-mixed concrete plants, concrete products plants and their 
associated facilities in Texas. This permit covers facilities having 
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Codes 3273

[[Page 40280]]

(manufacture of ready-mixed concrete), 3272 (manufacture of concrete 
products, except block and brick) and 3271 (manufacture of concrete 
block and brick).
    As proposed, the permit has the following requirements: Daily 
maximum limits of 15 mg/l Oil and Grease and 65 mg/l Total Suspended 
Solids, and a pH limit of 6.0 to 9.0 Standard Units. There is also a 
requirement of no acute toxicity as determined by requiring greater 
than 50% survival in 100% effluent using a 24 hour acute test. In 
addition, the permit has limits on arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, 
copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver and zinc as 
contained in Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) 
Regulations for Hazardous Metals (30 TAC 319, Subchapter B), as well as 
requirements for no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in 
other than trace amounts, and no discharge of visible oil. There is 
also the requirement to develop and implement a pollution prevention 
plan for the storm water discharges authorized by this permit.

DATES: Comments on this proposed permit must be submitted by September 
28, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed permit should be sent to the 
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 
75202-2733.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Wilma Turner, EPA Region 6, 1445 
Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-7516. Copies 
of the complete fact sheet and proposed permit may be obtained from Ms. 
Turner. The fact sheet and proposed permit can also be found on the 
Internet at http://www.epa.gov/earth1r6/6wq/6wq.htm. In addition, the 
current administrative record on the proposal is available for 
examination at the Region's Dallas offices during normal working hours 
after providing Ms. Turner 24 hours advanced notice.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated categories and entities include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Category                  Examples of regulated entities   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..........................  Operators of ready-mixed concrete   
                                     plants and concrete products       
                                     plants.                            
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware 
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities 
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether 
your (facility, company, business, organization, etc.) is regulated by 
this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in 
Part I, Section A.1 of this permit. If you have questions regarding the 
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person 
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Section 301(a) of the Clean Water Act (CWA or the Act), 33 U.S.C. 
1311(a), makes it unlawful to discharge pollutants to waters of the 
United States in the absence of authorizing permits. CWA section 402, 
33 U.S.C. 1342, authorizes EPA to issue National Discharge Elimination 
System (NPDES) permits allowing discharges on condition they will meet 
certain requirements, including CWA sections 301, 304, and 401 (33 
U.S.C. 1331, 1314 and 1341). Those statutory provisions require that 
NPDES permits include effluent limitations requiring that authorized 
discharges: (1) meet standards reflecting levels of technological 
capability, (2) comply with EPA-approved state water quality standards 
and (3) comply with other state requirements adopted under authority 
retained by states under CWA 510, 33 U.S.C. 1370.
    Two types of technology-based effluent limitations must be included 
in the permit proposed here. With regard to conventional pollutants, 
i.e., pH, BOD, oil and grease, TSS and fecal coliform, CWA section 301 
(b)(1)(E) requires effluent limitations based on ``best conventional 
pollution control technology'' (BCT). With regard to nonconventional 
and toxic pollutants, CWA section 301(b)(2)(A), (C), and (D) require 
effluent limitations based on ``best available pollution control 
technology economically achievable'' (BAT), a standard which generally 
represents the best performing existing technology in an industrial 
category or subcategory. BAT and BCT effluent limitations may never be 
less stringent than corresponding effluent limitations based on best 
practicable control technology (BPT), a standard applicable to similar 
discharges prior to March 31, 1989 under CWA 301(b)(1)(A).
    National guidelines establishing BPT, BCT and BAT standards have 
not been promulgated for discharges from ready-mixed concrete plants 
and concrete products plants. The BCT and BAT requirements for these 
discharges have, therefore, been established using best professional 
judgement, as required by CWA section 402(a)(1). All of the limitations 
in this proposed permit, except for the requirement to develop and 
implement a storm water pollution prevention plan, are also current 
requirements, contained either directly or by reference, in TNRCC 
Regulations 30 TAC 321, Subchapter J, for discharges from ready-mixed 
concrete plants, concrete products plants, and their associated 
facilities. The storm water pollution prevention plan requirements are 
those currently required by the NPDES Storm Water Multi-Sector General 
Permit for storm water discharges associated with ready-mixed concrete 
and concrete products plants. All of the discharges authorized by this 
permit are also those authorized by 30 TAC 321, Subchapter J.
    Although the TNRCC Rule contains, by reference, the metals and 
toxicity limits listed below, that Rule does not contain monitoring 
requirements for those limits. 40 CFR 122.44(i) requires monitoring for 
each pollutant limited in an NPDES permit to assure compliance with the 
permit limits. The frequency of this monitoring shall be established on 
a case by case basis, but shall in no case be less than once per year.
    In addition to requiring the development and implementation of a 
storm water pollution prevention plan, the following limits are 
proposed:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Daily maximum
                                                              (mg/l)    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oil and Grease..........................................              15
Total Suspended Solids..................................              65
pH 6.0-9.0 Std. Units...................................                
------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Monthly     Daily max (mg/    Single grab 
                                                                  average (mg/l)        l)            (mg/l)    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenic.........................................................              .1              .2              .3

[[Page 40281]]

                                                                                                                
Barium..........................................................             1.0             2.0             4.0
Cadmium (Inland Waters).........................................             .05              .1              .2
Cadmium (Tidal Waters)..........................................              .1              .2              .3
Chromium........................................................              .5             1.0             5.0
Copper..........................................................              .5             1.0             2.0
Lead............................................................              .5             1.0             1.5
Manganese.......................................................             1.0             2.0             3.0
Mercury.........................................................            .005            .005             .01
Nickel..........................................................             1.0             2.0             3.0
Selenium (Inland Waters)........................................             .05              .1              .2
Selenium (Tidal Waters).........................................              .1              .2              .3
Silver..........................................................             .05              .1              .2
Zinc............................................................             1.0             2.0             6.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The minimum monitoring requirements proposed, all using grab 
samples, are once per month for Oil and Grease, Total Suspended Solids 
and pH, and once per year for the metals.
    There shall be No Acute Toxicity as determined by requiring greater 
than 50% survival in 100% effluent using a 24 hour acute test. 
Monitoring shall be a minimum of once per 6 months using grab samples.
    In addition to proposing the NPDES general permit for these 
facilities, the Region is also soliciting effluent data for the above 
listed metals and whole effluent toxicity for the types of facilities 
to be covered by this proposed permit. Because of the lack of effluent 
data from these facilities for these metals and toxicity, the Region 
must include limits and, therefore, monitoring requirements for these 
pollutants to assure that State water quality standards will be met and 
to comply with 40 CFR 122.44(d), which requires inclusion of any more 
stringent limits established under State law or regulations in 
accordance with section 301(b)(1)(C) of the Clean Water Act.

Other Legal Requirements

A. State Certification

    Under section 401(a)(1) of the Act, EPA may not issue an NPDES 
permit until the State in which the discharge will originate grants or 
waives certification to ensure compliance with appropriate requirements 
of the Act and State law. Section 301(b)(1)(C) of the Act requires that 
NPDES permits contain conditions that ensure compliance with applicable 
state water quality standards or limitations. The proposed permit 
contains limitations intended to ensure compliance with state water 
quality standards and has been determined by EPA Region 6 to be 
consistent with the Texas water quality standards and the corresponding 
implementation plan. The Region has solicited certification from the 
Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission.

B. Endangered Species Act

    The proposed limits are sufficiently stringent to assure state 
water quality standards, both for aquatic life protection and human 
health protection, will be met. The effluent limitations established in 
this permit ensure protection of aquatic life and maintenance of the 
receiving water as an aquatic habitat. The Region finds that adoption 
of the proposed permit is unlikely to adversely affect any threatened 
or endangered species or its critical habitat. EPA is seeking written 
concurrence from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service on this 
determination.

C. Historic Preservation Act

    Facilities which adversely affect properties listed or eligible for 
listing in the National Register of Historical Places are not 
authorized to discharge under this permit.

D. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action 
from the review requirements of Executive Order 12866.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection required by this permit has been 
approved by OMB under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., in submission made for the NPDES permit program 
and assigned OMB control numbers 2040-0086 (NPDES permit application) 
and 2040-0004 (discharge monitoring reports).

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA), Public Law 
104-4, generally requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of 
their ``regulatory actions'' on State, local, and tribal governments 
and the private sector. UMRA uses the term ``regulatory actions'' to 
refer to regulations. (See, e.g., UMRA section 201, ``Each agency shall 
* * * assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions * * * (other 
than to the extent that such regulations incorporate requirements 
specifically set forth in law)'' (emphasis added)). UMRA section 102 
defines ``regulation'' by reference to section 658 of Title 2 of the 
U.S. Code, which in turn defines ``regulation'' and ``rule'' by 
reference to section 601(2) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). 
That section of the RFA defines ``rule'' as ``any rule for which the 
agency publishes a notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to section 
553(b) of (the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)), or any other law * 
* *''
    NPDES general permits are not ``rules'' under the APA and thus not 
subject to the APA requirement to publish a notice of proposed 
rulemaking. NPDES general permits are also not subject to such a 
requirement under the CWA. While EPA publishes a notice to solicit 
public comment on draft general permits, it does so pursuant to the CWA 
section 402(a) requirement to provide ``an opportunity for a hearing.'' 
Thus, NPDES general permits are not ``rules'' for RFA or UMRA purposes.
    EPA thinks it is unlikely that this proposed permit issuance would 
contain a Federal requirement that might result in expenditures of $100 
million or more for State, local and tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or the private sector in any one year.
    The Agency also believes that the proposed permit issuance would 
not significantly nor uniquely affect small governments. For UMRA 
purposes, ``small governments'' is defined by reference to the 
definition of ``small governmental jurisdiction'' under the RFA. (See 
UMRA section 102(1), referencing 2 U.S.C. 658, which references section 
601(5) of the RFA.) ``Small governmental jurisdiction''

[[Page 40282]]

means governments of cities, counties, towns, etc., with a population 
of less than 50,000, unless the agency establishes an alternative 
definition.
    The proposed permit issuance also would not uniquely affect small 
governments because compliance with the proposed permit conditions 
affects small governments in the same manner as any other entities 
seeking coverage under the permit.

G. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq, requires that 
EPA prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for regulations that have 
a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Compliance with the permit requirements will not result in a 
significant impact on dischargers, including small businesses, covered 
by these permits. EPA Region 6 therefore concludes that the permits 
proposed today will not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.
Oscar Ramirez, Jr.,
Deputy Director, Water Quality Protection Division, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 98-20146 Filed 7-27-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P