[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 164 (Tuesday, August 25, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45298-45335]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-22533]
[[Page 45297]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Defense
_______________________________________________________________________
40 CFR Chapter VII and Part 1700
Uniform National Discharge Standards for Vessels of the Armed Forces;
Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 164 / Tuesday, August 25, 1998 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 45298]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
40 CFR Chapter VII and Part 1700
[FRL-6145-4]
RIN 2040-AC96
Uniform National Discharge Standards for Vessels of the Armed
Forces
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Defense
(DOD).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed rule describes the types of discharges generated
incidental to the normal operation of Armed Forces vessels and
identifies which of these discharges the Armed Forces will be required
to control, and which vessel discharges will not require pollution
controls.
Today's proposal also addresses; the mechanism by which States can
petition EPA and DOD to review whether or not a discharge should
require control by a marine pollution control device (MPCD), or to
review a Federal performance standard for a MPCD; the effect on State
regulation of vessel discharges; and the processes to be followed by
EPA and States when establishing no-discharge zones (where any release
of a specified discharge is prohibited).
This is the first phase of a three-phased process to set uniform
national discharge standards (UNDS) for Armed Forces vessels. Phase I
will establish which types of discharges warrant control and which do
not, based on consideration of the anticipated environmental effects of
the discharge and other factors listed at section 312(n) of the Clean
Water Act. Phase II will promulgate MPCD performance standards, and
Phase III will specify requirements for the design, construction,
installation, and use of MPCDs.
Uniform national discharge standards will result in enhanced
environmental protection because standards will be established for
certain discharges that currently are not regulated comprehensively.
These standards will also advance the ability of the Armed Forces to
better design and build environmentally sound vessels, to train crews
to operate vessels in a manner that is protective of the environment,
and to maintain operational flexibility both domestically and
internationally. In addition, these standards are expected to stimulate
the development of innovative vessel pollution control technology.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received or postmarked by
October 9, 1998. For information on submitting comments on the draft
information collection request that was prepared for the proposed rule,
see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ``How to Submit Comments on the
Information Collection Request.''
ADDRESSES: Send written comments on the proposed rule to: Docket W-97-
21 UNDS Comment Clerk, Water Docket, Mail Code 4101, U.S. EPA, 401 M
Street SW., Washington, DC 20460. Please submit an original and three
copies of your comments and enclosures (including references). No
facsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. Commenters requesting
acknowledgment that their comments were received should enclose a self-
addressed stamped envelope with their comments. Comments may also be
filed electronically to [email protected]. Electronic comments must be
submitted as an ASCII or WordPerfect file avoiding the use of special
characters and any form of encryption. Electronic comments must be
identified by the docket number W-97-21 and may be filed online at many
Federal Depository Libraries.
The record for this proposed rulemaking has been established under
docket number W-97-21 and is available for review at the Office of
Water Docket, Room EB-57, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC The record
is available for inspection from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. For access to docket materials,
please call (202) 260-3027 to schedule an appointment.
For information on how to obtain a copy of the Information
Collection Request (ICR) that has been prepared for this proposed rule,
or for information on where to submit comments on the draft ICR
document, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ``How to Submit Comments on the
Information Collection Request.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gregory Stapleton (U.S. EPA) at
(202) 260-0141, or Mr. David Kopack (U.S. Navy) at (703) 602-3594 ext.
243.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities
This proposed rule would apply to discharges incidental to the
normal operation of vessels of the Armed Forces, establish procedures
for States to petition EPA and DOD to review whether a discharge should
be controlled, and establish procedures for creating no-discharge zones
in State waters. Regulated categories and entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Examples of regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Government.................. Vessels of the Armed Forces,
including the Navy, Military
Sealift Command, Marine Corps,
Army, Air Force, and Coast Guard.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The preceding table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated
by this proposed action. This table lists the types of entities that
EPA and DOD are 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 a particular category of vessel,
discharge from a vessel, or governmental entity is regulated by this
proposed action, carefully examine the applicability criteria at
proposed 40 CFR 1700.1 in the regulatory text following this preamble.
For answers to questions regarding the applicability of this proposed
action to a particular entity, consult one of the persons listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Exclusions
This proposed rule would not apply to commercial vessels; private
vessels; vessels owned or operated by State, local, or tribal
governments; vessels under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of
Engineers; vessels, other than those of the Coast Guard, under the
jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation; vessels preserved as
memorials and museums; time- and voyage-chartered vessels; vessels
under construction; vessels in drydock; and amphibious vehicles.
Supporting Documentation
The technical basis for this proposed rule is detailed in the
``Technical Development Document for Proposed Phase I Uniform National
Discharge Standards for Vessels of the Armed Forces'' (EPA-821-R-98-
009), hereafter referred to as the Technical Development Document. This
background document is available through EPA's Internet Home Page at
http://www.epa.gov/OST/rules, or through the UNDS Internet Home Page at
http://206.5.146.100/n45/doc/unds/unds.html. This document is also
available from the EPA Water Resource Center, Room EB-47, 401 M Street
SW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone (202) 260-7786 for the voice mail
publication request line.
[[Page 45299]]
How To Submit Comments on the Information Collection Request
An Information Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared
by EPA (ICR No.1791.02, amending the collection with OMB control #2040-
0187) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail at OPPE
Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(2137); 401 M St., SW; Washington, DC 20460, by email at
[email protected], or by calling (202) 260-2740. A copy may
also be downloaded off the internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr.
Send comments on the ICR to the Director, OPPE Regulatory
Information Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2137), 401
M St., S.W., Washington, DC 20460, and to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th St., NW,
Washington, DC 20503, marked ``Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.''
Include the ICR number in any correspondence. Since OMB is required to
make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after August
25, 1998, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if
OMB receives it by September 24, 1998.
Overview
This preamble describes the legal authority, background, technical
basis, and other aspects of the proposed regulation. The definitions,
acronyms, and abbreviations used in this proposed rule are defined in
appendix A to the preamble. The regulatory text for this proposed rule
(40 CFR Part 1700) follows the preamble.
Organization of This Document
I. Purpose and Summary of This Rulemaking
A. Pollution Control Requirements for Vessel Discharges
B. Effect on State and Local Laws and Regulations
II. Legal Authority and Background
A. Clean Water Act Statutory Requirements
B. Summary of Public Outreach and Consultation With States and
Federal Agencies
III. Description of Armed Forces Vessels
A. U.S. Navy
B. Military Sealift Command (MSC)
C. U.S. Coast Guard
D. U.S. Army
E. U.S. Marine Corps
F. U.S. Air Force
G. Vessels Not Covered by This Proposed Rule
IV. Summary of Data Gathering Efforts
A. Surveys and Consultations
B. Sampling and Analysis
V. Marine Pollution Control Device (MPCD) Requirements
A. Overview of Assessment Methodology
B. Peer Review
C. Discharges Requiring the Use of a MPCD
D. Discharges That Do Not Require Use of a MPCD
VI. Section-By-Section Analysis of the Regulation
A. Subpart A--Scope
B. Subpart B--Discharge Determinations
C. Subpart C--Effect on States
D. Subpart D--MPCD Performance Standards
VII. Related Acts of Congress and Executive Orders
A. Executive Order 12866
B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and Executive Order 12875
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act, as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Executive Order 13045
F. Endangered Species Act
G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Appendix A to the Preamble--Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Other Terms
Used in This Document
I. Purpose and Summary of This Rulemaking
A. Pollution Control Requirements for Vessel Discharges
Today's document proposes to create a new 40 CFR Part 1700
establishing uniform national discharge standards that would apply to
discharges incidental to the normal operation of vessels of the Armed
Forces. Incidental discharges include effluent from the normal
operation of vessel systems or hull protective coatings, but do not
include such things as emergency discharges, air emissions, or
discharges of trash. These proposed regulations identify discharges
that would require control through the use of marine pollution control
devices (MPCDs). This document also identifies discharges that are
proposed to be excluded from any requirement for a marine pollution
control device because of their low potential for causing environmental
impacts.
This proposed rule addresses 39 types of discharges from Armed
Forces vessels. EPA and DOD are proposing to require the use of MPCDs
to control 25 of these discharges. These discharges are listed in Table
1 and described in section V.C of the preamble. Section V.C also
discusses whether and to what extent the discharges have the potential
to cause adverse impacts on the marine environment, the availability of
MPCDs to mitigate adverse impacts, and the rationale for proposing to
require the use of MPCDs.
Table 1.--Discharges Requiring Marine Pollution Control Devices
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aqueous Film-Forming Foam.
Catapult Water Brake Tank and Post-Launch Retraction Exhaust.
Chain Locker Effluent.
Clean Ballast.
Compensated Fuel Ballast.
Controllable Pitch Propeller Hydraulic Fluid.
Deck Runoff.
Dirty Ballast.
Distillation and Reverse Osmosis Brine.
Elevator Pit Effluent.
Firemain Systems.
Gas Turbine Water Wash.
Graywater.
Hull Coating Leachate.
Motor Gasoline Compensating Discharge.
Non-oily Machinery Wastewater.
Photographic Laboratory Drains.
Seawater Cooling Overboard Discharge.
Seawater Piping Biofouling Prevention.
Small Boat Engine Wet Exhaust.
Sonar Dome Discharge.
Submarine Bilgewater.
Surface Vessel Bilgewater/Oil-Water Separator Discharge.
Underwater Ship Husbandry.
Welldeck Discharges.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For 14 types of vessel discharges, EPA and DOD have determined that
it is not reasonable and practicable to require the use of MPCDs
because these discharges, listed in Table 2, exhibit a low potential
for causing adverse impacts on the marine environment. Section V.D of
the preamble describes each of these discharges and the reasons why
MPCDs would not be required.
Table 2.--Discharges Exempted From Controls
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boiler Blowdown.
Catapult Wet Accumulator Discharge.
Cathodic Protection.
Freshwater Lay-up.
Mine Countermeasures Equipment Lubrication.
Portable Damage Control Drain Pump Discharge.
Portable Damage Control Drain Pump Wet Exhaust.
Refrigeration/Air Conditioning Condensate.
Rudder Bearing Lubrication.
Steam Condensate.
Stern Tube Seals and Underwater Bearing Lubrication.
Submarine Acoustic Countermeasures Launcher Discharge.
Submarine Emergency Diesel Engine Wet Exhaust.
Submarine Outboard Equipment Grease and External Hydraulics.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Effect on State and Local Laws and Regulations
This proposed rule, identifying which vessel discharges require
control, is the first step of a three-phased process to establish
uniform national discharge
[[Page 45300]]
standards under section 312(n) of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Establishing MPCD performance standards and promulgating regulations
governing the design and use of MPCDs will be accomplished in the
second and third phases of the UNDS process. The standards being
proposed today affect State and local laws and regulations in several
ways. Under section 312(n)(6) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), States and
their political subdivisions would be prohibited from adopting or
enforcing any State or local statute or regulation with respect to the
discharges listed in Table 2 once this proposed rule is in effect,
other than to establish no-discharge zones for these discharges. States
and their political subdivisions would be similarly prohibited from
adopting or enforcing any statutes or regulations affecting the
discharges listed in Table 1 once regulations governing MPCDs for those
discharges are in effect.
Second, this notice proposes the procedural mechanisms by which a
State can petition EPA and DOD to review whether a discharge should
require control by a MPCD. Finally, this proposed rule would codify the
process for establishing no-discharge zones (where any release of a
specified discharge is prohibited) where necessary to protect and
enhance the quality of some or all of the waters within a State. These
procedures, contained in proposed 40 CFR 1700.6 through 1700.13, are
discussed in section VI of this preamble.
II. Legal Authority and Background
A. Clean Water Act Statutory Requirements
Section 325 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1996,
entitled ``Discharges from Vessels of the Armed Forces'' (Pub. L. 104-
106, 110 Stat. 254), amended section 312 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (also known as the Clean Water Act, or CWA) to require the
Secretary of Defense (Secretary) and the Administrator of the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (Administrator) to develop
uniform national standards to control certain discharges from vessels
of the Armed Forces. Congress established requirements for the
development of uniform national discharge standards to (1) enhance the
operational flexibility of vessels of the Armed Forces domestically and
internationally, (2) stimulate the development of innovative vessel
pollution control technology, and (3) advance the development by the
U.S. Navy of environmentally sound ships. The term ``UNDS'' is used in
this preamble to refer to the provisions in section 312(n) of the CWA
(33 U.S.C. 1322(n)).
UNDS applies to vessels of the Armed Forces and discharges (other
than sewage) incidental to their normal operation, unless the Secretary
finds that compliance with UNDS would not be in the national security
interests of the United States (see CWA section 312(n)(1)). UNDS does
not apply to discharges overboard of rubbish, trash, garbage, or other
such materials; air emissions resulting from a vessel propulsion
system, motor driven equipment, or incinerator; or discharges that
require permitting under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) program, 40 CFR part 122 (see CWA section 312(a)(12)).
UNDS is applicable to discharges of Armed Forces vessels in the
navigable waters of the United States and the contiguous zone. As
defined in section 502(7) of the CWA, the term ``navigable waters''
means waters of the United States, including the Great Lakes, and
includes waters seaward from the coastline to a distance of 3 nautical
miles from the shore of the States, District of Columbia, Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Canal
Zone, and the Trust Territories of the Pacific Islands. The contiguous
zone extends from 3 nautical miles to 12 nautical miles from the
coastline. UNDS is not enforceable beyond the contiguous zone.
Although UNDS makes no changes to the regulation of sewage from
vessels, UNDS was patterned after provisions for the control of vessel
sewage discharges in the CWA (sections 312(a)--(m)). These provisions
require promulgation of Federal standards for performance of marine
sanitation devices, preemption of State regulation of marine sanitation
devices, and the opportunity to establish no-discharge zones (see CWA
sections 312(a)-(m) and 40 CFR part 140).
UNDS requires EPA and the Department of Defense (DOD) to develop
regulations and performance standards for controlling discharges
incidental to the normal operation of Armed Forces vessels where EPA
and DOD determine that it is reasonable and practicable to require use
of a marine pollution control device (MPCD) to mitigate adverse impacts
on the marine environment. The UNDS regulations are to be developed in
three phases:
Phase I: The first phase requires DOD and EPA to determine Armed
Forces vessel discharges for which it is reasonable and practicable to
require control with a MPCD to mitigate potential adverse impacts on
the marine environment (CWA section 312(n)(2)). The UNDS legislation
states that a MPCD may be a piece of equipment or a management practice
designed to control a particular discharge (CWA section 312(a)(13)).
DOD and EPA are required to consider seven factors in determining
whether a discharge requires a MPCD (CWA section 312(n)(2)(B)):
The nature of the discharge.
The environmental effects of the discharge.
The practicability of using the MPCD.
The effect that installing or using the MPCD has on the
operation or the operational capability of the vessel.
Applicable United States law.
Applicable international standards.
The economic costs of installing and using the MPCD.
The UNDS legislation requires DOD and EPA to consult with the
Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating, the
Secretary of Commerce, and interested States in the Phase I rule
development. UNDS provides that after promulgation of the Phase I rule,
neither States nor political subdivisions of States may adopt or
enforce any State or local statutes or regulations with respect to
discharges identified as not requiring control with a MPCD, except to
establish no-discharge zones (CWA section 312(n)(6)).
Phase II: The second phase of UNDS requires DOD and EPA to
promulgate Federal performance standards for each MPCD determined to be
required in Phase I (CWA section 312(n)(3)). Phase II requires
consultation with the Secretary of the department in which the Coast
Guard is operating, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Commerce,
other interested Federal agencies, and interested States. In developing
performance standards for the Phase II rulemaking, DOD and EPA are to
consider the same seven factors identified for Phase I, and can
establish standards that (1) distinguish among classes, types, and
sizes of vessels; (2) distinguish between new and existing vessels; and
(3) provide for a waiver of applicability of standards as necessary or
appropriate to a particular class, type, age, or size of vessel (CWA
section 312(n)(3)(C)). The mechanisms for determining compliance with
performance standards and the role of States and Federal agencies in
enforcement matters will be addressed during Phases II and III.
Phase III: The third phase requires DOD, in consultation with EPA
and the
[[Page 45301]]
Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating, to
establish requirements for the design, construction, installation, and
use of the MPCDs identified in Phase II (CWA section 312(n)(4)). These
Phase III requirements will be codified under the authority of the
Secretary of Defense. Additional details regarding codification of
these requirements will be provided in Phase II. Following completion
of Phase III, neither States nor political subdivisions of States may
adopt or enforce any State or local statutes or regulations with
respect to discharges identified as requiring control with a MPCD,
except to establish no-discharge zones (CWA section 312(n)(6)).
UNDS provides for the establishment of no-discharge zones either by
State prohibition (CWA section 312(n)(7)(A)) or by EPA prohibition (CWA
section 312(n)(7)(B)). Today's proposal addresses the criteria and
procedures for establishing no-discharge zones. For a State
prohibition, if a State determines that the protection and enhancement
of the quality of some or all of its waters require greater
environmental protection, the State may prohibit one or more
discharges, whether treated or not, into those waters. However, the
statute provides that such a prohibition shall not be effective until
EPA determines that there are adequate facilities for the safe and
sanitary removal of the discharges(s), and that the prohibition will
not have the effect of discriminating against an Armed Forces vessel by
reason of the ownership or operation by the Federal Government, or the
military function, of the vessel.
For a no-discharge zone by EPA prohibition, a State may request EPA
to prohibit, by regulation, the discharge of one or more discharges,
whether treated or not, into specified waters within a State. In this
case, EPA makes the determination that the protection and enhancement
of the quality of the specified waters require a prohibition of the
discharge. As with a State prohibition, EPA must also determine that
there are adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal of the
discharge, and that the prohibition will not discriminate against Armed
Forces vessels by reason of their Federal ownership or operation, or
their military function. However, the statute directs that EPA shall
not disapprove an application for an EPA prohibition for the sole
reason that there are not adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary
removal of such discharges.
The UNDS legislation contains two provisions for reviewing and
modifying performance standards and determinations of whether a MPCD is
required. The first requires DOD and EPA to review the determinations
and standards every five years, and if necessary, revise them based on
any significant new information (CWA sections 312(n)(5)(A) and (B)).
The second provision allows States, at any time, to petition the
Secretary and the Administrator to review the determinations (after
Phase I) and standards (after Phase II) if there is significant new
information, not considered previously, that could reasonably result in
a change to the determination or standard (CWA section 312(n)(5)(D)).
B. Summary of Public Outreach and Consultation With States and Federal
Agencies
In developing this proposed rule, EPA and DOD have consulted with
other interested Federal agencies, States, and environmental
organizations. Other Federal agencies that have been involved in UNDS
development include the Coast Guard (for the Department of
Transportation), the Department of State, and the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (for the Department of Commerce). The Coast
Guard has been involved in all aspects of UNDS development. The other
agencies have participated with the DOD, EPA, and the Coast Guard in
the UNDS Executive Steering Committee, which is responsible for UNDS
policy development and is composed of senior-level managers.
Separately, the DOD and EPA have held discussions with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service on UNDS
matters.
Two mechanisms have been used to consult with States. First, a
representative from the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS)
participates in Executive Steering Committee meetings. ECOS is the
national association of State and territorial environmental
commissioners and has been established, in part, to provide State
positions on environmental issues to EPA. Second, representatives from
the Navy (as the lead for the DOD), EPA, and the Coast Guard met at
least once, and in most cases twice, with each State expressing an
interest in the UNDS development. The interested States were
predominantly those with a significant presence of Navy or Coast Guard
vessels. The States participating in the consultation meetings are
identified in the Technical Development Document.
In early 1996, the Navy and EPA invited States with a DOD or Coast
Guard vessel presence to participate in an initial round of
consultation meetings. Of the approximately 40 States invited, 21
States requested a consultation meeting. These initial State
consultation meetings were held between August and December 1996. State
environmental regulatory authorities hosted each meeting, which
consisted of a Navy/EPA briefing on UNDS activities and an opportunity
to discuss State-specific issues. A Coast Guard representative was
present at each meeting to provide input on discharges from Coast Guard
vessels. The Navy/EPA briefing provided a summary of the UNDS history
and requirements, considerations for evaluating discharges, the
technical approach to determining which discharges will require
control, an overview of the vessels to which UNDS is applicable, and
the roles of DOD and EPA in the rulemaking process. See ``Uniform
National Discharge Standards (UNDS) State Consultation Meetings (Round
#1) Compendium of Minutes,'' available in the record for this proposed
rule.
The Navy and EPA conducted a second round of State consultation
meetings from October 1997 through January 1998. Of the 22 States
consulted in the second round of meetings, five were States that had
not been briefed during the initial round. The second round of
consultation meetings provided Navy and EPA an opportunity to summarize
the activities that had taken place since the initial round of
consultation meetings. This included discussing the 39 types of vessel
discharges covered by this proposed rule and the preliminary decisions
regarding which of the discharges would be proposed to require control.
States were provided information that included a description of the
discharges and the equipment or processes generating the discharges,
the locations where the discharges occur, vessels producing the
discharges, the preliminary results of environmental effects analyses,
and the preliminary conclusions of whether controls would be required.
States were generally supportive of the UNDS effort. States most
commonly expressed interest in matters related to the implementation of
UNDS regulations, including enforcement and procedures for establishing
no-discharge zones, the relationship between UNDS and other State
programs, which vessels are subject to UNDS, and discussions about
potential MPCD options.
In addition to State meetings, the Navy, EPA, and Coast Guard met
with several environmental organizations in December 1997 and May 1998.
Details
[[Page 45302]]
of the topics discussed and environmental organizations represented at
those meetings are in the record for this proposed rule. A compendium
of the minutes from the second round of State consultation meetings and
the meetings with environmental organizations is available in the
record for this proposed rule. See ``Uniform National Discharge
Standards (UNDS) Consultation Meetings (Round #2) Compendium of
Minutes.''
The Navy and EPA publish a newsletter that contains feature
articles on UNDS-related subjects (e.g., nonindigenous species, Navy
research and development programs), provides answers to frequently
asked questions, and provides an update on recent progress and upcoming
events. The newsletter is mailed to State and environmental group
representatives, Armed Forces and EPA contacts, and interested members
of the general public. The newsletter has a current circulation of 360
copies, approximately 200 of which are distributed outside of the EPA,
DOD, or their contractors. In addition, electronic copies of the
newsletter are available from an UNDS web site on the Internet (http://
206.5.146.100/n45/doc/unds/unds.html). In addition to the newsletter,
the Internet web site provides UNDS legislative information, a summary
of the technical and management approach to rule development, and a
description of the benefits expected to result from the development of
UNDS.
III. Description of Armed Forces Vessels
Section 312(a)(14) of the CWA, as amended by the National Defense
Authorization Act of 1996, defines a vessel of the Armed Forces as
``(A) any vessel owned or operated by the Department of Defense, other
than a time or voyage chartered vessel; and (B) any vessel owned or
operated by the Department of Transportation that is designated by the
Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating as a
vessel equivalent to a vessel [owned or operated by the DOD].'' The CWA
defines a vessel as every type of watercraft or other artificial
contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of
transportation on the navigable waters of the United States. See CWA
sections 312(a)(1) and 312(a)(2). Also see 40 CFR 140.1(d).
The scope of the UNDS legislation addresses incidental discharges
from over 7,000 vessels (i.e., ships, submarines, and small boats and
craft) of differing designs and mission requirements. The Armed Forces
that operate vessels subject to UNDS include the Navy, Military Sealift
Command, Army, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard. Table 3
summarizes the number of vessels operated by each of these branches of
the Armed Forces as of August 1997. The following sections provide a
general description of the mission of vessels operated by each branch
of the Armed Forces and the types of vessels covered by UNDS. Also
provided is a description of the vessels that are excluded from this
proposed rule. Armed Forces vessels and their operating locations are
discussed in more detail in the Technical Development Document.
Table 3.--Number of Armed Forces Vessels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Branch of armed forces vessels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navy....................................................... 4,760
Military Sealift Command................................... 57
Army....................................................... 334
Marine Corps............................................... 538
Air Force.................................................. 36
Coast Guard................................................ 1,445
------------
Total.................................................. 7,172
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. U.S. Navy
The role of the Navy is to maintain an effective naval fighting
force for the defense of the United States in times of war, and to
deploy this force to prevent conflicts and control crises around the
world. The Navy is responsible for organizing, training, and equipping
its forces to conduct prompt and sustained combat operations at sea.
The fleet must be capable of carrying personnel, weapons, and supplies
wherever needed.
The Navy currently owns and operates over 4,700 vessels. Navy
vessels can be categorized into eight groups by similar mission:
aircraft carriers, surface combatants, amphibious ships, submarines,
auxiliaries, mine warfare ships, service craft and small boats, and
inactive assets. Naval ships and submarines are ocean-going vessels
that for the most part operate within 12 nautical miles (n.m.) from
shore only during transit in and out of port. However, many of these
vessels spend approximately 180 days per year in port, and many testing
and maintenance activities are conducted in port or during transits.
Service craft and small boats typically operate in ports or other
coastal waters within 12 n.m. from shore. Unlike service craft, small
boats are often kept out of the water when not in use to increase the
vessels' longevity. Inactive assets include a variety of vessel types.
The majority of inactive vessels are scheduled for scrapping, transfer
to the Maritime Administration, or foreign sale. Table 4 provides a
brief description of the vessel types, and information on the number of
vessels and the vessels' primary operating areas.
The Navy bases the majority of its fleet at five major ports:
Norfolk, Virginia; San Diego, California; Mayport, Florida; Puget
Sound, Washington; and Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. These ports provide
services including: pierside support services (e.g., potable water,
sewage and trash disposal, and electrical power); supplies (e.g.,
repair parts, consumable materials, and food); and maintenance and
repair functions. The Navy operates additional ports, identified in the
Technical Development Document, that provide a subset of these
services.
Table 4.--U.S. Navy Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary operational
area
Vessel type Mission Number -----------------------
Inside 12 Outside 12
n.m. n.m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft Carriers......................... Provide air combat support to the 12 X
fleet with landing and launch
platforms for airplanes and
helicopters.
Surface Combatants........................ Provide air defense, ballistic 139 X
missile defense, antisubmarine
warfare support, antisurface
warfare support, merchant and
carrier group protection,
independent patrol operations,
and tactical support of land-
based forces.
[[Page 45303]]
Amphibious Ships.......................... Provide a landing and take-off 39 X X
platform for aircraft, primarily
helicopters, and a means for
launching and recovering smaller
landing craft.
Submarines................................ Provide strategic and ballistic 88 X
defense, search and rescue, and
research and survey capability.
Auxiliaries............................... Provide logistical support, such 20 X
as underway replenishment,
material support, and rescue and
salvage operations.
Mine Warfare Ships........................ Conduct minesweeping missions to 26 X
find, classify, and destroy
mines.
Service Craft and Small Boats............. Provide a variety of services. 4,192 X
Includes tug boats, landing
craft, training craft, torpedo
retrievers, patrol boats,
utility boats, floating
drydocks, barges, and transport
boats.
Inactive Assets........................... Vessels in various states of 244 X a
readiness, the majority of which
are scheduled for scrapping,
transfer to MARAD, or sale to
foreign nations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a These vessels are not operated and are kept at various port locations
B. Military Sealift Command (MSC)
The primary mission of the MSC is to transport Department of
Defense materials and supplies, provide towing and salvage services,
and conduct specialized missions for Federal agencies. To accomplish
this, the MSC maintains and operates a fleet of vessels classified
within four major maritime programs: the Special Mission Support Force
(SMSF); the Naval Fleet Auxiliary Force (NFAF); the Afloat
Prepositioning Force; and MSC Strategic Sealift Program. MSC vessels
are operated primarily by civil service mariners, but also by some
military personnel or mariners under contract to MSC. UNDS does not
apply to chartered Strategic Sealift and Afloat Prepositioning Force
vessels. See CWA section 312(a)(14) excluding time or voyage chartered
vessels from the definition of vessels of the Armed Forces.
MSC vessels provide support to other Armed Forces vessels and can
be stationed around the globe to ensure rapid support. MSC vessels are
ocean-going vessels that typically operate within 12 n.m. only during
transit in and out of port. Some testing and maintenance activities are
conducted while the vessel is in port or during transits through
coastal waters. Table 5 provides a brief description of MSC vessel
types, and information on the number of vessels and their primary
operating areas.
The MSC operates no major port facilities of its own, instead
maintaining its vessels at Navy and commercial port facilities. A
number of MSC replenishment and auxiliary vessels operate out of the
Navy's ports in Norfolk, Virginia; San Diego, California; and Pearl
Harbor, Hawaii.
Table 5.--MSC Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary operational
area
Vessel type Mission Number ----------------------
Inside 12 Outside 12
n.m. n.m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Mission Support Force............. Support the Armed Forces in 22 X
specialized missions such as
undersea surveillance, missile
range tracking, oceanographic and
hydrographic surveys, acoustic
research, and submarine escort.
Naval Fleet Auxiliary Force............... Provide underway replenishment 35 X
services (i.e., deliver fuel,
food, spare parts, equipment, and
ammunition) to Navy surface
combatants, as well as ocean
towing and salvage services.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. U.S. Coast Guard
The Coast Guard is a component of the Department of Transportation
and is responsible for enforcing laws on waters of the U.S., including
coastal waters, oceans, lakes, and rivers subject to the jurisdiction
of the United States. Peacetime missions include enforcing recreational
boating safety, conducting search and rescue operations, maintaining
aids to navigation, ensuring merchant marine safety, providing drug
interdiction, and facilitating environmental protection efforts. In
time of war, the Coast Guard may become a part of the Navy.
Coast Guard vessels may be categorized as: icebreakers; cutters;
tenders; tugboats; small boats and craft; and other vessels. Table 6
provides a brief description of the vessel types, and information on
the number of vessels and their typical operating areas.
The major Coast Guard facilities are located in Boston,
Massachusetts; Honolulu, Hawaii; Charleston, South Carolina; Alameda,
California; Galveston, Texas; Seattle, Washington; Miami, Florida; and
Portsmouth, Virginia. Coast Guard duty stations can also be found on
inland, coastal, and river waterways throughout the U.S. Ship repair
and overhaul is usually conducted at a commercial facility near the
homeport of the vessel.
[[Page 45304]]
Table 6.--U.S. Coast Guard Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary operational
area
Vessel type Mission Number -----------------------
Inside 12 Outside 12
n.m. n.m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ice breakers.............................. Support the winter icebreaking 3 X X
efforts in order to maintain
open waterways in the Arctic,
Antarctic, and the northern
regions of the United States
including the Great Lakes,
Northwest, and Northeast.
Cutters................................... Provide multi-mission capability, 128 X X
including patrol, air defense,
search and rescue, and drug
interdiction.
Tenders................................... Used to maintain inland river, 76 X
coastal, and offshore buoys and
navigational aids, or to serve
as a construction platform.
Tugboats.................................. Provide towing and support 20 X
services to other vessels.
Small Boats and Craft..................... Used in harbors, in rough surf 1,217 X
for rescue, for inland river and
lake patrol, as transports, and
for firefighting.
Other Vessel.............................. Includes a sailing cutter used 1 X
for training.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. U.S. Army
Army vessels are used primarily for ship-to-shore transfer of
equipment, cargo, and personnel. The Army operates one major port
facility at Fort Eustis, Virginia for active duty vessels, and numerous
other port facilities for reserve duty vessels. The Army's fleet is
divided into three categories: the Transportation Corps, the
Intelligence and Security Command, and the Corps of Engineers. The Army
Transportation Corps operates lighterage and floating utility craft to
provide waterborne delivery (inland and ship-to-shore) of equipment and
supplies for all Armed Forces and to perform port terminal operations.
The Intelligence and Security Command operates patrol vessels for drug
interdiction. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) boats and craft are
excluded from UNDS as discussed in section III.G of the preamble. Table
7 provides a brief description of Army vessels subject to the proposed
rule, and information on the number of vessels and their primary
operating areas.
Table 7.--U.S. Army Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary operational
area
Vessel type Mission Number -----------------------
Inside 12 Outside 12
n.m. n.m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lighterage................................ Transport equipment, cargo, and 159 X X
personnel.
Floating Utility.......................... Perform port terminal operations. 168 X
Patrol Ships.............................. Perform drug interdiction........ 7 X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. U.S. Marine Corps
A primary role of the Marine Corps is to employ military forces and
equipment onto land from the sea. The Marine Corps uses 538 inflatable
rubber craft for in-port, river, lake, and coastal operations. These
craft are often kept out of the water when not in use to increase the
craft's longevity. The Marine Corps makes use of available local port
facilities and operates no major port facilities of its own.
F. U.S. Air Force
The Air Force operates some large vessels and a number of smaller
boats and craft at various locations to support missile testing and
operations. Table 8 provides a brief description of the vessel types,
and information on the number of vessels and their primary operating
areas.
The Air Force operates no major port facilities of its own. The
larger Air Force vessels are located at Tyndall Air Force Base,
Florida, and at Carrabelle, Florida. Small boats and craft are
distributed among a number of local ports.
Table 8.--U.S. Air Force Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary operational
area
Vessel type Mission Number -----------------------
Inside 12 Outside 12
n.m. n.m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missile Retriever......................... Used to locate and recover 5 X X
practice missiles.
Floating Utility.......................... Used primarily for 31 X
transportation, training, and
repair.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Vessels Not Covered by This Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would apply only to Armed Forces vessels. This
proposed rule would not apply to commercial vessels; privately owned
vessels; vessels owned or operated by State, local, or tribal
governments; vessels under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of
Engineers; vessels, other than those of the Coast Guard, under the
jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation; vessels owned or
operated by other Federal agencies that are not part of the Armed
Forces; vessels preserved as
[[Page 45305]]
memorials and museums; time- and voyage-chartered vessels; vessels
under construction; vessels in drydock; and amphibious vehicles. For
clarification, several categories of these types of vessels that are
beyond the scope of this proposed rule are described below.
1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Vessels
Army Corps of Engineers vessels are typically used for civil works
purposes. Congress has consistently addressed the Army Corps of
Engineers separately from other parts of the Department of Defense in
both authorization and appropriations bills. Therefore, the DOD and EPA
do not consider that Congress intended to apply UNDS to Army Corps of
Engineers vessels.
2. Maritime Administration (MARAD) Vessels
A number of vessels are operated or maintained by the Maritime
Administration, a part of the Department of Transportation. As
established in section 312(a)(14) of the CWA, the definition of
``vessel of the Armed Forces'' includes those Department of
Transportation vessels that are designated by the Secretary of the
department in which the U.S. Coast Guard is operating (currently the
Department of Transportation) as operating as a vessel equivalent to a
DOD vessel. The Secretary of Transportation has determined that MARAD
vessels, including the National Defense Reserve Fleet, do not operate
equivalently to DOD vessels, and therefore MARAD vessels are not
covered by UNDS.
3. Memorial and Museum Vessels
Ships and submarines preserved as memorials and museums once served
a military mission. However, with the exception of one submarine, these
vessels are no longer owned or operated by the Armed Forces, and
therefore, they are not vessels of the Armed Forces and UNDS does not
apply to them.
The submarine Nautilus is owned and operated by the Navy as a
museum; however, the vessel is stationary and its systems are not
routinely operated. Therefore, the EPA and DOD are proposing to exclude
this vessel from the scope of UNDS.
4. Time- and Voyage-Chartered Vessels
CWA section 312(a)(14) specifically excludes time or voyage
chartered vessels from the definition of ``vessels of the Armed
Forces.'' Time- and voyage-chartered vessels are vessels operating
under a contract between the vessel owner and a charterer (in this
case, the Armed Forces) whereby the charterer hires the vessel for a
specified time period or voyage, respectively. Such vessels at all
times remain manned and navigated by the owner, and they are not owned
and operated by the Armed Forces. Examples of chartered vessels are
those operated by the MSC in the Afloat Prepositioning Force and the
Strategic Sealift Program.
5. Vessels Under Construction
EPA and DOD do not consider a vessel under construction for the DOD
or Coast Guard, and for which the Federal government has not taken
custody, to be a ``vessel of the Armed Forces.'' UNDS would not apply
to these vessels until the Federal government gains custody.
6. Vessels in Drydock
The statutory definition of ``discharge incidental to the normal
operation of a vessel'' includes incidental discharges whenever the
vessel is waterborne. See CWA section 312(a)(12). UNDS would not apply
to discharges from vessels while they are in drydock because they are
not waterborne, even if the discharges would otherwise meet the
definition of a ``discharge incidental to the normal operation of a
vessel.''
7. Amphibious Vehicles
EPA and DOD do not consider amphibious vehicles as a vessel for the
purposes of UNDS because they are operated primarily as vehicles on
land. Water use of these vehicles is of short duration for nearshore
transit to and from vessels.
IV. Summary of Data Gathering Efforts
Once the scope of vessels to which UNDS would apply was determined,
it was necessary to identify the universe of discharges and to
characterize the nature of these discharges. The data gathering effort
to support these objectives included surveys and consultations
involving DOD and Coast Guard personnel with expertise in vessel
operations and shipboard systems or equipment generating the
discharges. The survey and consultation results were supplemented with
sampling, where necessary. The following sections provide an overview
of the data collection efforts. Additional details are presented in the
Technical Development Document.
A. Surveys and Consultations
The Navy initiated the data collection process by compiling a list
of discharges and existing information on these discharges, including
summary results of previous sampling studies. The information was
presented in a single report, ``U.S. Navy Ship Wastewater Discharges,''
available in the record for this proposed rule. The Navy provided this
report, along with a survey, to each branch of the Armed Forces at the
headquarters and field levels, including both shore installations and
shipboard operators. The survey solicited comments on the accuracy and
completeness of the attached report, and sought information on which
vessels generate the discharges, discharge characteristics (e.g.,
pollutant constituents, discharge volumes, and flow rates), and any
existing reports or documentation relating to any discharges not
identified in the report.
The Navy and EPA supplemented the survey results by conducting ship
visits and consulting with DOD and Coast Guard personnel with expertise
in vessel systems, equipment, and operations that produce the
discharges. The purpose of these consultations and ship visits was to
clarify information gathered and to ensure all existing information on
discharges was obtained.
B. Sampling and Analysis
As a result of the survey and consultation process, EPA and DOD
identified 39 types of discharges incidental to the normal operation of
Armed Forces vessels. For 30 of the 39 discharges, existing information
gathered from surveys and consultations was sufficient to characterize
the nature of the discharges and assess potential environmental
impacts, if any, resulting from the discharges. EPA and DOD determined
that existing information was insufficient to characterize the
constituents and determine the environmental effects of the remaining
nine discharges. These nine discharges, identified in Table 9, were
sampled to obtain the additional data.
Table 9.--Discharges Sampled
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--Boiler Blowdown.
--Compensated Fuel Ballast.
--Distillation and Reverse Osmosis Brine.
--Firemain Systems.
--Freshwater Lay-up
--Non-Oily Machinery Wastewater.
--Seawater Cooling Overboard Discharge.
--Steam Condensate.
--Surface Vessel Bilgewater/Oil-Water Separator Discharge.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Samples were collected from ten vessels, representing a total of
six Navy, Coast Guard, and MSC vessel types. Navy vessels sampled
included an aircraft carrier, three surface combatants, two amphibious
ships, and a submarine. Also sampled were a Coast Guard cutter and two
MSC oilers, which are vessels used for fuel transport. The
[[Page 45306]]
sampling program was structured to address differences in wastestream
characteristics among certain vessel types. Information on the
discharges that were sampled from each ship and the constituents
analyzed for each discharge is presented in the Technical Development
Document. The technical basis for selecting the constituents analyzed
and the reasons for sampling specific discharges on certain ship
classes are presented in the document entitled ``Uniform National
Discharge Standards Rationale for Initial Discharge Sampling.'' Both
documents are available in the record for this proposed rule.
V. Marine Pollution Control Device (MPCD) Requirements
CWA section 312(n)(2)(B) identifies the seven factors EPA and DOD
are to consider in determining for which discharges it is reasonable
and practicable to require use of a MPCD to mitigate adverse impacts on
the marine environment. Those factors are listed in section II.A of
this preamble. The methodology EPA and DOD used to assess the
environmental effects, if any, resulting from each of the discharges is
presented in section V.A below.
This proposed rule would apply to 39 types of vessel discharges.
EPA and DOD are proposing to require the use of MPCDs to control 25 of
these discharges. These discharges are listed in Table 1 and described
below in section V.C. Section V.C also discusses the potential for the
discharges to cause adverse impacts on the marine environment and the
availability of MPCDs to mitigate adverse impacts. The MPCDs mentioned
below in sections V.C may not be uniformly applicable to all vessels.
The performance standards to be promulgated in a future rulemaking
(UNDS Phase II) may distinguish among classes, types, and sizes of
vessels; distinguish between new and existing vessels; and provide for
a waiver of applicability for a particular class, type, age or size of
vessel. (See CWA section 312(n)(3)C).)
EPA and DOD are proposing not to require the use of MPCDs for the
remaining 14 vessel discharges. These discharges, listed in Table 2 and
described below in section V.D, exhibit a low potential for causing
adverse impacts on the marine environment. Therefore, EPA and DOD have
determined, for this proposed rule, that it is not reasonable and
practicable to require the use of MPCDs to mitigate adverse impacts on
the marine environment.
A. Overview of Assessment Methodology
For the purposes of this proposed rule, EPA and DOD assessed the
potential environmental effects of the discharges by asking the
following questions concerning their chemical, physical, and biological
characteristics:
--Chemical Constituents. Does the discharge contain constituents in
concentrations that exceed State aquatic water quality criteria or
Federal aquatic water quality criteria (as promulgated by EPA in the
National Toxics Rule, 40 CFR 131.36) and have the potential to be
released into the environment in significant amounts, resulting in a
potential adverse impact on the environment?
--Thermal Pollution. Does the discharge pose the potential to exceed
State thermal water quality criteria in the receiving waters beyond a
mixing zone, and to a degree sufficient to have an adverse impact on
the environment?
--Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern. Does the discharge have the
potential to contain bioaccumulative chemicals of concern in amounts
sufficient to have an adverse impact on the environment?
--Nonindigenous Species. Does the discharge have the potential to
introduce viable nonindigenous aquatic species to new locations?
If the answer to any of the above questions was ``yes,'' EPA and
DOD determined that the discharge had a potential for adverse
environmental effect.
EPA and DOD used sampling results or process knowledge to identify
the potential presence and concentration of constituents in the
discharge. Constituent concentrations in the discharge were compared to
Federal criteria promulgated by EPA in its National Toxics Rule, 40 CFR
131.36 (57 FR 60848; Dec. 22, 1992 and 60 FR 22230; May 4, 1995),
referred to in this preamble as ``Federal criteria,'' and State water
quality numeric criteria for the ten States with the most significant
presence of Armed Forces vessels. These ten States are California,
Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, New Jersey, South Carolina,
Texas, Virginia, and Washington. Constituent concentrations in the
discharge were compared against the most stringent of the Federal and
ten States' criteria for that constituent. For almost all constituents,
the State water quality criteria are more stringent than the Federal
National Toxics Rule (NTR) criteria.
EPA and DOD used aquatic water quality criteria in this assessment
because they are a measure of the level of water quality that provides
for the protection and propagation of aquatic life.
EPA and DOD used saltwater aquatic life criteria for screening the
discharges because most Armed Forces vessels operate in the brackish
water of estuaries or bays, or in the marine environment off the coast
or in open ocean, where the biology of the water body is dominated by
saltwater aquatic life. Aquatic life criteria were used instead of
human health criteria, which are related to consumption of fish and
shellfish, because recreational activities such as fishing and swimming
generally do not occur in the immediate vicinity of Armed Forces
vessels.
Depending on the nature of the discharge, EPA and DOD compared
discharge concentrations to either the acute or chronic criteria
values. Where discharges are intermittent or occasional in nature, of
relatively short duration (a few seconds to a few hours), and dissipate
rapidly in the environment, constituent concentrations were compared to
acute water quality criteria. Where discharges are of a longer duration
or continuous and likely to result in concentrations in the environment
that approach a steady state condition, the constituent concentrations
were compared to chronic water quality criteria. Table 4-1 in the
Technical Development Document lists the State criteria or Federal
criteria used.
The initial screening process involved comparing the constituent
concentrations in the undiluted discharge to the water quality
criteria. For those discharges, such as cathodic protection, where the
constituents diffuse from the exterior of a vessel or vessel component,
EPA and DOD generally computed a concentration within a small mixing
zone (a few inches to a few feet).
EPA and DOD further assessed those discharges that had constituents
exceeding water quality criteria. EPA and DOD considered mass loadings,
flow rates, the geographic location of the discharge, the manner in
which the discharge occurs (e.g., continuous or intermittent), and in
some cases, the effect of the dilution within a small mixing zone. The
purpose of this further assessment was to determine whether the
constituents are discharged with such a low frequency or in such small
amounts that the resulting constituent mass loading has the potential
to produce only minor or undetectable environmental effects, or whether
the constituents are released in such a manner that dilution in a small
mixing
[[Page 45307]]
zone quickly results in concentrations below water quality criteria. If
so, EPA and DOD considered the chemical constituents of the discharge
not to have the potential to adversely affect the environment.
In addition to chemical constituents, EPA and DOD assessed whether
the discharges exceeded State thermal water quality criteria for the
five States with the most significant presence of Armed Forces vessels.
These States are California, Florida, Hawaii, Virginia, and Washington.
Many discharges did not need a detailed assessment because they are
discharged at ambient or only slightly elevated temperatures, or the
volume or discharge rate is very low. EPA and DOD determined that six
discharges are released at sufficiently high temperatures and volumes
that further assessment was warranted to determine whether the
discharge had the potential to cause an adverse thermal effect. These
discharges are:
--Boiler Blowdown,
--Catapult Water Brake Tank And Post-Launch Retraction Exhaust,
--Catapult Wet Accumulator Discharge,
--Distillation And Reverse Osmosis Brine,
--Seawater Cooling Overboard Discharge, and
--Steam Condensate.
EPA and DOD modeled these discharges to determine the size of the
mixing zone that would be needed for receiving waters to meet State
thermal water quality criteria and compared this zone to State thermal
mixing zone allowances. A more complete discussion of the models and
procedures used for these assessments is provided in the Technical
Development Document.
EPA and DOD reviewed each discharge to determine whether it
contained bioaccumulative chemicals of concern, as identified in the
Final Water Quality Guidance for the Great Lakes System (60 FR 15365;
March 23, 1995). This guidance contains a list of bioaccumulative
chemicals of concern identified after scientific study, in a process
subjected to public notice and comment, designed to support a
regionally uniform set of standards applicable to the waters of the
Great Lakes. Table 4-1 of the Technical Development Document lists
these bioaccumulative chemicals of concern. In every case where the
presence of a bioaccumulative chemical of concern was confirmed in a
discharge, EPA and DOD had already determined based on other
information that it was reasonable and practicable to require control
of that discharge.
EPA and DOD also assessed each discharge for its potential to
transport viable living aquatic organisms between naturally isolated
water bodies. Preventing the introduction of invasive nonindigenous
aquatic species has been recognized as important in maintaining
biodiversity, water quality, and the designated uses of water bodies.
If the available data indicate that a discharge has a potential for
transporting and then subsequently discharging viable aquatic organisms
into waters of the U.S., then EPA and DOD considered the discharge to
present a potential for causing adverse environmental effects from
nonindigenous species introduction. In some cases EPA and DOD
determined it was reasonable and practicable to require MPCDs to
control a discharge even though information in the record indicates
that the discharge has a low potential for adversely affecting the
environment. For the chain locker effluent and sonar dome discharges,
at least one class of Armed Forces vessel has a management practice or
control technology already in place to control the environmental
effects of the discharge. EPA and DOD considered the existence of a
currently applied management practice or control technology to be
sufficient indication that it was reasonable and practicable to require
a MPCD. In other cases (non-oily machinery wastewater and photographic
laboratory drains), analysis of whether the discharge had a potential
to adversely affect the environment was inconclusive. However, EPA and
DOD determined that it was reasonable and practicable to require an
MPCD to mitigate possible adverse environmental effects from the
discharge.
For each discharge that was determined to have the potential to
adversely affect the environment, EPA and DOD conducted an initial
evaluation of the practicability, operational impact, and economic cost
of using a MPCD to control each discharge. EPA and DOD first determined
whether a control technology or management practice is currently in
place to control the discharge for environmental protection on any
vessel type. The use of existing controls on a vessel was considered
sufficient demonstration that at least one reasonable and practicable
control is available for at least one vessel type. (This proposed Phase
I UNDS rule does not address whether existing control technologies or
management practices are adequate to mitigate potential adverse
impacts. In Phase II of UNDS, EPA and DOD will promulgate MPCD
performance standards for the discharges requiring control.) For
discharges without any existing pollution controls, EPA and DOD
analyzed potential pollution control options to determine whether it is
reasonable and practicable to require the use of MPCDs. For every
discharge that was found to have a potential to cause adverse
environmental effects, EPA and DOD determined that it is reasonable and
practicable to require a MPCD for at least one vessel type. The results
of the MPCD assessments are presented in the Technical Development
Document.
B. Peer Review
Peer review is a documented critical review of a scientific and
technical work product. It is an in-depth assessment that is used to
ensure that the final work product is technically sound. Peer reviews
are conducted by qualified individuals who are independent of those who
prepared the work product. For this proposed rule, reviewers were
selected because of their technical expertise in assessing pollutant
behavior in coastal and estuarine ecosystems, modeling pollutant
concentrations, and predicting the effects of pollutant loadings on
ambient water quality, sediments, and biota.
A technical report was prepared for each of the discharges covered
by this proposed rule. These Nature of Discharge (NOD) reports include
a discussion of how the discharge is generated, discharge volumes and
frequencies, where the discharge occurs, chemical constituents present
in the discharge, and relevant regulatory information or water quality
criteria. The NOD reports also assess the potential for a discharge to
cause an adverse environmental effect, and provide the process and
environmental background information used in determining whether a
particular discharge warrants control. NOD reports for each discharge
are included as an appendix to the Technical Development Document.
NOD reports for five discharges were selected for peer review. For
each of these discharges, EPA and DOD determined that it is not
reasonable and practicable to require the use of MPCDs because they
exhibit a low potential for causing adverse impacts on the marine
environment. Peer reviewers were asked whether the data and process
information presented in the NOD reports are sufficient to characterize
the discharges; whether the analyses are appropriate for the
discharges; and whether the conclusions regarding the discharges'
potential for causing adverse environmental impacts are supported by
[[Page 45308]]
the information presented in the NOD reports.
Results of the peer review are compiled in the ``Peer Review
Comments Document for Nature of Discharge Reports'' and are available
for review in the rulemaking record. An initial assessment of the
comments does not indicate any fundamental flaws in the methodology
used by EPA and DOD to assess a discharge's potential to cause adverse
impacts on the marine environment. EPA and DOD will address the peer
review comments prior to promulgating the final Phase I rule.
C. Discharges Requiring the Use of a MPCD
For the reasons discussed below, EPA and DOD have initially
determined that it is reasonable and practicable to require the use of
a MPCD to control 25 discharges from vessels of the Armed Forces.
Except where noted, the pollutant characteristics of these discharges
indicate a potential to cause adverse environmental impacts. Table 10
lists those discharges for which EPA and DOD determined it was
reasonable and practicable to require the use of a MCPD, and identifies
the characteristics of each discharge that formed the basis of the
determination. The terms ``Chemical Constituents,'' ``Thermal
Pollution,'' ``Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern'' and
``Nonindigenous Species'' refer to the four questions described in
section V.A.
Table 10.--Discharges Requiring the Use of a MPCD and the Basis for the Determination.a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical constituents
------------------------------------------ Thermal Bioaccumulative Nonindigenous
Discharge Organic pollution chemicals of species Other
Oil Metals Chemicals concern
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aqueous Film-Forming Foam......................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............... ............. (b)
Catapult Water Brake Tank Discharge & Post-Launch
Retraction Exhaust............................... X ............ ............ ............ ............. ............
Chain Locker Effluent............................. ............ ............ ............ ............ ............. (c)
Clean Ballast..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ X ............
Compensated Fuel Ballast.......................... X ............ ............ ............ ............. ............
Controllable Pitch Propeller Hydraulic Fluid...... X ............ ............ ............ ............. ............
Deck Runoff....................................... X ............ ............ ............ ............. ............
Dirty Ballast..................................... X ............ ............ ............ ............. ............
Distillation and Reverse Osmosis Brine............ ............ X ............ ............ ............. ............
Elevator Pit Overboard Discharge.................. X ............ ............ ............ ............. ............
Firemain Systems.................................. ............ X ............ ............ ............. ............
Gas Turbine Washdown Discharge.................... X ............ X ............ ............. ............
Graywater......................................... ............ ............ X ............ ............. ............
Hull Coating Leachate............................. ............ X ............ ............ ............. ............
Motor Gasoline Compensated Overboard Discharge.... X ............ ............ ............ X ............
Non-oily Machinery Wastewater..................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............. (d)
Photographic Laboratory Drains.................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............. (d)
Seawater Cooling Overboard Discharge.............. ............ X ............ X ............. ............
Seawater Piping Biofouling Prevention............. ............ ............ ............ ............ ............. (e)
Small Boat Engine Wet.............................
Exhaust........................................... ............ ............ X ............ ............. ............
Sonar Dome Discharge.............................. ............ ............ ............ ............ ............. (c)
Submarine Bilge Water............................. X ............ ............ ............ ............. ............
Surface Vessel Bilge Water/Oil-Water Separator....
Discharges........................................ X ............ ............ ............ ............. ............
Underwater Ship Husbandry......................... ............ X ............ ............ X ............
Welldeck Discharges............................... X ............ ............ ............ ............. ............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
(a) This table provides a simplified overview of the basis for requiring the use of MPCDs for particular discharges. It is not intended to fully
characterize the discharges or describe the analyses leading to the decision. More complete characterizations of the discharges and the analyses
leading to the decisions are presented in section V.C. and in the appendices of the Technical Development Document.
(b) Discharge may produce floating foam in violation of some State water quality standards.
(c) Discharge was determined to have a low potential to adversely affect the environment, but an existing MPCD is in place on at least one type of
vessel to reduce this low potential even further.
(d) No conclusion was drawn on the potential of the discharge to adversely affect the environment, but EPA and DOD determined a MPCD is reasonable and
practicable to mitigate any possible adverse effects.
(e) Chlorine and chlorination byproducts.
For this Phase I proposed rule, EPA and DOD identified at least one
potential MPCD control option for each discharge that could mitigate
the environmental impacts of the discharge from at least one class of
Armed Forces vessel. In Phase II of the UNDS rulemaking, EPA and DOD
will perform a more detailed assessment of MPCD control options. EPA
and DOD will consider options that are being evaluated as part of
research and development programs in addition to those that are
currently available. EPA and DOD will evaluate MPCDs for all classes of
vessels and promulgate the specific performance standards for each MPCD
that are reasonable and practicable for that class of vessel. In
developing specific MPCD performance standards, EPA and DOD will
consider the same factors considered in Phase I. The Phase II rule may
distinguish among vessel types and sizes, between new and existing
vessels, and may waive the applicability of Phase II standards as
necessary or appropriate to a particular type or age of vessel (see CWA
section 312(n)(3)(B)).
[[Page 45309]]
The definition of a marine pollution control device, or MPCD, as
used in this proposed rule is a control technology or a management
practice that can reasonably and practicably be installed or otherwise
used on a vessel of the Armed Forces to receive, retain, treat, control
or discharge a discharge incidental to the normal operation of the
vessel.
The discussions below provide a brief description of the discharges
and the systems that produce the discharges EPA and DOD propose to
control. The discussions highlight the most significant constituents
released to the environment, and describes the current practice, if
any, to prevent or minimize environmental effects. Because of the
diversity of vessel types and designs, these control practices are
usually not uniformly applied to all vessels generating the discharge.
In addition, these controls do not necessarily represent the only
control options available. The discharges are described in more detail
in Appendix A of the Technical Development Document.
1. Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF)
This discharge consists of a mixture of seawater and firefighting
foam discharged during training, testing, and maintenance operations.
Aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) is the primary firefighting agent used
to extinguish flammable liquid fires on surface ships of the Armed
Forces. AFFF is stored on vessels as a concentrated liquid that is
mixed with seawater to create the diluted solution (3-6% AFFF) that is
sprayed as a foam on the fire. The solution is applied with both fire
hoses and fixed sprinkler devices. During planned maintenance of
firefighting systems, system testing and inspections, and flight deck
certifications, the seawater/foam solution is discharged either
directly overboard from hoses, or onto flight decks and then
subsequently washed overboard. These discharges are considered
incidental to the normal operation of Armed Forces vessels. Discharges
of AFFF that occur during firefighting or other shipboard emergency
situations are not incidental to normal operations and are not subject
to the requirements of this proposed rule.
AFFF is discharged from all Navy ships, those MSC ships capable of
supporting helicopter operations, and Coast Guard cutters, icebreakers,
and tugs. AFFF discharges generally occur at distances greater than 12
n.m. from shore, and in all cases more than 3 n.m. from shore due to
existing Armed Forces operating instructions. The constituents of AFFF
include water, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)-ethanol,
urea, alkyl sulfate salts, amphoteric fluoroalkylamide derivative,
perfluoroalkyl sulfonate salts, triethanolamine, and methyl-1H-
benzotriazole. Because the water used to mix with the AFFF concentrate
comes from the vessel's firemain, the discharge will also include
nitrogen (measured as total Kjeldahl nitrogen), copper, nickel, and
iron from the firemain piping.
The AFFF discharge produces an aqueous foam intended to cool and
smother fires. Water quality criteria for some States include narrative
requirements for waters to be free of floating materials attributable
to domestic, industrial, or other controllable sources, or include
narrative criteria prohibiting discharges of foam. AFFF discharges in
State waters would be expected to result in violating such narrative
criteria for foam or floating materials. At present, the Navy uses
certain management practices to control these discharges, including a
self-imposed prohibition on AFFF discharges in coastal waters by most
Armed Forces vessels. These management practices to control discharges
of AFFF demonstrate the availability of a MPCD to mitigate the
potential adverse impacts that could result from the discharge of AFFF.
Therefore, EPA and DOD have determined that it is reasonable and
practicable to require use of a MPCD for this discharge.
AFFF discharges occur beyond 3 n.m. but within 12 n.m. from shore
infrequently and in relatively small volumes, and the diluted (3-6%)
AFFF solution is not believed to exhibit significant toxic effects.
Further, any discharges that do occur take place while the vessel is
underway and will be dispersed in the turbulence of the vessel wake.
2. Catapult Water Brake Tank and Post-Launch Retraction Exhaust
This intermittent discharge is the oily water skimmed from the
catapult water brake tank, and the condensed steam discharged when the
catapult is retracted. Catapult water brakes are used to stop the
forward movement of the steam-propelled catapults used to launch
aircraft from Navy aircraft carriers. The catapult water brake system
includes a water brake tank that contains freshwater, and water brake
cylinders . During flight operations, water from the catapult water
brake tank is continuously injected into the catapult water brake
cylinders. At the end of a launch stroke, spears located on the front
of the catapult pistons enter the water brake cylinders. The water in
the cylinders builds pressure ahead of the spears, cushioning the
catapult pistons to a stop. The catapult brake water is continuously
circulated between the catapult water brake tank and the catapult water
brake cylinders.
Prior to the launch stroke, lubricating oil is applied to the
catapult cylinder through which the catapult piston and piston spear
are driven. As the catapult piston is driven forward during the launch
stroke, the catapult piston and spear carries lubricating oil from the
catapult cylinder into the water brake cylinder at the end of the
stroke. Over the course of multiple launchings, the oil and water
circulating through the water brake cylinder and tank leads to the
formation of an oil layer in the water brake tank. The oil layer can
adversely affect water brake operation by interfering with the cooling
of water in the water brake tank. To prevent excessive heat buildup in
the tank, the oil is periodically skimmed off and discharged overboard.
Additionally, as the catapult piston is retracted following the launch,
expended steam from the catapult launch stroke and some residual
lubricating oil from the catapult cylinder walls are discharged below
the waterline through a separate exhaust pipe.
Only aircraft carriers generate this discharge. Catapult operations
during normal flight operations generate both the water brake tank
discharge and the post-launch retraction exhaust; however, flight
operations take place beyond 12 n.m. from shore. Catapult testing which
occurs within 12 n.m. always discharges the post-launch retraction
exhaust, but usually does not add sufficient quantities of oil to the
water brake tank to require skimming.
The water brake tank is used within 12 n.m. for dead-load catapult
shots when testing catapults on new aircraft carriers, and following
major drydock overhauls or major catapult modifications. This testing
requires a minimum of 60 dead-load shots each and may occur over a
period of several days within 12 n.m. from shore. New carrier testing
occurs only once, and major overhauls generally occur on 5- to 7-year
cycles in conjunction with drydocking. Major modifications to catapults
may occur during an overhaul or pierside and are also infrequent
events. Carriers also routinely perform no-load shots when leaving
port. The number of no-load shots conducted when leaving port, however,
usually do not add enough lubricating oil to the water brake tank to
require skimming the oil while the ship is within 12 n.m. from shore.
[[Page 45310]]
The water brake tank and post-launch retraction exhaust discharges
include lubricating oil, a limited thermal load associated with the
heated oil and water (or condensed steam, in the case of the post-
launch retraction exhaust), nitrogen (in the form of ammonia, nitrates
and nitrites, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen), and metals such as copper
and nickel from the piping systems. EPA and DOD analyzed the thermal
effects of this discharge and concluded they were unlikely to exceed
thermal mixing zone criteria in the States where aircraft carriers most
frequently operate. The post-launch retraction exhaust discharge can
contain oil, copper, lead, nickel, ammonia, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate,
phosphorus, and benzidine in concentrations exceeding State acute water
quality criteria. The post-launch retraction exhaust discharge can also
contain nitrogen in concentrations exceeding the most stringent State
water quality criteria.
The Navy has imposed operational controls limiting the amount of
oil applied to the catapult cylinder during the launch stroke, which
directly affects the amount of oil that is subsequently discharged from
the water brake tank or during the post-launch retraction exhaust. The
Navy has also established requirements dictating when catapult testing
is required within 12 n.m. from shore. These operational constraints
minimize discharges of oil from the water brake tank and post-launch
retraction exhaust in coastal waters. These existing management
practices demonstrate the availability of controls for this discharge.
Therefore, EPA and DOD have determined that it is reasonable and
practicable to require use of a MPCD to mitigate potential adverse
environmental impacts from this discharge.
3. Chain Locker Effluent
This discharge consists of accumulated precipitation and seawater
that is occasionally emptied from the compartment used to store the
vessel's anchor chain.
The chain locker is a compartment used to store anchor chain aboard
vessels. Navy policy requires that the anchor chain, appendages, and
anchor on Navy surface vessels be washed down with seawater during
retrieval to prevent onboard accumulation of sediment. During washdown,
some water adheres to the chain and is brought into the chain locker as
the chain is stored. The chain locker sump accumulates the residual
water and debris that drains from the chain following anchor chain
washdown and retrieval, or washes into the chain locker during heavy
weather. Water accumulating in the chain locker sump is removed by a
drainage eductor powered by the shipboard firemain system.
All Armed Forces vessels housing their anchor chains in lockers,
except submarines, can generate this discharge. Since submarine chain
lockers are always open to the sea, water is always present in the
chain locker and there is no ``collected'' water to be discharged as
effluent. Navy policy prohibits discharging chain locker effluent
within 12 n.m. Other vessels of the Armed Forces are currently
authorized to discharge chain locker effluent within 12 n.m.; however,
most Armed Forces vessels also observe the 12 n.m. discharge
prohibition. A recent review of practices on several Navy ships found
no water accumulation in the chain locker sump, and the ships' crew
confirmed that discharges of chain locker effluent occur outside 12
n.m.
In addition to water, materials collecting in the chain locker sump
can include paint chips, rust, grease, and other debris. Chain locker
effluent may contain organic and inorganic compounds associated with
this debris, as well as metals from the sump and from sacrificial
anodes installed in the chain locker to provide cathodic protection. If
the anchor chain washdown is not performed and the chain locker
effluent is subsequently discharged in a different port, the discharge
could potentially transport nonindigenous species. Discharge volume
will vary depending upon the frequency of anchoring operations, the
number of anchors used, and the depth of water (which determines the
amount of chain that will be lowered into the water).
Given the manner in which water collects in the chain locker sump
and remains there for extended periods of time, it is possible that the
discharge could contain elevated levels of metals at concentrations
exceeding State water quality criteria. However, given the small volume
of the discharge and the infrequency of anchoring operations, it is
unlikely that discharges of chain locker effluent would adversely
impact the environment. Nevertheless, the Navy and other Armed Forces
already have management practices in place for most vessels requiring
anchors and anchor chains to be washed down with seawater during
retrieval, and prohibiting the discharge of chain locker effluent until
beyond 12 n.m. from shore. DOD has chosen as a matter of policy to
continue prohibiting the discharge of chain locker effluent within 12
n.m. from shore. This prohibition, while not considered necessary to
mitigate an existing or potential adverse impact, will eliminate the
possibility of discharging into coastal waters any metals, other
contaminants, or nonindigenous aquatic species that may have
accumulated in the chain locker sump. EPA and DOD have determined that
the existing management practices demonstrate that it is reasonable and
practicable to require use of a MPCD for chain locker effluent.
4. Clean Ballast
This discharge is composed of the seawater taken into, and
discharged from, dedicated ballast tanks used to maintain the stability
of the vessel and to adjust the buoyancy of submarines.
Many types of Armed Forces vessels store clean ballast in dedicated
tanks in order to adjust a vessel's draft, buoyancy, trim, and list.
Clean ballast may consist of seawater taken directly onboard into the
ballast tanks or seawater received from the vessel's firemain system.
Clean ballast differs from ``dirty ballast'' and ``compensated
ballast'' discharges (described below) in that clean ballast is not
stored in tanks that are also used to hold fuel. Many surface vessels
introduce clean ballast into tanks to replace the weight of off-loaded
cargo or expended fuel to improve vessel stability while navigating on
the high seas. Amphibious ships also flood clean ballast tanks during
landing craft operations to lower the ship's stern, allowing the well
deck to be accessed. Submarines introduce clean ballast into their main
ballast tanks when submerging, and introduce clean ballast into their
variable ballast tanks to make minor adjustments to buoyancy, trim, and
list while operating submerged or surfaced. The discharge occurs when
fuel or cargo is taken on and the ballast is no longer needed, when
amphibious operations are concluded and the vessel is returned to its
normal operating draft, when submarines surface, or when submarines
make some operational adjustments in trim or list while submerged or
surfaced.
Clean ballast discharges are intermittent and can occur at any
distance from shore, including within 12 n.m. Constituents of clean
ballast can include materials from tank coatings (e.g., epoxy),
chemical additives (e.g., flocculant chemicals or rust inhibitors), and
metals from piping systems and sacrificial anodes used to control
corrosion. Based on analytical data for firemain system discharges,
metals expected to be present in the discharge include copper, nickel,
and zinc. These data indicate that the pollutant
[[Page 45311]]
concentrations in the discharge may exceed State water quality
criteria.
Previous studies have documented the potential of ballasting
operations to transfer nonindigenous aquatic species into receiving
waters. Ballast water potentially contains living microorganisms,
plants, and animals that are native to the location where the water was
pumped aboard. When the ballast water is transported to another port or
coastal area and discharged, the surviving organisms are released and
have the potential to invade and impact the local ecosystem.
The Navy, MSC, and Coast Guard either currently implement or are in
the process of approving a ballast water management policy requiring
open-ocean ballast water exchange, based on guidelines established by
the International Maritime Organization (Guidelines for Preventing the
Introduction of Unwanted Aquatic Organisms and Pathogens from Ships'
Ballast Water and Sediment Discharge, 10 May 1995). These management
practices demonstrate the availability of controls to mitigate the
potential adverse environmental impacts from this discharge. Therefore,
EPA and DOD have determined that it is reasonable and practicable to
require a MPCD for discharges of clean ballast.
5. Compensated Fuel Ballast
This intermittent discharge is composed of the seawater taken into,
and discharged from, tanks designed to hold both fuel and ballast water
to maintain the stability of the vessel.
Compensated fuel ballast systems are configured as a series of fuel
tanks that automatically draw in seawater to replace fuel as it is
consumed. Keeping the fuel tanks full in this manner enhances the
stability of a vessel by using the weight of the seawater to compensate
for the mass of ballast lost through fuel consumption. During
refueling, fuel displaces the seawater, and the displaced seawater is
discharged overboard.
Compensated fuel ballast is discharged by approximately 165 Navy
surface vessels and submarines. Surface ships with compensated fuel
ballast systems discharge directly to surface waters each time they
refuel. Surface vessels are refueled both inport and at sea. All at-sea
refueling is accomplished beyond 12 n.m. from shore. For submarines,
refueling occurs only in port and the compensated ballast is
transferred to shore facilities for treatment and disposal.
The compensated fuel ballast discharge can contain acrolein,
phosphorus, thallium, oil (and its constituents, such as benzene,
phenol, and toluene), copper, mercury (a bioaccumulative chemical of
concern), nickel, silver, and zinc. Concentrations of acrolein,
benzene, copper, nickel, silver, and zinc can exceed acute Federal
criteria or State acute water quality criteria. The compensated fuel
ballast discharge can also contain nitrogen (in the form of ammonia,
nitrates and nitrites, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen) in concentrations
exceeding the most stringent State water quality criteria.
To reduce the discharge of fuel in compensated fuel ballast
discharge, the Navy has instituted operational guidelines intended to
reduce the potential for overfilling tanks or discharging excessive
amounts of fuel entrained in the displaced compensating water while
refueling surface vessels. These guidelines limit the amount of fuel
that can be taken on in port (i.e., to prevent ``topping off'' the fuel
tanks) and establish maximum allowable rates for inport refueling.
Additionally, submarines transfer all compensated fuel ballast water to
shore facilities when refueling diesel fuel oil tanks. These
operational controls for surface vessel refueling and the practice of
transferring the discharge to shore for submarines demonstrates the
availability of MPCDs to mitigate potential adverse environmental
impacts; therefore, EPA and DOD have determined it is reasonable and
practicable to require the use of a MPCD for compensated fuel ballast.
6. Controllable Pitch Propeller Hydraulic Fluid
This discharge is the hydraulic fluid that discharges into the
surrounding seawater from propeller seals as part of normal operation,
and the hydraulic fluid released during routine maintenance of the
propellers.
Controllable pitch propellers (CPP) are used to control a vessel's
speed or direction while maintaining constant propulsion plant output
(i.e., varying the pitch, or ``bite,'' of the propeller blades allows
the propulsion shaft to remain turning at a constant speed). CPP blade
pitch is controlled hydraulically through a system of pumps, pistons,
and gears. Hydraulic oil may be released from CPP assemblies under
three conditions: leakage through CPP seals, releases during underwater
CPP repair and maintenance activities, or releases from equipment used
for CPP blade replacement.
Over 200 Armed Forces vessels have CPP systems. Leakage through CPP
seals can occur within 12 n.m., but seal leakage is more likely to
occur while the vessel is underway than while pierside or at anchor
because the CPP system operates under higher pressure when a vessel is
underway. Blade replacement occurs inport on an as-needed basis when
dry-docking is unavailable or impractical, resulting in some discharge
of hydraulic oil. Approximately 30 blade replacements and blade port
cover removals (for maintenance) are conducted annually, fleetwide.
CPP assemblies are designed to operate at 400 psi without leaking.
Typical pressures while pierside range from 6 to 8 psi. CPP seals are
designed to last five to seven years, which is the longest period
between dry-dock cycles, and are inspected quarterly to check for
damage or excessive wear. Because of the hub design and the frequent
CPP seal inspections, leaks of hydraulic oil from CPP hubs are expected
to be negligible. During the procedure for CPP blade replacement,
however, hydraulic oil is released to the environment from tools and
other equipment. In addition, hydraulic oil could also leak from the
CPP hub during a CPP blade port cover removal.
The Navy's repair procedures impose certain requirements during
blade replacement and blade port cover removal to minimize the amount
of hydraulic oil released to the extent possible. In addition, booms
are placed around the aft end of the vessel to contain possible oil
release during these procedures. Nevertheless, EPA and DOD believe that
the amount of hydraulic oil released during underwater CPP maintenance
could create an oil sheen and exceed State water quality criteria.
Constituents of the discharge could include paraffins, olefins, and
metals such as copper, aluminum, tin, nickel, and lead. Metal
concentrations are expected to be low because hydraulic oil is not
corrosive, and the hydraulic oil is continually filtered to protect
against system failures.
EPA and DOD have determined that pollution controls are necessary
to mitigate the potential adverse environmental impacts that could
result from releases of hydraulic oil during underwater maintenance on
controllable pitch propellers. The existing repair procedures and the
staging of containment booms and oil skimming equipment to capture
released oil demonstrate the availability of MPCDs (i.e., best
management practices) for this discharge. Therefore, EPA and DOD have
determined that it is reasonable and practicable to require MPCDs to
control discharges of CPP hydraulic fluid.
[[Page 45312]]
17. Deck Runoff
Deck runoff is an intermittent discharge generated when water from
precipitation, freshwater washdowns, or seawater falls on the exposed
portion of a vessel such as a weather deck or flight deck. This water
is discharged overboard through deck openings and washes overboard any
residues that may be present on the deck surface. The runoff drains
overboard to receiving waters through numerous deck openings. All
vessels of the Armed Forces produce deck runoff, and this discharge
occurs whenever the deck surface is exposed to water, both within and
beyond 12 n.m.
Contaminants present on the deck originate from topside equipment
components and the many varied activities that take place on the deck.
This discharge can include residues of gasoline, diesel fuel, Naval
distillate fuel, grease, hydraulic fluid, soot, dirt, paint, glycol,
cleaners such as sodium metasilicates, and solvents. A number of metal
and organic pollutants may be present in the discharge, including
silver, cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead, benzene, ethylbenzene,
toluene, xylene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and phenol. Mass
loadings and concentrations of these constituents will vary with a
number of factors including ship operations, deck washdown frequency,
and the frequency, duration, and intensity of precipitation events.
Based on the results from limited sampling from catapult troughs (a
component of runoff from aircraft carrier flight decks), oil and
grease, phenols, chromium, cadmium, nickel, and lead could be present
in this discharge at levels exceeding acute Federal criteria and State
acute water quality criteria. If not properly controlled, oil
collecting in catapult troughs can cause deck runoff from aircraft
carrier flight decks to create an oil sheen on the surface of the
receiving water, which would violate State water quality criteria.
Armed Forces vessels already institute certain management practices
intended to reduce the amount of pollutants discharged in deck runoff,
including keeping weather decks cleared of debris, immediately mopping
up and cleaning spills and residues, and engaging in spill prevention
practices. These practices demonstrate the availability of controls to
mitigate adverse impacts from deck runoff. Therefore, EPA and DOD have
determined it is reasonable and practicable to require a MPCD for deck
runoff.
8. Dirty Ballast
This intermittent discharge is composed of the seawater taken into,
and discharged from, empty fuel tanks to maintain the stability of the
vessel. The seawater is brought into these tanks for the purpose of
improving the stability of a vessel during rough sea conditions. Prior
to taking on the seawater as ballast, fuel in the tank to be ballasted
is transferred to another fuel tank or holding tank to prevent
contaminating the fuel with seawater. Some residual fuel remains in the
tank and mixes with the seawater to form dirty ballast. Dirty ballast
systems are configured differently from compensated ballast and clean
ballast systems. Compensated ballast systems continuously replace fuel
with seawater in a system of tanks as the fuel is consumed. Clean
ballast systems have tanks that carry only ballast water and are never
in contact with fuel. In a dirty ballast system, water is added to a
fuel tank after most of the fuel is removed.
Thirty Coast Guard vessels generate dirty ballast as a discharge
incidental to normal vessel operations. These Coast Guard vessels do so
because their size and design do not allow for a sufficient volume of
clean ballast tanks. The larger of these vessels discharge the dirty
ballast at distances beyond 12 n.m. from shore, while the smaller
vessels are cutters that discharge the dirty ballast between 3 and 12
n.m. from shore. Coast Guard vessels monitor the dirty ballast
discharge with an oil content monitor. If the dirty ballast exceeds 15
ppm oil, it is treated in an oil-water separator prior to discharge.
Expected constituents of dirty ballast are Naval distillate fuel or
aviation fuel. Based on sampling results for compensated fuel ballast,
which is expected to have similar constituents to dirty ballast, this
discharge can contain oil (and its constituents such as benzene and
toluene); biocidal fuel additives; metals such as copper, mercury (a
bioaccumulative chemical of concern), nickel, silver, and zinc; and the
pollutants acrolein, nitrogen (in the form of ammonia and total
Kjeldahl nitrogen), and phosphorus.
Uncontrolled discharges of dirty ballast would be expected to
exceed acute Federal criteria or State acute water quality criteria for
oil, benzene, phenol, copper, nickel, silver, and zinc. Concentrations
of nitrogen would be expected to exceed the most stringent State water
quality criteria. The use of oil content monitors and oil-water
separators to reduce the concentration of oil (and associated
constituents) demonstrates the availability of MPCDs to control this
discharge. Therefore, EPA and DOD have determined that it is reasonable
and practicable to require the use of MPCDs to control discharges of
dirty ballast.
9. Distillation and Reverse Osmosis Brine
This intermittent discharge is the concentrated seawater (brine)
produced as a byproduct of the processes used to generate freshwater
from seawater.
Distillation and reverse osmosis plants are two types of water
purification systems that generate freshwater from seawater for a
variety of shipboard applications, including potable water for drinking
and hotel services, and high-purity feedwater for boilers. Distillation
plants boil seawater, and the resulting steam is condensed into high-
purity distilled water. The remaining seawater concentrate, or
``brine,'' that is not evaporated is discharged overboard. Reverse
osmosis systems separate freshwater from seawater using semi-permeable
membranes as a physical barrier, allowing a portion of the seawater to
pass through the membrane as freshwater and concentrating the suspended
and dissolved constituents in a saltwater brine that is subsequently
discharged overboard.
Distillation or reverse osmosis systems are installed on
approximately 540 Armed Forces vessels. This discharge can occur in
port, while transiting to or from port, or while operating anywhere at
sea (including within 12 n.m.). Distillation plants on steam-powered
vessels may be operated to produce boiler feedwater any time a vessel's
boilers are operating; however, operational policy limits its use in
port for producing potable water because of the increased risk of
biofouling from the water in harbors and the reduced demand for potable
water. MSC steam-powered vessels typically operate one evaporator while
in port to produce boiler feedwater; most diesel and gas-turbine
powered MSC vessels do not operate water purification systems within 12
n.m.
Pollutants detected in distillation and reverse osmosis brine
include copper, iron, lead, nickel, selenium, and zinc. The sampling
data indicate that copper, lead, nickel and iron can exceed acute
Federal criteria and State acute water quality criteria. The
distillation and reverse osmosis brine discharge can also contain
nitrogen (in the form of ammonia) and phosphorus in concentrations
exceeding the most stringent State water quality criteria. The mass
loadings of copper and iron are estimated to be significant. Thermal
[[Page 45313]]
effects modeling of distillation plant discharges indicates that the
thermal plume does not exceed State water quality criteria.
Review of existing practices indicate that certain operational
controls limiting the use of distillation plants and reverse osmosis
units can reduce the potential for this discharge to cause adverse
environmental impacts in some instances. Additionally, it appears that,
for some vessels, reverse osmosis units may present an acceptable
alternative to the use of distillation plants. Reverse osmosis units
discharge brines are expected to contain lower concentrations of metals
because these systems have non-metallic membranes and ambient operating
temperatures, resulting in less system corrosion. Further analysis is
necessary before determining whether distillation plants should be
replaced by reverse osmosis units. Nevertheless, existing operational
practices for distillation and reverse osmosis plants and the
availability of reverse osmosis units to replace distillation units on
some vessels demonstrates the availability of MPCDs to reduce the
effects of this discharge. Therefore, EPA and DOD have determined that
it is reasonable and practicable to require MPCD controls for
discharges of distillation plant and reverse osmosis brines.
10. Elevator Pit Effluent
This discharge is the liquid that accumulates in, and is
occasionally discharged from, the sumps of elevator wells on vessels.
Most large surface ships have at least one type of elevator used to
transport supplies, equipment, and personnel between different decks of
the vessel. These elevators generally can be classified as either a
closed design in which the elevator operates in a shaft, or an open
design used to move aircraft between decks. Elevators operating in a
shaft are similar to the conventional design seen in many buildings.
For these elevators, a sump is located in the elevator pit to collect
liquids entering the elevator and shaft areas. Deck runoff and elevator
equipment maintenance activities are the primary sources of liquids
entering the sump. On some vessels, the elevator sump is equipped with
a drain to direct liquid wastes overboard. On others, piping is
installed that allows an eductor to pump the pit effluent overboard.
However, most vessels collect and containerize the pit effluent for
disposal onshore or process it along with their bilgewater.
The elevators used on aircraft carriers to move aircraft and
helicopters from one deck to another are an open design (i.e., there is
no elevator shaft). The elevator platform is supported by cables and
pulleys, and it operates on either the port or starboard side of the
ship away from the hull. Unlike elevators with pits, the aircraft
elevators are exposed to the water below and there are no systems in
place for collecting liquid wastes.
Coast Guard, Army and Air Force vessels do not have elevators and
therefore do not produce this discharge. The discharge of elevator pit
effluent may occur at any location, within or beyond 12 n.m. from
shore. Constituents in elevator pit effluent are likely to include
grease, lubricating oil, fuel, hydraulic fluid, cleaning solvents,
dirt, paint chips, aqueous film forming foam, glycol, and sodium
metasilicate. The discharge can also contain nitrogen (measured as
total Kjeldahl nitrogen) and metals from firemain water used to operate
eductors draining the elevator pit.
The concentrations of copper, nickel, and bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate in firemain water (discussed below in section
V.C.11) may exceed acute Federal criteria or State acute water quality
criteria. The elevator pit effluent discharge can also contain nitrogen
in concentrations exceeding the most stringent State water quality
criteria. Constituent concentrations and mass loadings vary among ship
classes depending on the frequency of elevator use, the size of the
elevator openings, the amount and concentration of deck runoff, and the
frequency of elevator equipment maintenance activities. Material
accumulated in elevator pits is either collected for disposal onshore
or directed to the bilgewater system for treatment through an oil-water
separator prior to discharge. These existing practices demonstrate the
availability of controls to reduce the potential for this discharge to
cause adverse impacts on the environment. Therefore, EPA and DOD have
determined that it is reasonable and practicable to require MPCDs for
elevator pit effluent.
11. Firemain Systems
This discharge is the seawater pumped through the firemain system
for firemain testing, maintenance, and training, and to supply water
for the operation of certain vessel systems.
Firemain systems distribute seawater for firefighting and other
services aboard ship. Firemain water is provided for firefighting
through fire hose stations, sprinkler systems, and foam proportioners,
which inject aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) into firemain water for
distribution over flammable liquid spills or fire. Firemain water is
also directed to other services including ballast systems, machinery
cooling, lubrication, and anchor chain washdown. Discharges of firemain
water incidental to normal vessel operations include anchor chain
washdown, firemain testing, various maintenance and training
activities, bypass flow from the firemain pumps to prevent overheating,
and cooling of auxiliary machinery equipment (e.g., refrigeration
plants). UNDS does not apply to discharges of firemain water that occur
during firefighting or other shipboard emergency situations because
they are not incidental to the normal operation of a vessel.
Firemain systems aboard Armed Forces vessels are classified as
either wet or dry. Wet firemain systems are continuously charged with
water and pressurized so that the system is available to provide water
upon demand. Dry firemains are not continuously charged with water, and
consequently do not supply water upon demand. Dry firemain systems are
periodically tested and are pressurized during maintenance or training
exercises, or during actual emergencies.
With the exception of small boats and craft, all Armed Forces
vessels use firemain systems. All Navy surface ships and some MSC
vessels use wet firemain systems. Submarines and all Army and Coast
Guard vessels use dry firemains. Firemain system discharges occur both
within and beyond 12 n.m. from shore. Flow rates depend upon the type,
number, and operating time of the equipment and systems using water
from the firemain system.
Samples were collected from three vessels with wet firemain systems
and analyzed to determine the constituents present. Because of longer
contact times between seawater and the piping in wet firemains, and the
use of zinc anodes in some seachests and heat exchangers to control
corrosion, pollutant concentrations in wet firemains are expected to be
higher than those in dry firemain systems. Pollutants detected in the
firemain discharge include nitrogen (measured as total Kjeldahl
nitrogen), copper, nickel, iron, zinc, and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate.
The concentrations of iron exceeded the most stringent State chronic
water quality criteria. Copper, nickel, and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
concentrations exceeded both the chronic Federal criteria and State
chronic water quality criteria. The concentrations of nitrogen exceeded
the most stringent State water quality criteria. These concentrations
contribute to a significant total mass loading in the discharge due to
the large volume of
[[Page 45314]]
water discharged from wet firemain systems. Circulation through heat
exchangers to cool auxiliary machinery increases the temperature of the
firemain water, but the resulting thermal effects do not exceed State
mixing zone criteria.
Firemain systems have a low potential for transporting
nonindigenous aquatic species, primarily because the systems do not
transport large volumes of water over great distances. In addition,
stagnant portions of the firemain tend to develop anaerobic conditions
which are inhospitable to most marine organisms.
EPA and DOD believe that dry firemain systems may offer one means
for reducing the total mass of pollutants discharged from firemain
systems. The use of dry firemains for Coast Guard vessels demonstrates
that, for at least some types of vessels, this option may be an
available control mechanism. Another possible MPCD option for achieving
pollutant reductions is the use of alternative piping systems (i.e.,
different metallurgy) that provide lower rates of pipe wall corrosion
and erosion. The use of dry firemains and the potential offered by
alternative piping systems demonstrates the availability of controls to
mitigate potential adverse impacts on the environment. Therefore, EPA
and DOD have determined that it is reasonable and practicable to
require the use of a MPCD for firemain systems.
12. Gas Turbine Water Wash
Gas turbine water wash consists of water periodically discharged
while cleaning internal and external components of propulsion and
auxiliary gas turbines. Approximately 155 Armed Forces vessels use gas
turbines for either propulsion or auxiliary power generation. Gas
turbine water wash is generated within 12 n.m. and varies by the type
of gas turbine and the amount of time it is operated. Because the drain
collecting system is limited in size, discharges may occur within 12
n.m. On most gas turbine Navy and MSC ships, gas turbine water wash is
collected in a dedicated collection tank and is not discharged
overboard within 12 n.m. On ships without a dedicated collection tank,
this discharge is released as a component of deck runoff, welldeck
discharges, or bilgewater.
Expected constituents of gas turbine water wash are synthetic
lubricating oil, grease, solvent-based cleaning products, hydrocarbon
combustion by-products, salts from the marine environment, and metals
leached from metallic turbine surfaces. The concentration of
naphthalene (from solvents) in the discharge is expected to exceed
acute Federal criteria and State acute water quality criteria. Copper,
nickel, and cadmium are also expected to be present in the discharge,
but at concentrations below the acute Federal criteria and State acute
water quality criteria. To limit the impacts of gas turbine water wash
discharge while operating in coastal areas, most vessels direct the
discharge to a dedicated holding tank for shore disposal. This
containment procedure demonstrates the availability of controls for
this discharge. Therefore, EPA and DOD have determined that it is
reasonable and practicable to require the use of a MPCD for gas turbine
water wash.
13. Graywater
Section 312(a)(11) of the CWA defines graywater as ``galley, bath,
and shower water.'' Recognizing the physical constraints of Armed
Forces vessels and the manner in which wastewater is handled on these
vessels, graywater is more broadly defined for the purposes of UNDS.
For the purposes of this proposed regulation, the graywater discharge
consists of graywater as defined in CWA section 312(a)(11), as well as
drainage from laundries, interior deck drains, water fountains and
miscellaneous shop sinks. All ships, and some small boats, of the Armed
Forces generate graywater on an intermittent basis. Graywater
discharges occur both within and beyond 12 n.m. from shore. Most Armed
Forces vessels collect graywater and transfer it to shore treatment
facilities while pierside. Some vessel types, however, have minimal or
no graywater collection or holding capability and discharge the
graywater directly overboard while pierside.
Less than half of all graywater discharged within 12 n.m. occurs
pierside from vessels lacking graywater collection holding capability.
The remainder of the discharge in coastal waters occurs during transit
within 12 n.m. from shore. Present in the discharge are several
priority pollutants including mercury, which is a known bioaccumulative
chemical of concern. Copper, lead, mercury, nickel, silver, and zinc
were detected in concentrations that exceed acute Federal criteria and
State acute water quality criteria. Graywater also contains
conventional and nonconventional pollutants, such as total suspended
solids, biochemical oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand, oil, grease,
ammonia, nitrogen, and phosphates. Due to the large volume of graywater
generated each year, the mass loadings of these constituents may be
significant. The use of containment systems to transfer graywater to
shore treatment facilities demonstrates the availability of controls to
mitigate adverse impacts on the environment. Therefore, EPA and DOD
have determined that it is reasonable and practicable to require a MPCD
to control graywater discharges.
14. Hull Coating Leachate
This discharge consists of constituents that leach, dissolve,
ablate, or erode from hull paints into the surrounding seawater.
Vessel hulls that are continuously exposed to seawater are
typically coated with a base anti-corrosive coating covered by an anti-
fouling coating. This coating system prevents corrosion of the
underwater hull structure and, through either an ablative (eroding or
dissolving) or non-ablative (leaching) action, releases antifouling
compounds. These compounds inhibit the adhesion of biological growth to
the hull surface.
The coatings on most vessels of the Armed Forces are either copper-
or tributyl tin (TBT)-based, with copper-based ablative paints being
the most predominant coating system. The Armed Forces have been phasing
out the use of TBT paints and now it is found only on approximately 10-
20 percent of small boats and craft with aluminum hulls. Small boats
and craft that spend most of their time out of water typically do not
receive an anti-corrosive or anti-fouling coating.
Hull coating leachate is generated continuously whenever a vessel
hull is exposed to water, within and beyond 12 n.m. from shore.
Priority pollutants expected to be present in this discharge include
copper and zinc. TBT is also expected to be present in this discharge
for those vessels with TBT paint. The release rate of the constituents
in hull coating leachate varies with the type of paint used, water
temperature, vessel speed, and the age of the coating. Using average
release rates derived from laboratory tests, the wetted surface area of
each vessel, and the number of days the vessel is located within 12
n.m., EPA and DOD estimated the mass of copper, zinc, and TBT released
in the leachate and concluded that the discharge has the potential to
cause an adverse environmental effect.
Annual releases of TBT are expected to decrease since TBT coatings
are being phased out by DOD and the Coast Guard. Both DOD and the
commercial industry have conducted research on the use of advanced
antifouling coatings such as easy release coatings (e.g., silicone)
that resist biofouling when the vessel is in motion and a critical
speed is reached. The combination of phasing out TBT paints, the
potential to establish limits on copper release rates for copper-based
coating systems, and
[[Page 45315]]
the potential for alternative coating systems to reduce copper
discharges demonstrates the availability of controls to mitigate
potential environmental impacts from hull coating leachate. Thus, EPA
and DOD determined that it is reasonable and practicable to require use
of a MPCD for hull coating leachate.
15. Motor Gasoline Compensating Discharge
This intermittent discharge consists of seawater taken into, and
discharged from, motor gasoline tanks. Motor gasoline (MOGAS) is used
to operate vehicles and equipment stored or transported on some Navy
amphibious vessels. The MOGAS is stored in a compensating fuel tank
system in which seawater is automatically added to fuel tanks as the
gasoline is consumed in order to eliminate free space where vapors
could accumulate. During refueling, gasoline displaces seawater from
the tanks, and the displaced seawater is discharged directly overboard.
A compensating system is used for MOGAS to provide supply pressure for
the gasoline and to keep the tank full to prevent potentially explosive
gasoline vapors from forming.
The Navy has two classes of vessels with MOGAS storage tanks.
Eleven of these vessels are homeported in the U.S. Based on operational
practices, vessels with MOGAS storage tanks typically refuel once per
year, and the refuelings are always conducted in port. Therefore, all
discharges from the MOGAS compensating system occur in port.
Seawater in the MOGAS compensating system is in contact with the
gasoline for long periods of time. MOGAS discharges are expected to
contain benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, phenols, and naphthalenes at
concentrations that exceed acute water quality criteria.
Specific operating procedures are followed when refueling MOGAS
tanks to reduce the potential for discharging gasoline. These
procedures require MOGAS tanks to be filled slowly and prohibit filling
the tanks beyond 80 percent of the total tank capacity. Containment is
placed around hose connections to contain any releases of gasoline, and
containment booms are placed in the water around the vessel being
refueled. Diffusers are used within the tanks to prevent entraining
fuel into the discharged compensating water. These management practices
demonstrate the availability of controls to mitigate potential adverse
impacts to the environment. Therefore, EPA and DOD have determined that
it is reasonable and practicable to require MPCDs for the MOGAS
compensating discharge.
16. Non-Oily Machinery Wastewater
This intermittent discharge is composed of water leakage from the
operation of equipment such as distillation plants, water chillers,
valve packings, water piping, low- and high-pressure air compressors,
and propulsion engine jacket coolers. The discharge is captured in a
dedicated system of drip pans, funnels, and deck drains to prevent
mixing with oily bilgewater. Only wastewater that is not expected to
contain oil is collected in this system. Non-oily machinery wastewater
from systems and equipment located above the waterline is drained
directly overboard. Non-oily machinery wastewater from systems and
equipment below the waterline is directed to collection tanks prior to
overboard discharge.
Nuclear-powered Navy surface vessels and some conventionally-
powered vessels have dedicated non-oily machinery wastewater systems.
Most other Armed Forces vessels have no dedicated non-oily machinery
wastewater system, so this type of wastewater drains directly to the
bilge and is part of the bilgewater discharge.
Non-oily machinery wastewater is discharged in port, during
transit, and at sea. This discharge is generated whenever systems or
equipment are in use, and varies in volume according to ship size and
the level of machinery use.
Pollutants, including copper, nickel, silver, and bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate were present in concentrations that exceed acute
Federal criteria or State acute water quality criteria. Nitrogen (in
the form of ammonia, nitrates and nitrites, and total Kjeldahl
nitrogen) and total phosphorus were present in concentrations exceeding
the most stringent State water quality criteria. Mercury (a
bioaccumulative chemical of concern) was also detected, but at
concentrations that did not exceed Federal or State water quality
criteria. There was significant variability in sampling data, and flow
rate data were insufficient for reliably estimating mass loadings for
this discharge. System design changes to control the types and numbers
of contributing systems and equipment, and implementation of management
practices to reduce the generation of non-oily machinery wastewater are
potential options for reducing the potential impact of this discharge
on the environment. For this proposed rule, EPA and DOD have determined
that it is reasonable and practicable to require MPCDs for non-oily
machinery wastewater.
17. Photographic Laboratory Drains
This intermittent discharge is laboratory wastewater resulting from
processing photographic film. Typical liquid wastes from these
activities include spent film processing chemical developers, fixer-
bath solutions and film rinse water.
Navy ship classes such as aircraft carriers, amphibious assault
ships, and submarine tenders have photographic laboratory facilities,
including color, black-and-white and x-ray photographic processors. The
Coast Guard has two icebreakers with photographic and x-ray processing
capabilities. The MSC has two vessels that have photographic processing
equipment onboard, but the equipment normally is not operated in U.S.
waters. Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps vessels do not use
photographic equipment aboard their vessels and therefore do not
produce this discharge.
Photographic laboratory wastes may be generated within and beyond
12 n.m. from shore, although current practice is to collect and hold
the waste onboard within 12 n.m. The volume and frequency of the waste
generation varies with a vessel's photographic processing capabilities,
equipment, and operational objectives.
Expected constituents in photographic laboratory waste include
acetic acid, aluminum sulfate, ammonia, boric acid, ethylene glycol,
sulfuric acid, sodium acetate, sodium chloride, ammonium bromide,
aluminum sulfate, and silver. Concentrations of silver can exceed acute
Federal criteria and State acute water quality criteria; however, the
existing data are insufficient to determine whether drainage from
shipboard photographic laboratories has the potential to cause adverse
environmental effects.
The Navy has adopted guidance to control photographic laboratory
drains, including containerizing for onshore disposal all photographic
processing wastes generated within 12 n.m., and is transitioning to
digital photographic systems. The current handling practices and the
availability of digital photographic systems demonstrates that MPCDs
are available to mitigate potential adverse effects, if any, from
photographic laboratory drains. Therefore, EPA and DOD have determined
that it is reasonable and practicable to require use of a MPCD for this
discharge.
[[Page 45316]]
18. Seawater Cooling Overboard Discharge
This discharge consists of seawater from a dedicated system that
provides noncontact cooling water for other vessel systems. The
seawater cooling system continuously provides cooling water to heat
exchangers, removing heat from main propulsion machinery, electrical
generating plants, and other auxiliary equipment. The heated seawater
is discharged directly overboard. With the exception of some small,
non-self-propelled vessels and service craft, all Armed Forces vessels
discharge seawater from cooling systems. Typically, the demand for
seawater cooling is continuous and occurs both within and beyond 12
n.m. from shore.
Seawater cooling overboard discharge contains trace materials from
seawater cooling system pipes, valves, seachests, pumps, and heat
exchangers. Pollutants detected in seawater cooling overboard discharge
include copper, zinc, nickel, arsenic, chromium, lead, and nitrogen (in
the form of ammonia, nitrates and nitrities, and total Kjeldahl
nitrogen). Copper, nickel, and silver were detected in concentrations
exceeding both the chronic Federal criteria and State chronic water
quality criteria. Nitrogen was detected in concentrations exceeding the
most stringent State water quality criteria. These concentrations
contribute to a significant total mass released by this discharge due
to the large volume of cooling water. In addition, thermal effects
modeling indicate that some vessels may exceed State thermal mixing
zone requirements. The seawater cooling water system has a low
potential for transporting nonindigenous species, because the residence
time for most portions of the system are short. However, a strainer
plate is used to minimize the inflow of larger biota during system
operation. The strainer plate is periodically cleaned using low
pressure air or steam to dislodge any accumulated material. This
procedure may result in releasing biota that have attached to the
plate.
A potential MPCD option for achieving pollutant reductions is the
use of alternative piping systems (i.e., different metallurgy) that
provide lower rates of pipe wall corrosion and erosion. The potential
substitution of materials demonstrates the availability of controls to
mitigate potential adverse impacts on the environment. Based on this
information, EPA and DOD have determined that it is reasonable and
practicable to require use of a MPCD for this discharge.
19. Seawater Piping Biofouling Prevention
This discharge consists of the additives used to prevent the growth
and attachment of biofouling organisms in seawater cooling systems on
selected vessels, as well as the reaction byproducts resulting from the
use of these additives. Aboard some vessels, active biofouling control
systems are used to control biological fouling of surfaces within the
seawater cooling systems. Generally, these active biofouling control
systems are used when the cooling system piping does not have inherent
antifouling properties (e.g., titanium piping). The most common
seawater piping biofouling prevention systems include chlorination,
chemical dosing, and anodic biofouling control systems. All three
systems act to prevent fouling organisms from adhering to and growing
on interior piping and components. Fouling reduces seawater flow and
heat transfer efficiency. Chlorinators use electric current to generate
chlorine and chlorine-produced oxidants from seawater. Anodic
biofouling control systems use electric current to accelerate the
dissolving of an anode to release metal ions into the piping system.
Chemical dosing uses an alcohol-based chemical dispersant that is
intermittently injected into the seawater system.
Twenty-nine Armed Forces vessels use active seawater piping
biofouling control systems. Nine vessels use onboard chlorinators, 19
vessels use anodic biofouling control systems, and one vessel employs
chemical dosing. Chlorinators operate on a preset schedule of
intermittent operation, a few hours daily. Chemical dispersant dosing
is performed for one hour every three days. Anodic systems normally
operate continuously.
Seawater discharged from systems with active biofouling control
systems is likely to contain residuals from the fouling control agent
(chlorine, alcohol-based chemical additives, or copper), in addition to
constituents normally found in cooling water. Based on modeling of the
discharge plume, EPA and DOD estimate that receiving water
concentrations of residual chlorine could exceed chronic Federal
criteria and State chronic water quality criteria. Because of the large
volume of seawater discharged from these systems, the resulting mass
loading of chlorine released to the environment is considered
significant.
Existing operational controls that limit the residual chlorine
discharged to the environment demonstrate the availability of an MPCD
to mitigate the potential for adverse impacts from this discharge. EPA
and DOD have determined that it is reasonable and practicable to
require a MPCD for seawater piping biofouling prevention systems.
20. Small Boat Engine Wet Exhaust
This discharge is the seawater that is mixed and discharged with
small boat propulsion engine exhaust gases to cool the exhaust and
quiet the engine. Small boats are powered by either inboard or outboard
engines. Seawater is injected into the exhaust of these engines for
cooling and to quiet engine operation. Constituents from the engine
exhaust are transferred to the injected seawater and discharged
overboard as wet exhaust.
Most small boats with engines generate this discharge. The majority
of inboard engines used on small boats are two-stroke engines that use
diesel fuel. The majority of outboard engines are two-stroke engines
that use a gasoline-oil mixture for fuel. This discharge is generated
when operating small boats. Due to their limited range and mission,
small boats spend the majority of their operating time within 12 n.m.
from shore.
Wet exhaust from outboard engines contains several constituents
that can exceed acute Federal criteria or State acute water quality
criteria including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and naphthalene. Wet
exhaust from inboard engines can contain benzene, ethylbenzene, and
total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) that can exceed State
water quality criteria. Mass loadings of these wet exhaust constituents
are considered large. Potential MPCD options include replacing existing
outboard engines with new reduced-emission outboard engines, and
ensuring all new boats and craft have inboard engines with dry exhaust
systems. Therefore, EPA and DOD have determined that it is reasonable
and practicable to require use of a MPCD for small boat engine wet
exhaust.
21. Sonar Dome Discharge
This discharge is generated by the leaching of antifoulant
materials from the sonar dome material into the surrounding seawater
and the discharge of seawater or freshwater from within the sonar dome
during maintenance activities. Hull-mounted sonar domes house the
electronic equipment used to navigate, detect, and determine the range
to objects. Sonar domes are composed of either rubber impregnated with
TBT anti-foulant, rubber without
[[Page 45317]]
TBT, steel, or glass-reinforced plastic, and are filled with freshwater
and/or seawater to maintain their shape and internal pressure. The
discharge is generated when materials leach from the exterior surface
of the dome, or when water from inside the dome is pumped overboard to
allow for periodic maintenance or repairs on the sonar dome or
equipment housed inside the dome.
Only Navy and MSC operate vessels with sonar domes. Sonar domes are
currently installed on approximately 225 vessels, including eight
classes of Navy vessels and one class of MSC vessels. Sonar domes on
MSC vessels are fiberglass and do not contain TBT.
The leaching of materials from the exterior surface of the dome is
a continuous discharge and occurs both within and beyond 12 n.m. from
shore. Discharges from the interior of the dome are intermittent and
occur while the vessel is pierside as water inside the dome is removed
to allow for periodic maintenance or repairs (approximately twice per
year per dome).
Expected constituents of sonar dome water discharge are TBT,
dibutyl tin, monobutyl tin, and metals such as copper, nickel, zinc,
and tin. Based on sampling data in the record, concentrations of TBT,
copper, nickel, and zinc can exceed acute Federal criteria or State
acute water quality criteria, although fleetwide mass loadings of these
constituents are not considered large (15 lbs/year of TBT, 23 lbs/year
of copper, 11 lbs/year of nickel, and 122 lbs/year of zinc).
Nevertheless, the Navy has instituted a program to install new sonar
domes that do not have TBT-impregnated internal surfaces as existing
domes require replacement. This practice demonstrates the availability
of a control to mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts, if
any, from sonar dome discharges. Therefore EPA and DOD have determined
that it is reasonable and practicable to require a MPCD for sonar dome
discharges.
22. Submarine Bilgewater
The submarine bilgewater discharge contains a mixture of wastewater
and leakage from a variety of sources that are allowed to drain to the
lowest inner part of the hull, known as the bilge. These sources can
include condensed steam from steam systems, spillage from drinking
fountains, valve and piping leaks, and evaporator dumps (i.e.,
evaporator water that fails to meet specifications for use). From the
various collection points in the bilge, this bilgewater is transferred
via an auxiliary drain system to a series of holding tanks. Most
submarines have the capability to segregate oily wastewater from non-
oily wastewater. The non-oily waste is discharged directly overboard
and the oily wastewater is collected in a tank that allows gravity
separation of the oil and water. The separated water phase is then
discharged overboard, as needed, and the oil phase held onboard until
it can be transferred to shore facilities for disposal.
This discharge is generated by all submarines, all of which are
operated by the Navy. Approximately 60 of the submarines (the SSN 688
class) discharge the separated water phase from the bilgewater
collection tanks within and beyond 12 n.m. from shore. The remaining
submarines generally hold all bilgewater onboard until they are beyond
50 n.m. from shore. The frequency and volume of the discharge is highly
variable, depending upon crew size, operating depth, and equipment
conditions.
Sampling conducted onboard submarines showed concentrations of
cadmium, chlorine, copper, cyanide, heptachlor, heptachlor epoxide,
mercury (a bioaccumulative chemical of concern), nickel, oil, phenol,
silver, and zinc that exceeded acute Federal criteria or State acute
water quality criteria. Submarines use gravity separation to reduce the
concentration of oil in bilgewater prior to discharge; however, this
method apparently does not consistently produce a discharge that meets
water quality criteria. The adequacy of existing gravity separation
treatment to provide effective environmental protection will be
addressed by the Phase II rulemaking. The nature of this discharge is
such that submarine bilgewater, if untreated, could potentially impact
the environment. Because of this potential to cause adverse
environmental impacts, coupled with the demonstration that pollution
controls are available to reduce the oil content of the discharge, EPA
and DOD have determined that it is reasonable and practicable to
require the use of a MPCD for submarine bilgewater.
23. Surface Vessel Bilgewater/OWS Discharge
The surface vessel bilgewater/OWS discharge consists of a mixture
of wastewater and leakage from a variety of sources that are allowed to
drain to the lowest inner part of the hull, known as the bilge. The
sources of surface vessel bilgewater are generally similar to those
discussed above for submarines. An additional source of bilgewater for
surface vessels is water from the continual blowdown of boilers (i.e.,
boiler blowdown). On surface vessels, bilgewater is usually transferred
to an oily waste holding tank, where it is stored for shore disposal or
treated in an oil-water separator (OWS) to remove oil before being
discharged overboard. Some vessels also have an oil content monitor
(OCM) installed downstream from the OWS to monitor bilgewater oil
content prior to discharge. Vessels with OCMs have the capability to
return bilgewater not meeting a preset oil concentration limit to the
OWS for reprocessing until the limit is met. Oil collected from the OWS
separation process is held in a waste oil tank until transferred to
shore facilities for disposal.
All vessels of the Armed Forces produce bilgewater and most of the
larger vessels have OWS systems. Small craft bilgewater is collected
and transferred to shore facilities while pierside.
Bilgewater accumulates continuously; however, vessels of the Armed
Forces do not discharge untreated bilgewater. Under current policy,
bilgewater treated by an OWS can be discharged as needed within 12
n.m., while untreated bilgewater is held for transfer to a shore
facility for treatment. For vessels with an OWS and OCM, oil
concentrations in the treated bilgewater must be less than 15 ppm prior
to overboard discharge.
Sampling data for OWS effluent show oil, copper, iron, mercury (a
bioaccumulative chemical of concern), nickel, and zinc exceed acute
Federal criteria or State acute water quality criteria. Sampling data
also show concentrations of nitrogen (in the form of ammonia, nitrates
and nitrites, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen) and phosphorus exceed the
most stringent State water quality criteria. The estimated mass loading
for oil is considered to be large.
The existing policies prohibiting the discharge of untreated
bilgewater, and the extensive use of oil-water separators and oil
content monitors demonstrate the availability of pollution controls for
bilgewater. The data in the record indicate that untreated bilgewater
would likely cause adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, EPA and
DOD have determined that it is reasonable and practicable to require
the use of a MPCD for this discharge.
24. Underwater Ship Husbandry
The underwater ship husbandry discharge is composed of materials
discharged during the inspection, maintenance, cleaning, and repair of
hulls and hull appendages performed while the vessel is waterborne.
Underwater ship husbandry includes activities such as hull cleaning,
[[Page 45318]]
fiberglass repair, welding, sonar dome repair, propulsor lay-up, non-
destructive testing, masker belt repairs, and painting operations.
Underwater ship husbandry discharge is created occasionally by all
Navy surface ships and submarines, and some Coast Guard vessels. These
ship husbandry operations are normally conducted pierside. Of the
underwater ship husbandry operations, only underwater hull cleaning and
propulsor (i.e., propeller) lay-up have the potential for causing an
adverse environmental effect. Underwater hull cleaning is conducted by
divers using a mechanical brush system. Copper and zinc are released
during cleaning in concentrations that exceed acute Federal criteria
and State acute water quality criteria and produce a significant mass
loading of constituents. The copper and zinc in this discharge
originate from the anti-fouling and anticorrosive hull coatings applied
to vessels. Data from commercial vessels indicate that underwater hull
cleaning also has the potential to transfer nonindigenous aquatic
species. Propulsor lay-up requires the placement of a vinyl cover over
the propulsor to reduce fouling of the propulsor when the vessel is in
port for extended periods. Chlorine-produced oxidants are generated
from impressed current cathodic protection systems and can build up
within the cover to levels exceeding State water quality criteria.
However, discharges from this operation, as well as other ship
husbandry operations (excluding hull cleaning) are infrequent and small
in terms of volume or mass loading.
The Navy has established policies to minimize the number of hull
cleanings, based on the degree to which biological fouling has
occurred. In addition, the Navy has established procedures to use the
least abrasive cleaning equipment necessary as a means for reducing the
mass of copper and zinc in the discharge. These practices represent
available controls to mitigate adverse impacts from underwater ship
husbandry operations, and EPA and DOD have determined that it is
reasonable and practicable to require the use of a MPCD to control this
discharge.
25. Welldeck Discharges
This discharge is the water that accumulates from the seawater
flooding of the docking well (welldeck) of a vessel used to transport,
load, and unload amphibious vessels, and from the maintenance and
freshwater washings of the welldeck and equipment and vessels stored in
the welldeck.
Amphibious operations by the Armed Forces require transport of
vehicles, equipment, and personnel between ship and shore on landing
craft. The landing craft are stored in a docking well, or welldeck, of
some classes of amphibious warfare ships. To load or unload landing
craft, amphibious warfare ships may need to flood the welldeck by
taking on ballast water and sinking the aft (rear) end of the ship.
Water that washes out of the welldeck contains residual materials that
were on the welldeck prior to flooding. Other welldeck discharges are
created by routine operations such as washing equipment and vehicles
with potable water, washing the gas turbine engines of air-cushion
landing craft (LCACs) in the welldeck with mild detergents, and
graywater from stored utility landing craft (LCUs). Additionally, the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) requires washing welldecks,
vehicle storage areas, and equipment upon return from overseas
locations. The washing is required to ensure that there is no
inadvertent transport of nonindigenous species to land. USDA-required
washes of welldecks and vehicle storage areas occur pierside, while
vehicles and equipment are washed onshore in a USDA-designated area.
Effluent from these activities drain to unflooded welldecks and are
discharged directly overboard.
The Navy is the only branch of the Armed Forces with ships having
welldecks. Thirty-three amphibious warfare ships produce this
discharge, which is released both within and beyond 12 n.m. from shore.
Depending upon the specific activities conducted, welldeck
discharges contain a variety of residual constituents, including oil
and grease, ethylene glycol (antifreeze), chlorine, detergents/
cleaners, metals, solvents, and sea-salt residues. The volume of
welldeck washout varies depending upon the type of landing craft to be
loaded or unloaded. The greatest volume of welldeck discharge occurs
when LCUs are being loaded into, or unloaded from the welldeck. Loading
and unloading of LCACs does not require the welldeck to be flooded.
Instead, a small ``surge'' of water enters the ship during these
operations. Constituent concentrations in welldeck washout are expected
to be low due to dilution in the large volume of water discharged, and
because of general housekeeping procedures which require containment
and cleanup of spills on the welldeck.
Other discharges from the welldeck include vehicle and craft
washwater, gas turbine engine washes, and USDA washes. Constituents of
these discharges are expected to be identical to those in welldeck
washout. Of the various welldeck discharges, gas turbine water washes
and USDA washes may result in hydrocarbon, chlorine, or metal
concentrations that exceed acute water quality criteria. In addition,
there is a potential for nonindigenous species to be introduced from
USDA-required welldeck washes, although it should be noted that the
viability of any species introduced is questionable since they
generally would have been exposed to air for extended periods of time
prior to their introduction into U.S. coastal waters (i.e., for the
most part, these species would have been removed from vehicles and deck
surfaces and thus it would not be a water-to-water transfer, in
contrast to species transfers from ballast water systems).
Existing practices for containment and cleanup of welldeck spills
demonstrate the availability of controls to reduce contamination of
welldeck discharges and the potential for causing adverse environmental
impacts (e.g., oil sheens). EPA and DOD have determined that it is
reasonable and practicable to require a MPCD for welldeck discharges.
D. Discharges That Do Not Require Use of a MPCD
For the reasons discussed below, EPA and DOD have determined that
it is not reasonable and practicable to require the use of a MPCD to
control 14 discharges incidental to the normal operation of Armed
Forces vessels. Based on the information in the record, these
discharges have a low potential to adversely affect the environment by
introduction of chemical constituents, thermal pollution,
bioaccumulative chemicals of concern, or nonindigenous species.
As discussed below, in some cases, the concentration of one or more
constituents in the undiluted discharge exceed water quality criteria
at the point of discharge. However, such discharges occur in low
volumes or infrequently. In all of these instances, either the
pollutant concentration in the discharge plume quickly falls below
water quality criteria once the dilution effect of mixing zones is
taken into account, or the low mass loading of the discharge is
unlikely to adversely affect the environment.
EPA and DOD have determined that it is not reasonable and
practicable to require a MPCD to mitigate adverse impacts on the marine
environment for the discharges listed in Table 2 of this preamble and
discussed below in this section. These discharges would not require
control, and no control standards will be set for them, in Phase
[[Page 45319]]
II of UNDS development. Upon promulgation of the final Phase I rule,
States and their political subdivisions would be prohibited from
adopting or enforcing any statute or regulation to control these
discharges, except by establishing no-discharge zones (see section VI.C
of this preamble). Following promulgation of the final Phase I rule,
States can petition EPA and DOD to review the determination not to
require MPCDs for these discharges using the procedures set forth in
proposed 40 CFR 1700.11 and 1700.12.
The discussion below provides a brief description of the discharges
and the systems that produce the discharge and highlights the most
significant constituents released to the environment and other
characteristics of the discharge. A more detailed discussion of these
discharges is presented in Appendix A of the Technical Development
Document.
1. Boiler Blowdown
This discharge is the water and steam discharged during the
blowdown of a boiler or steam generator, or when a safety valve is
tested. Boilers are used to produce steam for propulsion and a variety
of auxiliary and hotel services. Water supplied to the boiler system
(feedwater) is treated with chemicals to inhibit corrosion and the
formation of scale in the boiler and boiler system piping.
Periodically, water must be removed from the boiler to control the
buildup of particulates, sludge, and treatment chemical concentrations.
The term ``blowdown'' refers to the minimum discharge of boiler water
required to prevent the buildup of these materials in the boiler to
levels that would adversely affect boiler operation and maintenance.
There are four types of boiler blowdown procedures employed on Armed
Forces vessels: (1) surface blowdowns for removing materials dissolved
in the boiler water and for controlling boiler water chemistry; (2)
scum blowdowns for removing surface scum; (3) bottom blowdowns for
removing sludge that settles at the bottom of boilers; and (4)
continuous blowdowns for removing dissolved metal chelates and other
suspended matter. The type of blowdown used is a function of the boiler
water chemistry and thus varies among vessel classes. With the
exception of continuous blowdowns, boiler blowdowns are discharged
below the vessel waterline. Continuous blowdowns are discharged inside
the vessel and are directed to the bilge. These are addressed as part
of the surface vessel bilgewater/OWS discharge (see section V.C.23 of
this preamble). Another discharge occurs during periodic testing of
steam generator safety valves on nuclear-powered vessels. The safety
valve discharge is a short-duration release of steam below the vessel
waterline.
Approximately 360 surface vessels and submarines discharge boiler
blowdowns directly to receiving waters. These blowdowns occur both
within and beyond 12 n.m. from shore. Nuclear-powered ships perform
steam generator safety valve testing only in port once every five
years.
Boiler blowdown is discharged intermittently in small volumes
(approximately 300 gallons per discharge), at high velocities (over 400
feet per second), and at elevated temperatures (over 325 degrees
Fahrenheit). Boiler water treatment chemicals used by Armed Forces
vessels include ethylenediamine-tetraacetic acid (EDTA), hydrazine,
sodium hydroxide, and disodium phosphate. Sampling data for boiler
blowdowns indicate the presence of nitrogen (in the form of ammonia,
nitrates and nitrites, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen), phosphorus,
hydrazine, iron, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, antimony, arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, selenium, thallium, and zinc.
Boiler blowdown discharges from conventionally-powered boilers exceed
Federal criteria and State water quality criteria for copper, nickel,
and zinc, and the most stringent State water quality criteria for
nitrogen, phosphorus, iron, and lead. Blowdown discharges from nuclear-
powered steam generators exceed acute Federal criteria and State acute
water quality criteria for copper, and the most stringent State acute
water quality criteria for lead and nickel. For nitrogen and
phosphorus, the most stringent State water quality criteria was
exceeded. However, the turbulent mixing resulting from the high
velocity discharge, and the relatively small volume of the boiler
blowdown causes pollutant concentrations to rapidly dissipate to
background levels or below acute Federal criteria and State acute water
quality criteria within a short distance from the point of discharge.
Based on thermal modeling of the discharge plume, boiler blowdowns are
not expected to exceed State standards for thermal effects. Thermal
effects from safety valve testing are substantially less than that from
blowdowns, thus safety valve testing also will not exceed State
standards for thermal effects. Annual fleetwide pollutant discharges
from boiler blowdowns within 12 n.m. are estimated at 3,036 pounds per
year of phosphorus, 513 pounds/year of nitrogen, less than 11 pounds of
copper, less than 2 pounds of lead, approximately 10 pounds of nickel,
and less than 12 pounds of zinc. The fleetwide discharge of all
pollutants from safety valve testing is less than 5 pounds/year. While
the pollutant concentrations in the boiler blowdown discharges exceed
acute Federal criteria and State acute water quality criteria, they are
discharged intermittently and in small volumes. Further, these
discharges are distributed throughout the U.S. at Armed Forces ports,
and each individual port receives only a fraction of the total
fleetwide mass loading. Based on the information in the record
regarding the low mass of pollutants discharged during boiler blowdowns
and safety valve discharges, and the manner in which the discharges
take place, there is a low potential for causing adverse environmental
impacts. Therefore, EPA and DOD have concluded that it is not
reasonable and practicable to require the use of a MPCD to mitigate
adverse impacts on the marine environment for this discharge.
2. Catapult Wet Accumulator Discharge
This discharge is the water discharged from a catapult wet
accumulator, which stores a steam/water mixture for launching aircraft
from an aircraft carrier.
The steam used as the motive force for operating the catapults for
launching aircraft is provided to the catapult from a steam reservoir,
referred to as the catapult wet accumulator. The catapult wet
accumulator is a pressure vessel containing a steam/water mixture at a
high temperature and pressure. The accumulator is fed an initial charge
of boiler feedwater and provided steam from boilers. As steam is
released from the accumulator for the catapult launch, the pressure
reduction in the accumulator allows some of the water to flash to
steam, providing additional steam to operate the catapult. During
operation of the system, steam condenses in the accumulator and causes
the water level in the accumulator to gradually rise. Periodic
blowdowns of the accumulator are required to maintain the water level
within operating limits. This steam/water mixture released during the
blowdown is discharged below the vessel waterline. In addition to
blowdowns required during catapult operation and testing, wet
accumulators are emptied prior to major maintenance of the accumulator
or when a carrier will be in port for more than 72 hours. When emptying
the accumulator, multiple blowdowns are performed over an extended
period (up to 12 hours) to
[[Page 45320]]
reduce pressure prior to draining the tank.
The Navy is the only branch of the Armed Forces with vessels
generating this discharge. Eleven of the aircraft carriers are
homeported in the United States.
Wet accumulator blowdowns are performed during flight operations,
which occur beyond 12 n.m., and during catapult testing, which occurs
within 12 n.m. from shore. Wet accumulators are emptied outside 12 n.m.
when returning to port for accumulator maintenance or when the carrier
will be in port for more than 72 hours. If catapult testing is
conducted in port, and the carrier will remain in port for more than 72
hours following the testing, the accumulator will be emptied in port.
Catapult wet accumulator blowdowns have little potential for
causing adverse environmental impacts because of the low pollutant
loadings and thermal effects of this discharge. Because boiler
feedwater is used for the initial charge of water to an empty
accumulator, the constituents of the discharge include water treatment
chemicals present in boiler feedwater. These chemicals include EDTA,
disodium phosphate, and hydrazine. During normal operation, the boiler
feedwater chemicals are diluted by the supplied steam. Additional
constituents present in the blowdowns originate from the steam provided
to the accumulator. Based on sampling data for steam condensate (a
similar discharge discussed below in section V.D.10) and the volume of
wet accumulator blowdowns performed within 12 n.m., the combined mass
loading for all metals is estimated at less than 0.01 pounds per year.
Constituents found in steam condensate include antimony, arsenic,
benzidine, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, cadmium, copper, nickel,
nitrogen (in the form of ammonia, nitrates and nitrites, and total
Kjeldahl nitrogen), phosphorus, selenium, thallium, and zinc. The
concentrations of benzidine, copper, and nickel in steam condensate
were found to exceed acute Federal criteria and State acute water
quality criteria. The concentration of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate was
found to exceed State acute water quality criteria. The concentrations
of nitrogen and phosphorus were found to exceed the most stringent
State water quality criteria. However, using steam condensate data may
overestimate wet accumulator pollutant concentrations because of the
shorter contact time between catapult steam and its associated piping
system (resulting in less opportunity to entrain corrosion products
from the piping). Based on thermal modeling of the discharge plume,
catapult wet accumulator blowdowns are not expected to exceed State
standards for thermal effects.
Catapult wet accumulator blowdowns have little potential for
causing adverse environmental impacts because of the very low pollutant
mass loadings in this discharge and because of the low thermal effects
from this discharge. Therefore, EPA and DOD determined that it is not
reasonable and practicable to require the use of a MPCD to mitigate
adverse impacts on the marine environment for this discharge.
3. Cathodic Protection
This discharge consists of the constituents released into the
surrounding water from sacrificial anodes or impressed current cathodic
protection systems used to prevent hull corrosion.
Steel-hulled vessels require corrosion protection. In addition to
anti-corrosion hull paints, these vessels employ cathodic protection
which is provided by either sacrificial anodes or Impressed Current
Cathodic Protection (ICCP) systems. The most common cathodic protection
system for vessels of the Armed Forces is the zinc sacrificial anode,
although a few submarines use aluminum anodes. With the sacrificial
anode system, zinc or aluminum anodes attached to the hull will
preferentially corrode from exposure to the seawater and thereby
minimize corrosion of the vessel's hull.
In ICCP systems, the vessel's electrical system passes a current
through inert platinum-coated anodes. This current protects the hull in
a manner similar to sacrificial anodes by generating current as the
anodes corrode. Depending on the type of cathodic protection used, the
discharge will include either zinc or aluminum from sacrificial anodes,
or chlorine-produced oxidants (CPO) from ICCP systems.
Approximately 1,800 large Armed Forces vessels use cathodic
protection. Of these, nearly 270 have ICCP systems, fewer than five use
aluminum sacrificial anodes, and the remaining use zinc sacrificial
anodes. The discharge is continuous while the vessel is waterborne and
occurs both within and beyond 12 n.m. from shore.
EPA and DOD modeled the discharge from cathodic protection systems
to determine the range of constituent concentrations that could be
expected in the water surrounding a vessel. This discharge is best
described as a mass flux of reaction byproducts emanating from the
electro-chemical reaction that occurs at the anodes. Two separate
modeling techniques were used for both sacrificial anodes and ICCP
systems. The first technique was a dilution model for harbors that
takes into account the number of homeported vessels and harbor-specific
volume and tidal flow information. Three Navy ports were modeled,
representing a range of port sizes. The resulting constituent
concentrations calculated for the three ports in this dilution model
were below chronic Federal criteria and State chronic water quality
criteria.
The second technique modeled mixing zones around a vessel using
calculations for a hull size typical of vessels using cathodic
protection systems. The mixing model results indicate that a mixing
zone of five feet for CPO and 0.5 feet for zinc results in
concentrations below the chronic Federal criteria or State chronic
water quality criteria. For vessels with aluminum anodes, a mixing zone
of less than 0.1 feet achieves concentrations below chronic Federal
criteria and State chronic water quality criteria. Concentrations of
mercury will be 1,000 times lower than the acute State water quality
criteria and 35 times lower than the chronic criteria. The total amount
of mercury discharged from aluminum anodes on all Armed Forces vessels
is estimated to be less than 0.001 pounds annually.
For ICCP calculations, the modeling is based on an assumption that
100 percent of the supplied electrical current results in CPO
generation. Less CPO is actually expected to be generated because the
efficiency of the chlorine generation process is known to be less than
100 percent. In addition, using the generation rate alone does not
account for the rapid decay of CPO in water through chemical reactions
involving CPO, which occur within minutes.
The dilution and mixing zone modeling performed for this discharge
indicates that cathodic protection has a low potential for causing
adverse impacts on the marine environment. Therefore, EPA and DOD
determined that it is not reasonable and practicable to require the use
of a MPCD to mitigate adverse impacts on the marine environment for
this discharge.
4. Freshwater Lay-up
This discharge is the potable water that is periodically discharged
from the seawater cooling system while the vessel is in port, and the
cooling system is in a lay-up mode.
Seawater cooling systems are used onboard some Armed Forces vessels
to remove heat from main propulsion machinery, electrical generating
plants
[[Page 45321]]
and other auxiliary equipment. These are single-pass, non-contact
cooling systems whereby the seawater enters the hull, is pumped through
a piping network and circulated through one or more heat exchangers,
then exits the vessel. On certain vessels, the seawater cooling systems
are placed in a stand-by mode, or lay-up, when the machinery is not in
use. The lay-up is accomplished by blowing the seawater from the
condenser with low-pressure air. The condenser is then filled with
potable water and drained again to remove residual seawater as
protection against corrosion. Then, the condenser is refilled with
potable water for the actual lay-up. After 21 days, the lay-up water is
discharged overboard and the condenser refilled. The condenser is
discharged and refilled on a 30-day cycle thereafter. The volume of
each condenser batch discharge is approximately 6,000 gallons.
The Navy is the only branch of the Armed Forces with vessels
discharging freshwater lay-up. All submarines generate this discharge,
which only occurs while in port. Eight aircraft carriers also lay-up
their condensers; however, these condensers are drained to the bilge
and the water is handled as bilgewater. Generally, the cooling system
is only placed in a lay-up condition if the vessel remains in port for
more than three days and the main steam plant is shut down.
Sampling data for submarine freshwater lay-up indicate the presence
of chlorine, nitrogen (in the form of ammonia, nitrates and nitrites,
and total Kjeldahl nitrogen), and the priority pollutants chromium,
copper, lead, nickel, and zinc. The concentrations of chlorine, copper,
nickel, and zinc can exceed acute Federal criteria or State acute water
quality criteria. For nitrogen and total phosphorus, the most stringent
State water quality criteria was exceeded. Chlorine was detected in the
initial flush discharge, but was not found in the extended lay-up
discharge. Mass loadings for the priority pollutants (copper, nickel,
and zinc) were estimated using total annual discharge volumes and
average pollutant concentrations. The total mass loading from all
discharges of freshwater lay-up from submarines is estimated at 7 lbs/
yr of copper, 36 lbs/yr of nickel, and 29 lbs/yr of zinc. The mass
discharge from any individual freshwater lay-up discharge event would
be a fraction of that total. Because of the low total annual mass
loading, the low frequency at which the discharge occurs, and the
volume of an individual discharge event, discharges of freshwater lay-
up have a low potential for causing adverse environmental impacts.
Therefore, EPA and DOD determined that it is not reasonable and
practicable to require the use of a MPCD to mitigate adverse impacts on
the marine environment for this discharge.
5. Mine Countermeasures Equipment Lubrication
This discharge consists of the constituents released into the
surrounding seawater by erosion or dissolution from lubricated mine
countermeasures equipment when the equipment is deployed or towed.
Various types of mine countermeasures equipment are deployed and towed
behind vessels to locate and destroy mines. Lubricating grease and oil
applied to this equipment can be released into surrounding seawater
during its deployment and use, including during training exercises.
The Navy is the only branch of the Armed Forces with a mine
countermeasures mission. The Navy uses two classes of vessels, totaling
23 ships, to locate, classify, and destroy mines. The discharge is
generated during training exercises, which are normally conducted
between 5 and 12 n.m. from shore. Depending on the class of vessel and
the type of mine countermeasures equipment being used, the number of
training exercises conducted by each vessel ranges from 6 to 240 per
year.
Using estimates of the amount of lubricant released during each
training exercise, EPA and DOD calculated the annual mass loading of
lubricant discharges to be approximately 770 pounds of grease and oil.
Using the estimates of the pollutant mass loading released during an
exercise, and the volume of water through which the countermeasures
equipment is towed or operated during an exercise, EPA and DOD
estimated the oil and grease concentrations resulting from mine
countermeasures training exercises. These estimated concentrations of
oil and grease in the receiving water range from 0.0002 to 7.1
g/l and do not exceed acute water quality criteria.
An additional calculation was performed for the lift cable for the
SLQ-48 mine neutralization vehicle (MNV). This lift cable is lubricated
with grease; however, the cable is not towed through the water and is
only used to deploy or recover the MNV while a vessel is stationary.
Using the maximum predicted release of 0.15 ounces of grease per
deployment, modeling results indicate that the grease released from the
lift cable would disperse in the surrounding receiving waters and be at
concentrations below the most stringent State acute water quality
criteria within 3 to 5 feet from the cable.
Most discharges from mine countermeasures equipment occur while
vessels are underway and the pollutants are quickly dispersed in the
environment due to the turbulent mixing conditions caused by the wake
of the vessel and towed equipment. Further, these discharges take place
beyond 5 n.m. from shore in waters with significant wave energy,
allowing for rapid and wide dispersion of the releases. The manner in
which these releases occur, coupled with the relatively small amounts
of lubricants released, results in this discharge having a low
potential for causing adverse impacts on the marine environment.
Therefore, EPA and DOD determined that it is not reasonable and
practicable to require the use of a MPCD to mitigate adverse impacts on
the marine environment for the mine countermeasures equipment
lubrication discharge.
6. Portable Damage Control Drain Pump Discharge
This discharge consists of seawater pumped through the portable
damage control drain pump and discharged overboard during periodic
testing, maintenance, and training activities.
Portable damage control (DC) drain pumps are used to remove water
from vessel compartments during emergencies or provide seawater for
shipboard firefighting in the event water is unavailable from the
firemain system. The types of pumps used are described in section
V.D.7, Portable Damage Control Drain Pump Wet Exhaust. Discharges from
drain pumps being used during onboard emergencies are not incidental to
normal vessel operations, and therefore are not within the scope of
this proposed rule. These pumps are, however, periodically operated
during maintenance, testing, and training, and pump discharges during
these activities are within the scope of this rule. To demonstrate that
the pumps are functioning properly, the suction hose is hung over the
side of the vessel and the pump operated to verify that the pump
effectively transfers the seawater or harbor water. This pump effluent
is discharged directly overboard during this testing.
All large ships and selected boats and craft of the Armed Forces
generate this discharge. As part of equipment maintenance, testing, and
training, the pumps are operated both within and beyond 12 n.m. from
shore. Navy , Army, and MSC vessels operate portable DC drain pumps for
approximately 10 minutes per month and an additional 15
[[Page 45322]]
minutes per year to demonstrate working order and condition. Coast
Guard vessels operate their portable DC drain pumps for approximately
30 minutes per month for maintenance and testing.
This discharge consists of seawater/harbor water that only briefly
passes through a pumping process. The drain pump discharge is unlikely
to cause adverse impacts because the water has a residence time of less
than five seconds in the pump and associated suction and discharge
hoses, and no constituents are expected to be added to the seawater/
harbor water. Therefore, EPA and DOD determined it is not reasonable
and practicable to require the use of a MPCD to mitigate adverse
impacts on the marine environment for this discharge.
7. Portable Damage Control Drain Pump Wet Exhaust
This periodic discharge is seawater that has mixed and been
discharged with portable damage control drain pump exhaust gases to
cool the exhaust and quiet the engine.
Portable, engine-driven pumps provide seawater for shipboard
firefighting in the event water is unavailable from the firemain. Two
models of these portable damage control (DC) drain pumps are used: P-
250 and P-100. The P-250 pumps operate on gasoline injected with oil-
based lubricants. Part of the seawater output from these pumps is used
to cool the engine and quiet the exhaust. This discharge, termed wet
exhaust, is typically routed overboard through a separate exhaust hose
and does not include the main discharge of the pump which is classified
separately as Portable Damage Control Drain Pump Discharge.
Fuel residuals, lubricants, or their combustion byproducts are
present in P-250 engine exhaust gases, condense in the cooling water
stream, and are discharged as wet exhaust. The P-100 model operates on
diesel fuel. Although the engine that drives the P-100 pump is air-
cooled and no water is injected into the exhaust of the pump, a small
amount of water contacts the engine during pump priming. Up to one-
seventh of a gallon of water may be discharged during each priming
event. This water discharged during P-100 priming is considered part of
the portable DC drain pump wet exhaust.
The Navy operates approximately 910 drain pumps, the MSC
approximately 140 drain pumps, and the Coast Guard approximately 370
drain pumps.
Portable DC drain pump wet exhaust discharges occur during training
and monthly planned maintenance activities both within and beyond 12
n.m. from shore. During monthly maintenance activities, the pumps are
run for approximately 10 to 30 minutes. The use of portable DC drain
pumps during onboard emergencies is not incidental to normal
operations, and therefore not within the scope of this proposed rule.
Based on data in the record, the wet exhaust discharge is likely to
include metals, oil and grease, and volatile and semi-volatile organic
compounds. The concentrations of copper, lead, nickel, silver, zinc,
and iron in portable DC drain pump wet exhaust can exceed acute Federal
criteria and State acute water quality criteria. Concentrations of oil
and grease, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and napthalene can exceed
State acute water quality criteria. Concentrations of these
constituents in receiving waters are not expected to exceed water
quality criteria because they will dissipate quickly since the mass
loadings per discharge event are small and the discharge locations are
dispersed fleetwide. The discharge from each of the 500 P-250 pumps
occurs separately at different discharge locations. On average, each P-
250 pump discharges less than 0.3 pounds of pollutants per discharge
event. The duration of each discharge is short, averaging less than 30
minutes. These factors allow the pollutants to dissipate rapidly. Based
on this information, the portable DC drain pump wet exhaust is expected
to have a low potential for exhibiting adverse environmental impacts on
the marine environment. Therefore, EPA and DOD determined it is not
reasonable and practicable to require a MPCD to mitigate adverse
impacts on the marine environment for this discharge.
8. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Condensate
This discharge is the drainage of condensed moisture from air
conditioning units, refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerated spaces.
Refrigerators, refrigerated spaces, freezers, and air conditioning (AC)
units produce condensate when moist air contacts the cold evaporator
coils. This condensate drips from the coils and collects in drains.
Condensate collected in drains above the vessel waterline is
continuously discharged directly overboard. Below the waterline,
condensate is directed to the bilge, non-oily machinery wastewater
system, or is retained in dedicated holding tanks prior to periodic
overboard discharge.
Approximately 650 Navy, MSC, Coast Guard, Army, and Air Force
vessels produce this discharge. The condensate may be discharged at any
time, both within and beyond 12 n.m. from shore.
Condensate flow rates depend on air temperature, humidity, and the
number and size of cooling units per vessel. The discharge can contain
cleaning detergent residuals, seawater from cleaning refrigerated
spaces, food residues, and metals contributed from contact with cooling
coils and drain piping. Because evaporator coils are made from
corrosion-resistant materials and condensation is non-corrosive,
condensate is not expected to contain metals in significant
concentrations. Discharges of refrigeration/AC condensate are expected
to have a low potential for causing adverse environmental impacts,
therefore EPA and DOD determined it is not reasonable and practicable
to require a MPCD to mitigate adverse impacts on the marine environment
for condensate discharges.
9. Rudder Bearing Lubrication
This discharge is the oil or grease released by the erosion or
dissolution from lubricated bearings that support the rudder and allow
it to turn freely. Armed Forces vessels generally use two types of
rudder bearings, and two lubricating methods for each type of rudder
bearing: (1) grease-lubricated roller bearings; (2) oil-lubricated
roller bearings; (3) grease-lubricated stave bearings; and (4) water-
lubricated stave bearings. Only oil-lubricated roller bearings and
grease-lubricated stave bearings generate a discharge.
Approximately 220 Navy vessels, 50 Coast Guard vessels, and eight
MSC vessels use a type of rudder bearing that generates this discharge.
The discharge occurs intermittently, primarily when a vessel is
underway or its rudder is in use, although some discharges from oil-
lubricated roller bearings could potentially occur pierside even when
the rudder is not being used because the oil lubricant is slightly
pressurized.
This discharge consists of oil leakage and the washout of grease
from rudder bearings. EPA and DOD developed an upper bound estimate of
the fleetwide release of oil and grease based on allowable leakage/
washout rates and the amount of time each vessel spends within 12 n.m.
from shore. The maximum allowable oil leak rate for oil-lubricated
roller bearings is one gallon/day when the vessel is underway and one
pint/day while in port. In practice, these leakage rates are not
reached under normal conditions. The grease washout rate for grease-
lubricated stave bearings is based on Navy specifications limiting
grease washout to 5 percent. Grease washout estimates for this
[[Page 45323]]
proposed rule are based on releasing 5 percent of the grease over a
two-week period, which corresponds to the time between grease
applications.
EPA and DOD calculated the expected receiving water concentrations
of oil and grease from this discharge to evaluate the potential for the
discharge to cause adverse impacts. The underway receiving water volume
was determined using an average size vessel and estimating the volume
of water displaced by the vessel while transiting from port to a
distance of 12 n.m. from shore. In port, discharges are not expected
since the lower bearing seals are designed to prevent leakage and, as
noted above, the oil to the bearings is kept at a low pressure while in
port. The resulting estimated pollutant concentrations do not exceed
acute Federal criteria or State acute water quality criteria. The
rudder bearing lubrication discharge has a low potential for causing
adverse environmental impacts. EPA and DOD determined that it is not
reasonable and practicable to require a MPCD to mitigate adverse
impacts on the marine environment for this discharge.
10. Steam Condensate
This discharge is the condensed steam discharged from a vessel in
port, where the steam originates from shore-based port facilities. Navy
and MSC surface ships often use steam from shore facilities during
extended port visits to operate auxiliary systems such as laundry
facilities, heating systems, and other shipboard systems. In the
process of providing heat to ship systems, the steam cools and a
portion of it condenses. This condensate collects in drain collection
tanks and is periodically discharged by pumping it overboard. The steam
condensate is discharged above the vessel waterline and a portion of
the condensate can vaporize as it contacts ambient air.
This discharge is generated only in port because vessels only
discharge the condensed steam if it was generated by a shore facility.
Ships producing their own steam will recycle their condensate back to
the boiler. Vessels take on shore steam when their own boilers are shut
down, and thus they have no means for reusing the condensate. There are
no systems in place that would allow vessels to return steam condensate
to shore for reuse.
Depending on the steam needs of individual vessels, the discharge
can be intermittent or continuous whenever shore steam is supplied.
Approximately 180 Navy and MSC vessels discharge steam condensate.
Coast Guard vessels do not generate this discharge because they operate
their auxiliary boilers to produce their own steam even while in port.
Army and Air Force vessels do not have steam systems and therefore do
not discharge steam condensate.
The constituents of steam condensate include metals from onshore
steam piping, ship piping, and heat exchangers, and may have some
residual water treatment chemicals. Pollutants found in the discharge
include nitrogen (in the form of ammonia, nitrates and nitrites, and
total Kjeldahl nitrogen), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, benzidine,
antimony, arsenic, cadmium, copper, chromium, lead, nickel, phosphorus,
selenium, thallium, and zinc. Sampling of steam condensate from four
vessels found copper concentrations that exceed both acute Federal
criteria and State acute water quality criteria. Nickel concentrations
exceeded the most stringent State acute water quality criteria, but not
the acute Federal criteria. Nitrogen concentrations exceeded the most
stringent State water quality criteria. Using upper-bound estimates of
the volume of steam condensate discharged, the fleetwide mass loadings
for nitrogen, copper and nickel were calculated to be 1972 lbs/year, 49
lbs/year and 28 lbs/year, respectively. The mass discharged from any
individual vessel while in a given port would be a fraction of that
total. The upper-bound estimate for the fleetwide discharge volume is
300 million gallons per year.
Based on modeling of the discharge plume, the thermal effects
resulting from the steam condensate discharge exceed mixing zone
requirements for Washington. However, these modeling results may
overstate the actual thermal effects because the computer model
predicted the plume to be only twelve centimeters in depth, which
appears to underestimate the degree of mixing that is likely to occur.
In addition, certain assumptions used in the model tend to be more
representative of worst-case conditions in how they influence the size
of the calculated thermal plume. For example, parameters included in
the model assume minimum wind speed and slack water (resulting in less
mixing) and winter conditions (which results in larger discharge
flows).
The low mass loadings in the discharge and the thermal effects
modeling results indicate that steam condensate has a low potential for
causing adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, EPA and DOD
determined that it is not reasonable and practicable to require a MPCD
to mitigate adverse impacts on the marine environment for this
discharge.
11. Stern Tube Seals and Underwater Bearing Lubrication
This discharge is the seawater pumped through stern tube seals and
underwater bearings to lubricate and cool them during normal operation.
Propeller shafts are supported by stern tube bearings at the point
where the shaft exits the hull (for surface ships and submarines), and
by strut bearings outboard of the ship (for surface ships only). A
stern tube seal is used to prevent seawater from entering the vessel
where the shaft penetrates the hull. The stern tube seals and bearings
are cooled and lubricated by forcing seawater from the firemain or
auxiliary cooling water system through the seals and over the bearings.
On submarines, potable water (freshwater) may be supplied from pierside
connections for stern tube seal lubrication during extended periods in
port.
Strut bearings are not provided with forced cooling or lubrication.
Instead, strut bearings use the surrounding seawater flow for
lubrication and cooling when the vessel is underway. Submarines do not
have strut bearings and instead use a self-aligning bearing aft of the
stern tube that supports the weight of the propeller and shafting
outboard of the vessel.
Almost all classes of surface vessels and submarines have stern
tube seals and bearings that require lubrication, and these discharges
are continuous. The discharge can contain synthetic (Buna-N) rubber
used in the construction of the bearings. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
and metals such as copper, nickel and zinc are also expected to be
present in the discharge. The primary source of bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate and the metals in the discharge is the lubricating
water (firemain or auxiliary cooling water). The shaft and the stern
tube seal may also be a small contributor to the metals present in the
discharge. When freshwater is used for lubricating submarine seals, the
freshwater may contain residual chlorine. Based on estimates of
chlorine concentrations in potable water, fleetwide approximately 0.8
lbs/year of chlorine exit through the stern tube seals and bearings.
Since the majority of metals discharged through the stern tube
seals and bearings originate from the firemain system, mass loadings
for metals discharged through the stern tube seals and bearings is
included as part of the total mass loading calculations for the
firemain system discharge, presented in section V.C.11 of the preamble.
Metals contributions from the seals and bearings themselves are
expected to be
[[Page 45324]]
negligible. It should be noted that the mass of metals exiting through
the seals and bearings would be reduced by any controls imposed on
firemain system discharges in UNDS Phases II and III. While the metals
concentrations in the firemain discharge exceed chronic Federal
criteria and State chronic water quality criteria, the rate at which
the water is discharged through a vessel's stern tube seal and bearings
is relatively small--20 gal/min each shaft, 2 shafts per ship--
resulting in the low pollutant mass loading exiting through the seals
and bearings. Further, these discharges are distributed throughout the
U.S. at Armed Forces ports, and each individual port receives only a
fraction of the total fleetwide mass loading. (See the Technical
Development Document for details on vessel ports.) Given the low rate
of the discharge and the low mass loadings, this discharge has a low
potential for causing adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, EPA and
DOD determined it is not reasonable and practicable to require the use
of a MPCD to mitigate adverse impacts on the marine environment for
this discharge.
12. Submarine Acoustic Countermeasures Launcher Discharge
This intermittent discharge is composed of seawater that mixes with
acoustic countermeasure device propulsion gas after launching an
acoustic countermeasure device, then subsequently discharged either
through exchange with the surrounding seawater or while draining from
an expended device being removed from the submarine.
Navy submarines have the capability to launch acoustic
countermeasures devices to improve the survivability of a submarine by
generating sufficient noise to be observed by hostile torpedoes,
sonars, or other monitoring devices. The only countermeasures systems
that generate a discharge within 12 n.m. are the countermeasures set
acoustic (CSA) Mk 2 systems, which launch the countermeasure devices by
gas propulsion through a launch tube. Following the launch, a metal
plate closes the launch tube forming a watertight endcap. To equalize
pressure, a one-way check valve allows water to flow into the tube
after launch, but does not allow any of the water to be released
through the opening. The launch tube cap contains three, \3/8\ inch,
bleed hole plugs that dissolve approximately three days after the
launch. This allows exchange between the launch tube and the
surrounding seawater while the submarine is moving. The bleed holes
also allow some launch tube water to drain into the surrounding water
when the assembly is removed from the submarine for replacement. The
CSA Mk2 system is installed on 24 Navy submarines.
Constituents found in the CSA Mk2 launch tubes after launching
countermeasures devices include copper, cadmium, lead, and silver. The
discharge may also contain constituents from the propulsion gas
including hydrochloric acid, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen,
alumina, iron (II) chloride, titanium dioxide, hydrogen, and iron (II)
oxide. Sampling indicates that copper, cadmium, and silver
concentrations are above both Federal acute water criteria and the most
stringent State acute water quality criteria; lead concentrations are
above the most stringent State water quality criteria. The total annual
mass loadings from all discharges from submarine CSA Mk2 countermeasure
launcher systems are estimated at 0.0005 lbs/year cadmium, 0.0009 lbs/
year lead, 0.0007 lbs/year copper, and 0.00009 lbs/year silver.
Because of the low annual mass loading, the low frequency at which
the discharge occurs, and the volume of the individual discharge event
(17 gallons), discharges from submarine CSA launcher systems have a low
potential for causing adverse environmental impacts. Therefore EPA and
DOD determined it is not reasonable and practicable to require a MPCD
to mitigate adverse impacts on the marine environment for this
discharge.
13. Submarine Emergency Diesel Engine Wet Exhaust
This discharge is seawater that is mixed and discharged with
exhaust gases from the submarine emergency diesel engine for the
purpose of cooling the exhaust and quieting the engine.
Submarines are equipped with an emergency diesel engine that is
also used in a variety of non-emergency situations, including
electrical power generation to supplement or replace shore-supplied
electricity, routine maintenance, and readiness checks. This wet
exhaust discharge is generated by injecting seawater (or harbor water)
as a cooling stream into the diesel engine exhaust system. The cooling
water mixes with and cools the hot exhaust gases, and is discharged
primarily as a mist that disperses in the air before depositing on the
surface of the water body.
All submarines generate this discharge. Diesel engines must be
operated for equipment checks that occur prior to submarine deployment,
monthly availability assurance, and periodic trend analyses. On
average, each submarine will operate the diesel engine for
approximately 60 hours/year while within 12 n.m. from shore. Most of
the operating time (54 hours/year) occurs while the submarine is
pierside.
Typical constituents of diesel engine exhaust include various
hydrocarbon combustion by-products, measured as volatile and semi-
volatile organic compounds. The priority pollutants expected to be
present in the discharge include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs), toluene, and possibly metals. Although no individual pollutant
exceeds water quality criteria, the total concentration of PAHs in the
discharge is predicted to exceed State acute water quality criteria.
Nevertheless, the discharge of PAHs is unlikely to cause adverse
impacts on the marine environment because the total fleetwide annual
mass loading of PAHs is calculated to be less than 0.06 pounds per
year. Therefore, EPA and DOD determined that it is not reasonable and
practicable to require a MPCD to mitigate adverse impacts on the marine
environment for submarine diesel engine wet exhaust.
14. Submarine Outboard Equipment Grease and External Hydraulics
This discharge occurs when grease applied to a submarine's outboard
equipment is released to the environment through the mechanical action
of seawater eroding the grease layer while the submarine is underway,
and by the slow dissolution of the grease into the seawater. This
discharge also includes any hydraulic oil that may leak past the seals
of hydraulically-operated external components of a submarine (e.g., bow
planes).
Outboard equipment grease is discharged by all submarines, but the
discharge of oil from external hydraulic equipment is limited to 22
submarines. This discharge occurs continuously both within and beyond
12 n.m. from shore, although the rate of discharge depends upon the
degree of contact between seawater and the greased outboard components,
and how fast the submarine is traveling. Most hydraulically-operated
outboard equipment, for example, does not contact seawater within 12
n.m. from shore because submarines generally operate on the surface in
this region, and the hydraulically-operated equipment producing this
discharge is located mostly above the waterline.
This discharge consists of grease (Termalene #2) and hydraulic oil.
Termalene #2 consists of mineral oil, a calcium-based rust inhibitor,
thickening agents, an antioxidant, and dye. Using
[[Page 45325]]
an assumption that 100 percent of all grease applied to outboard
equipment is washed away at a constant rate during submarine
operations, the amount of grease released fleetwide within 12 n.m. is
approximately 520 lbs/year. This value is believed to overstate the
actual mass of grease discharged within 12 n.m. because submarines
operate at lower rates of speed in coastal waters (thus leading to less
erosion of the grease) and a surfaced submarine exposes a lesser amount
of grease to the water than is exposed by a submerged submarine.
Hydraulic oil consists of paraffinic distillates and additives.
Using a calculation that assumes all hydraulic system seals leak oil at
the maximum allowable leak rate, approximately 0.4 lbs/year of
hydraulic oil is released fleetwide within 12 n.m. from shore. (Based
on discussions with Navy hydraulic system experts, such oil leakage
rates are not common and thus this calculation overestimates the amount
of oil actually leaked.) The submarine will displace approximately 120
million cubic feet of water as it travels within 12 n.m. from shore.
Assuming that hydraulic oil and outboard grease are leaked at a
constant rate, this will result in concentrations below the levels
established in acute Federal criteria and State acute water quality
criteria.
In addition, the turbulence created by the vessel wake is expected
to result in rapid dispersion of the constituents released. As a
result, the submarine outboard equipment grease and external hydraulics
discharge has low potential for causing adverse environmental effects.
EPA and DOD determined it is not reasonable and practicable to require
a MPCD to mitigate adverse impacts on the marine environment for this
discharge.
VI. Section-By-Section Analysis of the Regulation
A. Subpart A--Scope
Section 1700.1 Applicability
Section 1700.2 Effect
This rule proposes how discharges incidental to the normal
operation of Armed Forces vessels would be controlled within the
navigable waters of the United States and the waters of the contiguous
zone. The rule would apply to owners and operators of Armed Forces
vessels. This rule would not apply to commercial and privately owned
vessels.
The rule also would preempt States and political subdivisions of
States from regulating these discharges, except that States may
establish a no-discharge zone or apply to EPA for a no-discharge zone.
Federal standards of performance for each required Marine Pollution
Control Device will be published in Sec. 1700.14 of this part after the
completion of Phase II of UNDS.
Section 1700.3 Definitions
The definitions in the proposed rule are based on definitions in
the Clean Water Act (CWA).
The proposed regulatory definition of ``Armed Forces vessel'' is
based on the statutory definition of ``vessel of the Armed Forces'' in
CWA section 312(a)(14), which includes vessels owned or operated by the
Department of Defense, as well as vessels owned or operated by the
Department of Transportation that are designated by the Secretary of
the department in which the U.S. Coast Guard is operating as operating
equivalently to Department of Defense vessels. At present, the U.S.
Coast Guard is operating in the Department of Transportation. The
Secretary of Transportation has determined that U.S. Coast Guard
vessels operate equivalently to vessels of the Department of Defense,
and therefore are included in the proposed regulatory definition of
``Armed Forces vessel.'' Armed Forces vessels are discussed in section
III of this preamble.
CWA section 312(n) applies to ``discharges, other than sewage,
incidental to the normal operation of a vessel of the Armed Forces.''
The proposed regulatory definition of ``discharge incidental to the
normal operation of a vessel'' is based on the statutory definition
(see CWA section 312(a)(12)(A)), which includes incidental discharges,
other than sewage, whenever a vessel is waterborne. If a vessel is not
waterborne (e.g., the vessel is in drydock), its discharges would not
be covered by this rule; instead these discharges would be covered
under the facility's drydock NPDES permit. Discharges not incidental to
the normal operation of a vessel, such as those resulting from an
emergency situation or unavoidable accident, also would not be covered
by this rule. Discharges containing source, special nuclear, or
byproduct materials are regulated by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq., and are excluded from regulation under
the CWA. Therefore these discharges would not be covered by this rule.
CWA section 312(a)(12)(B) specifically excludes from the definition
of discharge incidental to the normal operation of a vessel, and thus
from the UNDS program, certain types of discharges. First, incidental
discharges do not include discharges of rubbish, trash, garbage, or
other such material discharged overboard. Shipboard solid waste,
including pulper discharges, is regulated separately under the Act to
Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS), 33 U.S.C. 1901 et seq., which
requires public vessels, including warships, to comply with the
requirements of Annex V of the Convention to Prevent Pollution from
Ships (MARPOL) for shipboard solid waste. Each branch of the Armed
Forces and the Coast Guard has developed regulations, separate from
UNDS, to implement the requirements of APPS for their vessels.
Second, incidental discharges do not include air emissions
resulting from the operation of a vessel propulsion system, motor
driven equipment, or incinerator.
Third, incidental discharges do not include any discharges not
covered by 40 CFR 122.3 (as in effect of February 10, 1996). This
section of the CFR lists discharges that are excluded from National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements,
such as discharges incidental to the normal operation of a vessel. In
other words, UNDS covers discharges that are excluded by EPA in 40 CFR
122.3.
By enacting CWA section 312(n), Congress has chosen to regulate
discharges from Armed Forces vessels through uniform national discharge
standards, rather than by NPDES permits. This is supported by the
statutory change in CWA section 502(c) specifically excluding from the
definition of ``pollutant'' any discharges incidental to the normal
operation of Armed Forces vessels. Therefore, after a discharge
incidental to the normal operation of an Armed Forces vessel is
determined not to require control, or after the regulations for the use
of MPCDs for controlled discharges are implemented (in Phase III of
UNDS), Armed Forces vessels would not be required to obtain or comply
with NPDES permits for those discharges.
Although discharges incidental to the normal operation of a vessel
are excluded from NPDES requirements under 40 CFR 122.3, that exclusion
does not include discharges when a vessel is operating in a capacity
other than as a means of transportation, such as when used as a mining
facility or seafood processing facility. EPA and DOD do not believe,
however, that Congress intended the UNDS program to be limited to Armed
Forces vessels only when they are under power. Rather, the purpose of
CWA section 312(n)--to enhance the operational flexibility of Armed
Forces vessels by avoiding the
[[Page 45326]]
problems caused by subjecting these vessels to varying State regulation
under the CWA--and its legislative history, clearly indicate
congressional intent that this program be comprehensive with respect to
these discharges. This intent would not be met if Armed Forces vessels
were subject to UNDS technology standards only when under power but
then subject to State permitting requirements when they are docked for
any period of time, especially when the State standards could be very
different from the UNDS standards and would vary from State to State.
Indeed, this is the very situation Congress was intending to remedy by
prohibiting States from adopting or enforcing regulations affecting
discharges covered by UNDS. Therefore, discharges incidental to the
normal operation of Armed Forces vessels include incidental discharges
whenever a vessel is waterborne, including pierside.
By enacting CWA section 312(n), Congress has chosen to regulate
discharges from Armed Forces vessels through uniform national discharge
standards, rather than by NPDES permits. Congress made no such
statements and passed no legislation regarding commercial and private
vessels, and the distinction in 40 CFR 122.3 between discharges from a
vessel ``when it is operating as a means of transportation'' and when
it is not remains unchanged for those vessels.
Finally, under CWA section 312(n)(6)(B), this rule would not affect
the application of CWA section 311 to discharges incidental to the
normal operation of Armed Forces vessels.
No-discharge zone is defined in the proposed rule as an area of
water into which one or more specified discharges incidental to the
normal operation of Armed Forces vessels, whether treated or not, are
prohibited. No-discharge zones are identified and established following
the requirements in Secs. 1700.7 to 1700.10 of this proposed rule.
B. Subpart B--Discharge Determinations
Section 1700.4 Discharges Requiring Control
Section 1700.5 Discharges Not Requiring Control
Information on vessel discharges was gathered as described in
section IV, above. The decision methodology described in section V.A
was used to determine which discharges require control (described in
section V.C) and which discharges do not require control (described in
section V.D).
C. Subpart C--Effect on States
Section 1700.6 Effect on State and Local Statutes and Regulations
There are two types of discharges identified in today's proposed
rule--those that would require control (listed in Sec. 1700.4) and
those that would not require control (listed in Sec. 1700.5). The
effect of today's proposed rule on State and local statutes and
regulations depends on the type of discharge.
After final promulgation of this rule, neither States nor political
subdivisions of States would be able to adopt or enforce any State or
local statutes or regulations controlling a discharge that will not
require control (listed in Sec. 1700.5). However, States would be able
to establish a no-discharge zone by State prohibition (following the
provisions of Sec. 1700.9), or apply for a no-discharge zone by EPA
prohibition (following the provisions of Sec. 1700.10), for these
discharges.
After final promulgation of this rule, States also would be able to
apply for a no-discharge zone by EPA prohibition (following the
provisions of Sec. 1700.10) for discharges that will require control
(listed in Sec. 1700.4). Note that States and their political
subdivisions will not be prohibited from controlling discharges listed
in Sec. 1700.4 by State or local statute or regulation until after
regulations governing the design, construction, installation, and use
of the MPCDs are promulgated (i.e., the third phase of UNDS is
completed). However, EPA and DOD recommend that States and political
subdivisions coordinate their actions with EPA and DOD such that any
interim requirements would be consistent with the final Phase III
regulations. After Phase III regulations are issued by the Secretary,
States and political subdivisions will not be able to adopt or enforce
any State of local statute or regulation controlling discharges listed
in Sec. 1700.4 except to establish a no-discharge zone by State or EPA
prohibition.
States and their political subdivisions will not be prohibited from
regulating any discharge that is not listed in either Sec. 1700.4 or
Sec. 1700.5.
This rule also proposes the requirements for a State to petition
the Administrator and the Secretary to review whether a discharge
should require control by a MPCD, or to review a Federal standard of
performance for a MPCD (Secs. 1700.11 to 1700.13).
Section 1700.7 No-discharge Zones
For this part, a no-discharge zone is a waterbody, or portion
thereof, where one or more incidental discharges from Armed Forces
vessels, whether treated or not, are prohibited. No-discharge zones are
established on the basis of a need to provide additional environmental
protection for the designated area of water. A no-discharge zone may be
established by either State prohibition (see proposed Sec. 1700.9) or
EPA prohibition (see proposed Sec. 1700.10). The most significant
difference between the two prohibitions is that in a State prohibition,
adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal of the prohibited
discharge must be reasonably available. In an EPA prohibition, adequate
collection facilities are not necessary if EPA determines, following
consultation with the Secretary, that the significance of the waters
and the potential impact of the discharge are of sufficient magnitude
to warrant any resulting constraints on Armed Forces vessels. The
purpose for this difference, which was established initially in section
312 of the CWA to apply to discharges from vessel marine sanitation
devices, is to provide the opportunity for States to seek additional
protection for waterbodies even where collection facilities for the
discharge may not be available.
The process for establishing an EPA prohibition is different from
the process for establishing a State prohibition, including the
requirement for the no-discharge zone to be established through
rulemaking rather than by a State statute or regulation. Another
difference is that for a State prohibition, the determination that
greater protection of the waters is necessary is made by the State; for
an EPA prohibition, this determination is made by EPA.
Armed Forces vessels must comply with State and EPA prohibitions,
except where the Secretary finds that compliance would not be in the
interest of national security (CWA section 312(n)(1)).
Section 1700.8 Discharges for Which No-discharge Zones Can Be
Established
After the final promulgation of this rule, no-discharge zones may
be established by State or EPA prohibition for any discharge identified
as not requiring control (listed in Sec. 1700.5).
After the final promulgation of this rule, no-discharge zones can
be established by EPA prohibition for any discharge identified as
requiring control (listed in Sec. 1700.4). States will not be preempted
from regulating or prohibiting these discharges until after the
Secretary identifies design, construction, installation, and operation
standards for MPCDs (i.e., after the third phase of UNDS is complete).
After the third phase is complete, States wanting
[[Page 45327]]
to establish a no-discharge zone by State prohibition for the
discharges listed in Sec. 1700.4 must use the procedures in this part.
Section 1700.9 No-discharge Zones by State Prohibition
For a State to establish a no-discharge zone to prohibit one or
more Armed Forces discharges from a specified waterbody or portion of a
waterbody, several determinations, as specified by section 312(n)(7)(A)
of the CWA, must be made. The State must determine that protection and
enhancement of the waters of interest require greater environmental
protection than provided by UNDS. EPA must determine that: (1) adequate
facilities for the safe and sanitary removal of the discharge
incidental to the normal operation of Armed Forces vessels are
reasonably available for the waters being protected; and (2) the
prohibition will not have the effect of discriminating against an Armed
Forces vessel by reason of the ownership or operation by the Federal
government, or the military function, of the vessel. In making its
determinations, EPA will consult with the Secretary on the adequacy of
the facilities and the operational impact of any prohibition on Armed
Forces vessels.
A State must provide EPA with enough information, as set forth in
Sec. 1700.9(a), to make the determinations listed above. This
information is consistent with the information required for
establishing a State prohibition for sewage discharges as provided in
40 CFR part 140. The required information must include:
(1) The discharge from Sec. 1700.4 or Sec. 1700.5 of this part to
be prohibited within the no-discharge zone. An area can be designated
as a no-discharge zone for more than one discharge, and this may be
done in a single request, but all information required must be
presented separately for each discharge.
(2) A detailed description of the waters, or portions thereof, to
be included in the prohibition. The description must include a map,
preferably a USGS topographic quadrant map, clearly marking the zone
boundaries by latitude and longitude.
(3) A determination that the protection and enhancement of the
waters described require greater environmental protection than provided
by existing Federal standards. The determination should present an
argument that the proposed area is in need of greater environmental
protection, and a rationale indicating the justification for the no-
discharge zone.
(4) A complete description of the facilities available for
collecting the discharge. The State must provide a map showing the
location(s) and provide a written location description of the
facilities, a demonstration that the facilities have the capacity to
manage the volume of discharge being prohibited in terms of both vessel
berthing and discharge reception, the schedule of operating hours of
the facilities, the draft requirements of the vessels that will be
required to use the facilities and the available water depth at the
facilities, and information showing that handling of the discharge at
the facilities is in conformance with Federal law. Information on Armed
Forces vessel population and usage of an area and on existing Armed
Forces collection facilities may be obtained from the Office of the
Chief of Naval Operations, Environmental Protection, Safety and
Occupational Health Division, N45, Washington DC, 20350-2000.
Information on the amount of discharge expected from Armed Forces
vessels may be obtained from the Technical Development Document
available in the docket for this rulemaking, or by contacting the
Office of the Chief of Naval Operations.
(5) Information on whether the prohibition would be applied to all
vessels in the area, and, if not, documentation of the technical or
environmental basis for applying the prohibition only to Armed Forces
vessels. Documentation on a technical or environmental basis for
applying the prohibition only to Armed Forces vessels must include an
analysis showing the relative contributions of the discharge from Armed
Forces and non-Armed Forces vessels, and a description of State efforts
to control the discharge from non-Armed Forces vessels. EPA is asking
for information on vessels other than those of the Armed Forces only in
order to determine whether there is discrimination against Armed Forces
vessels based on their Federal ownership or operation, or military
function, and not because it is approving the prohibition with respect
to these other vessels.
The first determination to be made by EPA--that adequate collection
facilities are reasonably available--will be based upon a finding that
the capacity of existing facilities is sufficient to handle the number
of vessels and the quantity of discharge produced.
The second determination to be made by EPA--that the prohibition
will not have the effect of discriminating against Armed Forces vessels
by reason of Federal ownership or operation, or military function--may
be based upon a showing that (1) the prohibition will be applied to all
vessels (not just vessels of the Armed Forces); or (2) any distinction
between Armed Forces vessels and other vessels is based on valid
environmental or technical reasons. For example, if a discharge is
produced only by Armed Forces vessels, this could be an acceptable
technical basis for such a distinction.
If EPA determines that adequate facilities are reasonably available
and that the prohibition would not discriminate against Armed Forces
vessels by reason of Federal ownership or operation, or military
function, the State may promulgate the no-discharge zone as a State
statute or regulation, which will be binding on the vessels of the
Armed Forces to which UNDS applies.
Section 1700.10 No-discharge Zones by EPA Prohibition
For EPA to establish a no-discharge zone to prohibit one or more
Armed Forces discharges from a specified waterbody or portion of a
waterbody, several determinations, as specified by section 312(n)(7)(B)
of the CWA, must be made. Although these determinations are similar to
those for a State prohibition, there are three differences: (1) EPA
rather than the State must determine that the protection and
enhancement of the specified waters require a prohibition; (2) EPA can
not disapprove an application for an EPA prohibition for the sole
reason that adequate collection facilities are not available; and (3)
EPA must establish the no-discharge zone by rulemaking. In making its
determinations, EPA will consult with the Secretary on the adequacy of
the facilities and the operational impact of any prohibition on Armed
Forces vessels.
For EPA to make the determinations required by the legislation and
establish the no-discharge zone, a State must provide an application to
EPA including the information set forth in Sec. 1700.10(a). The
information required in the application is consistent with the
application requirements for requesting an EPA prohibition for sewage
discharges as provided in 40 CFR part 140. The application must
include:
(1) The discharge from Sec. 1700.4 or Sec. 1700.5 of this part to
be prohibited within the no-discharge zone. An area can be designated
as a no-discharge zone for more than one discharge, and this may be
done in a single request, but all information required must be
presented separately for each discharge.
(2) A detailed description of the waters, or portions thereof, to
be included in the prohibition. The
[[Page 45328]]
description must include a map, preferably a USGS topographic quadrant
map, clearly marking the zone boundaries by latitude and longitude.
(3) A technical analysis demonstrating the need for protection and
enhancement of the waters of the no-discharge zone beyond those
protections provided by Federal regulations. The analysis must provide
specific information on why the discharge adversely impacts the zone
and how prohibition will protect the zone. In addition, the
justification should characterize any sensitive areas, such as aquatic
sanctuaries, fish-spawning and nursery areas, pristine areas, areas not
meeting water quality standards, drinking water intakes, and
recreational areas, that would justify an EPA prohibition. Less
technical justification as to why the proposed waters need special
protection will be required for an area where there is little or no
anticipated Armed Forces vessel presence than for an area where the
impact on Armed Forces vessels is considered likely or great.
(4) A complete description of the facilities available for
collecting the discharge. The State must provide a map showing the
location(s) and provide a written location description of the
facilities, a demonstration that the facilities have the capacity to
manage the volume of discharge being prohibited in terms of both vessel
berthing and discharge reception, the schedule of operating hours of
the facilities, the draft requirements of the vessels that will be
required to use the facilities and the available water depth at the
facilities, and information showing that handling of the discharge at
the facilities is in conformance with Federal law. Information on Armed
Forces vessel population and usage of an area and on existing Armed
Forces collection facilities may be obtained from the Office of the
Chief of Naval Operations, Environmental Protection, Safety and
Occupational Health Division, N45, Washington DC, 20350-2000.
Information on the amount of discharge expected from Armed Forces
vessels may be obtained from the Technical Development Document
available in the docket for this rulemaking, or by contacting the
Office of the Chief of Naval Operations.
(5) Information on whether a similar prohibition would be applied
to other vessels in the area, and, if not, documentation of the
technical or environmental basis for applying the prohibition only to
Armed Forces vessels. Documentation on a technical or environmental
basis for applying the prohibition only to Armed Forces vessels must
include an analysis showing the relative contributions of the discharge
from Armed Forces and non-Armed Forces vessels, and a description of
State efforts to control the discharge from non-Armed Forces vessels.
EPA is asking for information on vessels other than those of the Armed
Forces only in order to determine whether there is discrimination
against Armed Forces vessels based on their Federal ownership or
operation, or military function, and not because it is approving the
prohibition with respect to these other vessels.
In considering a no-discharge zone application under this section,
EPA must determine whether adequate facilities for the safe and
sanitary removal of the discharge are available. However, the statute
directs that EPA shall not disapprove an application under this section
for the sole reason that there are not adequate facilities. If adequate
facilities are not available, EPA may approve the application but delay
the effective date of the prohibition or place other conditions on the
prohibition that will provide an opportunity for adequate facilities to
become available. EPA may also approve the application without
facilities if it determines that the significance of the waters and the
potential impact of the discharge are of sufficient magnitude to
warrant the resulting constraints on Armed Forces vessels. Such a
finding would depend on many factors including the size, shape, and
location of the area, the nature and amount of the discharge, and the
types of Armed Forces vessels that use the area and their missions. EPA
will only make such a determination after careful consultation with the
Secretary.
EPA will make a determination regarding the need for additional
protection or enhancement of the waters; the availability of adequate
collection facilities for vessels of the Armed Forces, or whether, in
the absence of available facilities, a prohibition is warranted; and
whether the no-discharge zone discriminates against vessels of the
Armed Forces. If the EPA prohibition is approved, EPA will establish
the no-discharge zone by regulation. When the rule goes into effect, it
will be binding on the vessels of the Armed Forces to which UNDS
applies.
Section 1700.11 State Petition for Review of Determinations or
Standards
Section 312(n)(5)(D) of the CWA authorizes the Governor of any
State to submit a petition to the Administrator and the Secretary
requesting the re-evaluation of whether a discharge requires control,
as identified in this rule, or the re-evaluation of a performance
standard established for a discharge requiring control, as identified
in the second phase of UNDS. Until performance standards are
established in rulemaking, petitions can only be submitted for review
of determinations of whether the discharge requires control.
Section 1700.12 Petition Requirements
Section 312(n)(5)(D) of the CWA allows States to submit a petition
when there is new, significant information not considered previously
that could result in a change to a determination or standard after
consideration of the seven factors in the legislation. Any petition for
re-evaluation of a determination or standard must include:
(a) The discharge from Sec. 1700.4 or Sec. 1700.5 of this part for
which a change in determination is requested, or the performance
standard from Sec. 1700.14 of this part for which review is requested.
(b) The scientific and technical information on which the petition
is based. Because such a decision will have national implications, the
data must be sufficient to support a finding that it is appropriate to
change the determination or standard on a nation-wide basis. For this
reason, any petition must include or cite to the scientific and
technical information on which the petition is based. If the results of
field work are submitted, information should be included on the quality
assurance and quality control procedures used.
(c) A detailed explanation of how the technical information
presented affects the previous determination or standard. The
explanation shall take into account the seven factors identified in the
UNDS legislation and listed previously in this preamble.
Section 1700.13 Petition Decisions
Section 312(n)(5)(D) of the CWA requires the Administrator and the
Secretary to evaluate the petition and grant or deny the petition no
later than two years after receiving the petition. If the Administrator
and Secretary grant the petition, they will undertake rulemaking to
amend the necessary sections of part 1700.
D. Subpart D--MPCD Performance Standards
Section 1700.14 Marine Pollution Control Device (MPCD) Performance
Standards
This section is reserved. No performance standards are being
proposed in this rulemaking. MPCD
[[Page 45329]]
performance standards for discharges requiring control will be
promulgated by the Administrator and Secretary in Sec. 1700.14 of this
rule at the completion of the second phase of UNDS.
VII. Related Acts of Congress and Executive Orders
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), EPA and
DOD must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive
Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that
is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material
way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or
tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency
or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another
agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements,
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising
out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this proposed Phase I rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order
12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB review.
B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and Executive Order 12875
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub.
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 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, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, 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. Today's rule contains no Federal mandates
(under the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State,
local, or tribal governments or the private sector. The rule imposes no
enforceable duty on any State, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector. Thus today's rule is not subject to the requirements of
Sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
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, enabling officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with regulatory requirements. As this
rule would not impose any mandate on small governments, this rule is
not significant as that term applies under Section 203 of the UMRA.
This rule does not uniquely affect small governments because the
preemption that occurs after promulgation of this rule applies to both
large governments (States) as well as small governments. Further, the
preemption originates from the CWA rather than this rule. Finally, the
no-discharge zone procedures in the rule would apply only to States,
not small governments. Thus, this rule would not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments and Section 203 of the UMRA does not
apply. Nevertheless, as described elsewhere in this preamble and in the
record for the rule, DOD and EPA sought meaningful and timely input
from States and localities on this proposed rule.
Executive Order 12875 requires that, to the extent feasible and
permitted by law, no Federal agency shall promulgate any regulation
that is not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a
State, local, or tribal government, unless funds necessary to pay the
direct costs incurred by the State, local, or tribal government in
complying with the mandate are provided by the Federal government or
that the Agency provide OMB certain information about its outreach
efforts. As described above this rule contains no Federal mandates. It
imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local, or tribal government.
Thus, Executive Order 12875 does not apply to this rulemaking.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act, as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
EPA and DOD generally are required to prepare an initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis describing the impact of the regulatory action on
small entities as part of rulemaking. However, under section 605(b) of
the RFA, if the Administrator of EPA or the Secretary of DOD certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, EPA and DOD are not required to
prepare a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. The RFA recognizes three
kinds of small entities, and defines them as follows: (1) Small
governmental jurisdictions: any government of a district with a
population of less than 50,000; (2) Small business: any business which
is independently owned and operated and not dominant in its field, as
defined by the Small Business Administration regulations under the
Small Business Act; and (3) Small organization: any not for profit
enterprise that is independently owned and operated and not dominant in
its field. This proposed Phase I rule would address discharges from
vessels of the Armed Forces and proposes information collection
requirements on States that wish to establish no-discharge zones or
petition the Secretary of Defense and the Administrator to review a
determination regarding the need for a marine pollution control device
or a standard issued under Phase II of the rule. Small entities are not
affected by this rule. Therefore, pursuant to section 605(b) of the
RFA, the Administrator and the Secretary certify that this proposed
Phase I rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in this proposed Phase I
rule have been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
An Information Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by
EPA (ICR No.1791.02, amending the collection with OMB control # 2040-
0187) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail at OPPE
Regulatory Information Division; U.S.
[[Page 45330]]
Environmental Protection Agency (2137); 401 M St., S.W.; Washington, DC
20460, by email at [email protected], or by calling (202)
260-2740. A copy may also be downloaded off the internet at http://
www.epa.gov/icr.
There are three information collections associated with this rule,
each of which is required by statute in order for a State to obtain a
benefit. Each information collection is discussed separately below
(including authority and projected annual hour and cost burdens). The
total projected annual hour burden for all three information
collections is 958 hours; the projected annual cost burden is $31,871.
In order for a State to establish a No-discharge Zone (NDZ) by
State prohibition, EPA must make the following determinations: (i) that
adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal of the discharge
are reasonably available for the waters to which the prohibition would
apply; and (ii) that the prohibition will not have the effect of
discriminating against a vessel of the Armed Forces by reason of the
ownership or operation by the Federal Government, or the military
function, of the vessel (see CWA section 312(n)(7)(A), 33 U.S.C.
1322(n)(7)(A)). The State must provide EPA enough information to be
able to make those determinations. The specific information being
requested is listed in proposed 40 CFR 1700.9(a). The information
requested from the State will be used by EPA to make the determinations
it is required to make by law in order for a State prohibition to be
effective.
The projected annual hour burden for requests by a State to EPA to
make the determinations required for the State to establish a NDZ by
State prohibition is 717 hours (with an average of 179.25 burden hours
per response and an estimated 4 respondents per year). The projected
annual cost burden is $23,815 (with an average of $23,215 for labor, $0
for capital and start-up costs, $600 for operation and maintenance, and
$0 for the purchase of services).
In order for EPA to establish a NDZ by EPA prohibition (upon
application of a State), EPA must make the following determinations:
(i) that the protection and enhancement of the quality of the specified
waters require a prohibition of the discharge; (ii) that adequate
facilities for the safe and sanitary removal of the discharge are
reasonably available for the waters to which the prohibition would
apply; and (iii) that the prohibition will not have the effect of
discriminating against a vessel of the Armed Forces by reason of the
ownership or operation by the Federal Government, or the military
function, of the vessel (see CWA section 312(n)(7)(B), 33 U.S.C.
1322(n)(7)(B)). The State must provide EPA enough information to be
able to make those determinations. The specific information being
requested is listed in proposed 40 CFR 1700.10(a). The information
requested from the State will be used by EPA to make the determinations
it is required to make by law in order to establish a NDZ.
The projected annual hour burden for applications by a State to EPA
to establish a NDZ by EPA prohibition is 194.25 hours (with an average
of 194.25 burden hours per response and an estimated 1 respondent per
year). The projected annual cost burden is $6,478 (with an average of
$6,328 for labor, $0 for capital and start-up costs, $150 for operation
and maintenance, and $0 for the purchase of services).
The Governor of any State may request EPA and the Secretary of
Defense to review (i) a determination of whether an UNDS discharge
requires a control, or (ii) a standard of performance for a control on
an UNDS discharge, by submitting a petition which discusses significant
new scientific and technical information that could reasonably result
in a change to the determination or standard (see CWA section
312(n)(5)(D), 33 U.S.C. 1322(n)(5)(D)). The State must provide EPA this
information and a discussion of how the information is relevant to one
or more of the seven factors which EPA and the Secretary of Defense are
required to consider in making these determinations and standards (see
CWA section 312(n)(2)(B), 33 U.S.C. 1322(n)(2)(B)). These requirements
are listed in proposed 40 CFR 1700.12. The information requested from
the State will be used by EPA and the Secretary of Defense in order to
review any determinations and standards promulgated under UNDS.
The projected annual hour burden for petitions from a State to EPA
and DOD to review a determination or standard is 46.25 hours (with an
average of 46.25 burden hours per response and an estimated 1
respondent per year). The projected annual cost burden is $1,578 (with
an average of $1,428 for labor, $0 for capital and start-up costs, $150
for operation and maintenance, and $0 for the purchase of services).
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.
Comments are requested on the Agency's need for this information,
the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested
methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of
automated collection techniques. Send comments on the ICR to the
Director, OPPE Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (2137); 401 M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460; and to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, 725 17th St., NW, Washington, DC 20503, marked ``Attention:
Desk Officer for EPA.'' Include the ICR number in any correspondence.
Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30
and 60 days after August 25, 1998, a comment to OMB is best assured of
having its full effect if OMB receives it by September 24, 1998. The
final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on the
information collection requirements contained in this proposal.
E. Executive Order 13045
On April 23, 1997, the President issued Executive Order 13045
entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks (62 FR 19885). The Executive Order applies to any rule
that EPA determines (1) ``economically significant'' as defined under
Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the
Agency must evaluate the environmental or safety effects of the planned
rule on children; and explain why the planned regulation is preferable
to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives
considered by the Agency.
[[Page 45331]]
This proposed Phase I rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is not an economically significant regulatory action as
defined by Executive Order 12866.
F. Endangered Species Act
EPA and DOD have discussed the applicability of the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) to the three phases of the Uniform National Discharge
Standards rulemaking. As Phase I is a preliminary step, simply
identifying the discharges that will require control and the discharges
that will not require control, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
the National Marine Fisheries Service have agreed that the consultation
requirements of section 7 of the ESA do not apply to Phase I. Instead,
EPA and DOD will initiate consultation during Phase II of the UNDS
rulemaking, which will establish performance standards for the
discharges identified in Phase I as requiring control.
G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Under section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA), EPA and DOD are required to use voluntary
consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless to do so
would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, business practices,
etc.) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. Where available and potentially applicable voluntary consensus
standards are not used by EPA or DOD, the Act requires the Agency and
Department to provide Congress, through the Office of Management and
Budget, an explanation of the reasons for not using such standards.
EPA and DOD do not believe that this proposed Phase I rule
addresses any technical standards subject to the NTTAA. It simply
addresses which discharges would or would not require a MPCD. A
commenter who disagrees with this conclusion should indicate how the
notice is subject to the Act and identify any potentially applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
Appendix A to the Preamble--Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Other
Terms Used in This Document
Administrator--The Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
AFFF--Aqueous film-forming foam
CFR--U.S. Code of Federal Regulations
CPO--Chlorine-produced oxidants
CPP--Controllable pitch propeller
Clean Water Act--The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)
CWA--Clean Water Act
DOD--U.S. Department of Defense
EPA--U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ICCP--Impressed current cathodic protection
LCAC--Air-cushion landing craft
LCU--Utility landing craft
MPCD--Marine pollution control device
MSC--Military Sealift Command
n.m.--Nautical miles
No-discharge zone--An area of water into which one or more specified
discharges is prohibited, as established under procedures set forth
in proposed 40 CFR 1700.7 to 1700.10
NPDES--National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
OCM--Oil content monitor
OWS--Oil-water separator psi--Pounds per square inch
Secretary--The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Defense
TBT--Tributyl tin
USDA--U.S. Department of Agriculture
UNDS--Uniform national discharge standards
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 1700
Environmental protection, Armed Forces, Coastal zone, Vessels,
Water pollution control.
Dated: August 11, 1998.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency.
Dated: August 4, 1998.
Robert B. Pirie, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Installations and Environment).
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA and DOD propose to
establish a new chapter VII in title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations consisting at this time of part 1700 to read as follows:
CHAPTER VII--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE
PART 1700--UNIFORM NATIONAL DISCHARGE STANDARDS FOR VESSELS OF THE
ARMED FORCES
Subpart A--Scope
Sec.
1700.1 Applicability.
1700.2 Effect.
1700.3 Definitions.
Subpart B--Discharge Determinations
1700.4 Discharges requiring control.
1700.5 Discharges not requiring control.
Subpart C--Effect on States
1700.6 Effect on State and local statutes and regulations.
No-Discharge Zones
1700.7 No-discharge zones.
1700.8 Discharges for which no-discharge zones can be established.
1700.9 No-discharge zones by State prohibition.
1700.10 No-discharge zones by EPA prohibition.
State Petition for review
1700.11 State petition for review of determinations or standards.
1700.12 Petition requirements.
1700.13 Petition decisions.
Subpart D--Marine Pollution Control Device (MPCD) Performance Standards
1700.14 Marine Pollution Control Device (MPCD) Performance
Standards. [reserved]
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1322, 1361.
PART 1700--UNIFORM NATIONAL DISCHARGE STANDARDS FOR VESSELS OF THE
ARMED FORCES
Subpart A--Scope
Sec. 1700.1 Applicability.
(a) This part applies to the owners and operators of Armed Forces
vessels, except where the Secretary of Defense finds that compliance
with this part is not in the interest of the national security of the
United States. This part does not apply to vessels while they are under
construction, vessels in drydock, amphibious vehicles, or vessels under
the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation other than those
of the Coast Guard.
(b) This part also applies to States and political subdivisions of
States.
Sec. 1700.2 Effect.
(a) This part identifies those discharges, other than sewage,
incidental to the normal operation of Armed Forces vessels that require
control within the navigable waters of the United States and the waters
of the contiguous zone, and those discharges that do not require
control. Discharges requiring control are identified in Sec. 1700.4.
Discharges not requiring control are identified in Sec. 1700.5. Federal
standards of performance for each required Marine Pollution Control
Device are listed in Sec. 1700.14. This part is not applicable beyond
the contiguous zone.
(b) This part prohibits States and their political subdivisions
from adopting or enforcing State or local statutes or regulations
controlling the discharges from Armed Forces vessels listed in
Secs. 1700.4 and 1700.5 according to the timing provisions in
Sec. 1700.6, except to establish a no-discharge zone by State
prohibition in accordance with Sec. 1700.9, or to apply for a no-
discharge zone by
[[Page 45332]]
EPA prohibition in accordance with Sec. 1700.10. This part also
provides a mechanism for States to petition the Administrator and the
Secretary to review a determination of whether a discharge requires
control, or to review a Federal standard of performance for a Marine
Pollution Control Device, in accordance with Secs. 1700.11 through
1700.13.
Sec. 1700.3 Definitions.
Administrator means the Administrator of the United States
Environmental Protection Agency or that person's authorized
representative.
Armed Forces vessel means a vessel owned or operated by the United
States Department of Defense or the United States Coast Guard, other
than vessels that are time or voyage chartered by the Armed Forces,
vessels of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or vessels that are
memorials or museums.
Discharge incidental to the normal operation of a vessel means a
discharge, including, but not limited to: graywater, bilgewater,
cooling water, weather deck runoff, ballast water, oil water separator
effluent, and any other pollutant discharge from the operation of a
marine propulsion system, shipboard maneuvering system, crew
habitability system, or installed major equipment, such as an aircraft
carrier elevator or a catapult, or from a protective, preservative, or
absorptive application to the hull of a vessel; and a discharge in
connection with the testing, maintenance, and repair of any of the
aforementioned systems whenever the vessel is waterborne, including
pierside. A discharge incidental to normal operation does not include:
(1) Sewage;
(2) A discharge of rubbish, trash, or garbage;
(3) A discharge of air emissions resulting from the operation of a
vessel propulsion system, motor driven equipment, or incinerator;
(4) A discharge that requires a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit under the Clean Water Act; or
(5) A discharge containing source, special nuclear, or byproduct
materials regulated by the Atomic Energy Act.
Environmental Protection Agency, abbreviated EPA, means the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
Marine Pollution Control Device, abbreviated MPCD, means any
equipment or management practice installed or used on an Armed Forces
vessel that is designed to receive, retain, treat, control, or
discharge a discharge incidental to the normal operation of a vessel,
and that is determined by the Administrator and Secretary to be the
most effective equipment or management practice to reduce the
environmental impacts of the discharge consistent with the
considerations in Clean Water Act section 312(n)(2)(B).
No-discharge zone means an area of specified waters established
pursuant to this regulation into which one or more specified discharges
incidental to the normal operation of Armed Forces vessels, whether
treated or untreated, are prohibited.
Secretary means the Secretary of the United States Department of
Defense or that person's authorized representative.
United States includes the States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa,
the Canal Zone, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.
Vessel includes every description of watercraft or other artificial
contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of
transportation on navigable waters of the United States or waters of
the contiguous zone, but does not include amphibious vehicles.
Subpart B--Discharge Determinations
Sec. 1700.4 Discharges requiring control.
For the following discharges incidental to the normal operation of
Armed Forces vessels, the Administrator and the Secretary have
determined that it is reasonable and practicable to require use of a
Marine Pollution Control Device for at least one class of vessel to
mitigate adverse impacts on the marine environment:
(a) Aqueous Film-Forming Foam: the firefighting foam and seawater
mixture discharged during training, testing, or maintenance operations.
(b) Catapult Water Brake Tank & Post-Launch Retraction Exhaust: the
oily water skimmed from the water tank used to stop the forward motion
of an aircraft carrier catapult, and the condensed steam discharged
when the catapult is retracted.
(c) Chain Locker Effluent: the accumulated precipitation and
seawater that is emptied from the compartment used to store the
vessel's anchor chain.
(d) Clean Ballast: the seawater taken into, and discharged from,
dedicated ballast tanks to maintain the stability of the vessel and to
adjust the buoyancy of submarines.
(e) Compensated Fuel Ballast: the seawater taken into, and
discharged from, ballast tanks designed to hold both ballast water and
fuel to maintain the stability of the vessel.
(f) Controllable Pitch Propeller Hydraulic Fluid: the hydraulic
fluid that discharges into the surrounding seawater from propeller
seals as part of normal operation, and the hydraulic fluid released
during routine maintenance of the propellers.
(g) Deck Runoff: the precipitation, washdowns, and seawater falling
on the weather deck of a vessel and discharged overboard through deck
openings.
(h) Dirty Ballast: the seawater taken into, and discharged from,
empty fuel tanks to maintain the stability of the vessel.
(i) Distillation and Reverse Osmosis Brine: the concentrated
seawater (brine) produced as a byproduct of the processes used to
generate freshwater from seawater.
(j) Elevator Pit Effluent: the liquid that accumulates in, and is
discharged from, the sumps of elevator wells on vessels.
(k) Firemain Systems: the seawater pumped through the firemain
system for firemain testing, maintenance, and training, and to supply
water for the operation of certain vessel systems.
(l) Gas Turbine Water Wash: the water released from washing gas
turbine components.
(m) Graywater: galley, bath, and shower water, as well as
wastewater from lavatory sinks, laundry, interior deck drains, water
fountains, and shop sinks.
(n) Hull Coating Leachate: the constituents that leach, dissolve,
ablate, or erode from the paint on the hull into the surrounding
seawater.
(o) Motor Gasoline and Compensating Discharge: the seawater taken
into, and discharged from, motor gasoline tanks to eliminate free space
where vapors could accumulate.
(p) Non-oily machinery wastewater: the combined wastewater from the
operation of distilling plants, water chillers, valve packings, water
piping, low- and high-pressure air compressors, and propulsion engine
jacket coolers.
(q) Photographic Laboratory Drains: the laboratory wastewater
resulting from processing of photographic film.
(r) Seawater Cooling Overboard Discharge: the discharge of seawater
from a dedicated system that provides noncontact cooling water for
other vessel systems.
(s) Seawater Piping Biofouling Prevention: the discharge of
seawater containing additives used to prevent the growth and attachment
of biofouling organisms in dedicated seawater cooling systems on
selected vessels.
(t) Small Boat Engine Wet Exhaust: the seawater that is mixed and
discharged with small boat propulsion engine exhaust to cool the
exhaust and quiet the engine.
[[Page 45333]]
(u) Sonar Dome Discharge: the leaching of antifoulant materials
into the surrounding seawater and the release of seawater or freshwater
retained within the sonar dome.
(v) Submarine Bilgewater: the wastewater from a variety of sources
that accumulates in the lowest part of the submarine (i.e., bilge).
(w) Surface Vessel Bilgewater/Oil-Water Separator Effluent: the
wastewater from a variety of sources that accumulates in the lowest
part of the vessel (the bilge), and the effluent produced when the
wastewater is processed by an oil water separator.
(x) Underwater Ship Husbandry: the materials discharged during the
inspection, maintenance, cleaning, and repair of hulls performed while
the vessel is waterborne.
(y) Welldeck Discharges: the water that accumulates from seawater
flooding of the docking well (welldeck) of a vessel used to transport,
load, and unload amphibious vessels, and from maintenance and
freshwater washings of the welldeck and equipment and vessels stored in
the welldeck.
Sec. 1700.5 Discharges not requiring control.
For the following discharges incidental to the normal operation of
Armed Forces vessels, the Administrator and the Secretary have
determined that it is not reasonable or practicable to require use of a
Marine Pollution Control Device to mitigate adverse impacts on the
marine environment:
(a) Boiler Blowdown: the water and steam discharged when a steam
boiler is blown down, or when a steam safety valve is tested.
(b) Catapult Wet Accumulator Discharge: the water discharged from a
catapult wet accumulator, which stores a steam/water mixture for
launching aircraft from an aircraft carrier.
(c) Cathodic Protection: the constituents released into surrounding
water from sacrificial anode or impressed current cathodic hull
corrosion protection systems.
(d) Freshwater Lay-up: the potable water that is discharged from
the seawater cooling system while the vessel is in port, and the
cooling system is in lay-up mode (a standby mode where seawater in the
system is replaced with potable water for corrosion protection).
(e) Mine Countermeasures Equipment Lubrication: the constituents
released into the surrounding seawater by erosion or dissolution from
lubricated mine countermeasures equipment when the equipment is
deployed and towed.
(f) Portable Damage Control Drain Pump Discharge: the seawater
pumped through the portable damage control drain pump and discharged
overboard during testing, maintenance, and training activities.
(g) Portable Damage Control Drain Pump Wet Exhaust: the seawater
mixed and discharged with portable damage control drain pump exhaust to
cool the exhaust and quiet the engine.
(h) Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Condensate: the drainage of
condensed moisture from air conditioning units, refrigerators,
freezers, and refrigerated spaces.
(i) Rudder Bearing Lubrication: the oil or grease released by the
erosion or dissolution from lubricated bearings that support the rudder
and allow it to turn freely.
(j) Steam Condensate: the condensed steam discharged from a vessel
in port, where the steam originates from port facilities.
(k) Stern Tube Seals and Underwater Bearing Lubrication: the
seawater pumped through stern tube seals and underwater bearings to
lubricate and cool them during normal operation.
(l) Submarine Countermeasures Set Acoustic Launcher Discharge: the
seawater that is mixed with acoustic countermeasure device propulsion
gas following a countermeasure launch that is then exchanged with
surrounding seawater, or partially drained when the launch assembly is
removed from the submarine for maintenance.
(m) Submarine Emergency Diesel Engine Wet Exhaust: the seawater
that is mixed and discharged with submarine emergency diesel engine
exhaust to cool the exhaust and quiet the engine.
(n) Submarine Outboard Equipment Grease and External Hydraulics:
the grease released into the surrounding seawater by erosion or
dissolution from submarine equipment exposed to seawater.
Subpart C--Effect on States
Sec. 1700.6 Effect on State and local statutes and regulations.
(a) After the effective date of a final rule determining that it is
not reasonable and practicable to require use of a Marine Pollution
Control Device regarding a particular discharge incidental to the
normal operation of an Armed Forces vessel, States or political
subdivisions of States may not adopt or enforce any State or local
statute or regulation, including issuance or enforcement of permits
under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, controlling
that discharge, except that States may establish a no-discharge zone by
State prohibition (as provided in Sec. 1700.9), or apply for a no-
discharge zone by EPA prohibition (as provided in Sec. 1700.10).
(b)(1) After the effective date of a final rule determining that it
is reasonable and practicable to require use of a Marine Pollution
Control Device regarding a particular discharge incidental to the
normal operation of an Armed Forces vessel, States may apply for a no-
discharge zone by EPA prohibition (as provided in Sec. 1700.10) for
that discharge.
(2) After the effective date of a final rule promulgated by the
Secretary governing the design, construction, installation, and use of
a Marine Pollution Control Device for a discharge listed in
Sec. 1700.4, States or political subdivisions of States may not adopt
or enforce any State or local statute or regulation, including issuance
or enforcement of permits under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System, controlling that discharge except that States may
establish a no-discharge zone by State prohibition (as provided in
Sec. 1700.9), or apply for a no-discharge zone by EPA prohibition (as
provided in Sec. 1700.10).
(c) The Governor of any State may submit a petition requesting that
the Administrator and Secretary review a determination of whether a
Marine Pollution Control Device is required for any discharge listed in
Sec. 1700.4 or Sec. 1700.5, or review a Federal standard of performance
for a Marine Pollution Control Device.
No-Discharge Zones
Sec. 1700.7 No-discharge zones.
For this part, a no-discharge zone is a waterbody, or portion
thereof, where one or more discharges incidental to the normal
operation of Armed Forces vessels, whether treated or not, are
prohibited. A no-discharge zone is established either by State
prohibition using the procedures in Sec. 1700.9, or by EPA prohibition,
upon application of a State, using the procedures in Sec. 1700.10.
Sec. 1700.8 Discharges for which no-discharge zones can be
established.
(a) A no-discharge zone may be established by State prohibition for
any discharge listed in Sec. 1700.4 or Sec. 1700.5 following the
procedures in Sec. 1700.9. A no-discharge zone established by a State
using these procedures may apply only to those discharges that have
been preempted from other State or local regulation pursuant to
Sec. 1700.6.
(b) A no-discharge zone may be established by EPA prohibition for
any discharge listed in Sec. 1700.4 or Sec. 1700.5 following the
procedures in Sec. 1700.10.
[[Page 45334]]
Sec. 1700.9 No-discharge zones by State prohibition.
(a) A State seeking to establish a no-discharge zone by State
prohibition must send to the Administrator the following information:
(1) The discharge from Sec. 1700.4 or Sec. 1700.5 to be prohibited
within the no-discharge zone.
(2) A detailed description of the waterbody, or portions thereof,
to be included in the prohibition. The description must include a map,
preferably a USGS topographic quadrant map, clearly marking the zone
boundaries by latitude and longitude.
(3) A determination that the protection and enhancement of the
waters described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section require greater
environmental protection than provided by existing Federal standards.
(4) A complete description of the facilities reasonably available
for collecting the discharge including:
(i) A map showing their location(s) and a written location
description.
(ii) A demonstration that the facilities have the capacity and
capability to provide safe and sanitary removal of the volume of
discharge being prohibited in terms of both vessel berthing and
discharge reception.
(iii) The schedule of operating hours of the facilities.
(iv) The draft requirements of the vessel(s) that will be required
to use the facilities and the available water depth at the facilities.
(v) Information showing that handling of the discharge at the
facilities is in conformance with Federal law.
(5) Information on whether vessels other than those of the Armed
Forces are subject to the same type of prohibition. If the State is not
applying the prohibition to all vessels in the area, the State must
demonstrate the technical or environmental basis for applying the
prohibition only to Armed Forces vessels. The following information
must be included in the technical or environmental basis for treating
Armed Forces vessels differently:
(i) An analysis showing the relative contributions of the discharge
from Armed Forces and non-Armed Forces vessels.
(ii) A description of State efforts to control the discharge from
non-Armed Forces vessels.
(b) The information provided under paragraph (a) of this section
must be sufficient to enable EPA to make the two determinations listed
below. Prior to making these determinations, EPA will consult with the
Secretary on the adequacy of the facilities and the operational impact
of any prohibition on Armed Forces vessels.
(1) Adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal of the
discharge are reasonably available for the specified waters.
(2) The prohibition will not have the effect of discriminating
against vessels of the Armed Forces by reason of the ownership or
operation by the Federal Government, or the military function, of the
vessels.
(c) EPA will notify the State in writing of the result of the
determinations under paragraph (b) of this section, and will provide a
written explanation of any negative determinations. A no-discharge zone
established by State prohibition will not go into effect until EPA
determines that the conditions of paragraph (b) of this section have
been met.
Sec. 1700.10 No-discharge zones by EPA prohibition.
(a) A State requesting EPA to establish a no-discharge zone must
send to the Administrator an application containing the following
information:
(1) The discharge from Sec. 1700.4 or Sec. 1700.5 to be prohibited
within the no-discharge zone.
(2) A detailed description of the waterbody, or portions thereof,
to be included in the prohibition. The description must include a map,
preferably a USGS topographic quadrant map, clearly marking the zone
boundaries by latitude and longitude.
(3) A technical analysis showing why protection and enhancement of
the waters described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section require a
prohibition of the discharge. The analysis must provide specific
information on why the discharge adversely impacts the zone and how
prohibition will protect the zone. In addition, the analysis should
characterize any sensitive areas, such as aquatic sanctuaries, fish-
spawning and nursery areas, pristine areas, areas not meeting water
quality standards, drinking water intakes, and recreational areas.
(4) A complete description of the facilities reasonably available
for collecting the discharge including:
(i) A map showing their location(s) and a written location
description.
(ii) A demonstration that the facilities have the capacity and
capability to provide safe and sanitary removal of the volume of
discharge being prohibited in terms of both vessel berthing and
discharge reception.
(iii) The schedule of operating hours of the facilities.
(iv) The draft requirements of the vessel(s) that will be required
to use the facilities and the available water depth at the facilities.
(v) Information showing that handling of the discharge at the
facilities is in conformance with Federal law.
(5) Information on whether vessels other than those of the Armed
Forces are subject to the same type of prohibition. If the State is not
applying the prohibition to all vessels in the area, the State must
demonstrate the technical or environmental basis for applying the
prohibition only to Armed Forces vessels. The following information
must be included in the technical or environmental basis for treating
Armed Forces vessels differently:
(i) An analysis showing the relative contributions of the discharge
from Armed Forces and non-Armed Forces vessels.
(ii) A description of State efforts to control the discharge from
non-Armed Forces vessels.
(b) The information provided under paragraph (a) of this section
must be sufficient to enable EPA to make the three determinations
listed below. Prior to making these determinations, EPA will consult
with the Secretary on the adequacy of the facilities and the
operational impact of the prohibition on Armed Forces vessels.
(1) The protection and enhancement of the specified waters require
a prohibition of the discharge.
(2) Adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal of the
discharge are reasonably available for the specified waters.
(3) The prohibition will not have the effect of discriminating
against vessels of the Armed Forces by reason of the ownership or
operation by the Federal Government, or the military function, or the
vessels.
(c) If the three conditions in paragraph (b) of this section are
met, EPA will by regulation establish the no-discharge zone. If the
conditions in paragraphs (b)(1) and (3) of this section are met, but
the condition in paragraph (b)(2) of this section is not met, EPA may
establish the no-discharge zone if it determines that the significance
of the waters and the potential impact of the discharge are of
sufficient magnitude to warrant any resulting constraints on Armed
Forces vessels.
(d) EPA will notify the State of its decision on the no-discharge
zone application in writing. If EPA approves the no-discharge zone
application, EPA will by regulation establish the no-discharge zone by
modification to this part. A no-discharge zone established by EPA
prohibition will not go into effect until the effective date of the
regulation.
[[Page 45335]]
State Petition for Review
Sec. 1700.11 State petition for review of determinations or standards.
The Governor of any State may submit a petition requesting that the
Administrator and Secretary review a determination of whether a Marine
Pollution Control Device is required for any discharge listed in
Sec. 1700.4 or Sec. 1700.5, or review a Federal standard of performance
for a Marine Pollution Control Device. A State may submit a petition
only where there is new, significant information not considered
previously by the Administrator and Secretary.
Sec. 1700.12 Petition requirements.
A petition for review of a determination or standard must include:
(a) The discharge from Sec. 1700.4 or Sec. 1700.5 for which a
change in determination is requested, or the performance standard from
Sec. 1700.14 for which review is requested.
(b) The scientific and technical information on which the petition
is based.
(c) A detailed explanation of why the State believes that
consideration of the new information should result in a change to the
determination or the standard on a nationwide basis, and an explanation
of how the new information is relevant to one or more of the following
factors:
(1) The nature of the discharge.
(2) The environmental effects of the discharge.
(3) The practicability of using a Marine Pollution Control Device.
(4) The effect that installation or use of the Marine Pollution
Control Device would have on the operation or operational capability of
the vessel.
(5) Applicable United States law.
(6) Applicable international standards.
(7) The economic costs of the installation and use of the Marine
Pollution Control Device.
Sec. 1700.13 Petition decisions.
The Administrator and the Secretary will evaluate the petition and
grant or deny the petition no later than two years after the date of
receipt of the petition. If the Administrator and Secretary grant the
petition, they will undertake rulemaking to amend this part. If the
Administrator and Secretary deny the petition, they will provide the
State with a written explanation of why they denied it.
Subpart D--Marine Pollution Control Device (MPCD) Performance
Standards
Sec. 1700.14 Marine Pollution Control Device (MPCD) Performance
Standards. [Reserved.]
[FR Doc. 98-22533 Filed 8-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P