[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 14 (Monday, January 22, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6607-6610]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-1829]



[[Page 6607]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-6935-7]


Notice of Proposed NPDES General Permit for Discharges From the 
Coastal Subcategory of the Oil and Gas Extraction Point Source Category 
in Texas (TXG330000)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of draft NPDES general permit.

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

SUMMARY: EPA Region 6 is proposing to reissue General NPDES Permit No. 
TXG330000 regulating discharges from oil and gas wells in the Coastal 
Subcategory of the Oil and Gas Extraction Point Source Category in 
Texas. Most of the requirements in this proposed permit are the same as 
in the previous permit having an effective date of October 21, 1993 and 
expiration date of October 21, 1998. The main differences between the 
previous permit and this proposed permit are: discharges from New 
Sources are authorized by this permit, there are changes in the 
requirements for treated waste water from drilling fluids/cuttings and 
dewatering effluent, and changes in the requirements for well 
treatment, completion and workover fluids. These permit requirement 
changes are the result of incorporating additional or more stringent 
requirements contained in effluent limitations guidelines for the 
Coastal Subcategory contained in 40 CFR part 435, subpart D.
    Additionally, EPA Region 6 is proposing to reissue NPDES General 
Permit TXG290000, regulating produced water and produced sand 
discharges to coastal water in Texas, and combine that permit with 
NPDES General Permit TXG330000. Permit No. TXG330000 previously 
regulated all discharges from wells in the Coastal Subcategory of the 
Oil and Gas Extraction Point Source Category, except for produced water 
and produced sand. Combining these two permits will, thereby, allow 
regulation of all discharges from Coastal Subcategory wells in one 
permit. General Permit TXG290000 also regulated the discharge of 
produced water from wells in the Stripper and Offshore Subcategories 
which discharged into coastal waters of Texas. Regulation of that 
produced water will also be incorporated into General Permit TXG330000.

DATES: Comments on this proposed permit must be submitted by March 23, 
2001.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Diane Smith, EPA Region 6, 1445 
Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-7191. Copies 
of the complete fact sheet and proposed permit may be obtained from Ms. 
Smith. The fact sheet and proposed permit can also be found on the 
Internet at http://www.epa.gov/earth1r6/6wq/6wq.htm. In addition, the 
current administrative record on the proposal is available for 
examination at the Region's Dallas offices during normal working hours 
after providing Ms. Smith 24 hours advanced notice.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Regulated categories and entities include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Category                  Examples of regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry...............................  Operators of oil and gas wells
                                          in the Coastal Subcategory of
                                          the Oil and Gas Extraction
                                          Point Source Category.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware 
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities 
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether 
your (facility, company, business, organization, etc.) is regulated by 
this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in 
part I, section A.1 of this permit. If you have questions regarding the 
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person 
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Section 301(a) of the Clean Water Act (CWA or the Act), 33 U.S.C. 
1311(a), makes it unlawful to discharge pollutants to waters of the 
United States in the absence of authorizing permits. CWA section 402, 
33 U.S.C. 1342, authorizes EPA to issue National Discharge Elimination 
System (NPDES) permits allowing discharges on condition they will meet 
certain requirements, including CWA sections 301, 304, and 401 (33 
U.S.C. 1331, 1314 and 1341). Those statutory provisions require that 
NPDES permits include effluent limitations requiring that authorized 
discharges: (1) Meet standards reflecting levels of technological 
capability, (2) comply with EPA-approved state water quality standards 
and (3) comply with other state requirements adopted under authority 
retained by states under CWA 510, 33 U.S.C. 1370.
    Two types of technology-based effluent limitations must be included 
in the permit proposed here. With regard to conventional pollutants, 
i.e., pH, BOD, oil and grease, TSS and fecal coliform, CWA section 
301(b)(1)(E) requires effluent limitations based on ``best conventional 
pollution control technology'' (BCT). With regard to nonconventional 
and toxic pollutants, CWA section 301(b)(2)(A), (C), and (D) require 
effluent limitations based on ``best available pollution control 
technology economically achievable'' (BAT), a standard which generally 
represents the best performing existing technology in an industrial 
category or subcategory. BAT and BCT effluent limitations may never be 
less stringent than corresponding effluent limitations based on best 
practicable control technology (BPT), a standard applicable to similar 
discharges prior to March 31, 1989 under CWA 301(b)(1)(A).
    National guidelines establishing BCT, BAT and New Source 
Performance Standards have been promulgated for discharges from 
facilities in the Coastal Subcategory of the Oil and Gas Extraction 
Point Source Category. The final rule for these guidelines was 
published in the Federal Register at 61 FR 66086 on December 16, 1996. 
These guidelines can also be found at 40 CFR part 435, subpart D. The 
current proposal is to reissue NPDES General Permit TXG330000 which was 
issued in the Federal Register at 58 FR 49126 with an effective date of 
October 21, 1993, and an expiration date of October 21, 1998. 
Additionally, NPDES General Permit TXG290000, regulating produced water 
and produced sand discharges to coastal waters in Texas, will be 
reissued and combined with NPDES General Permit TXG330000. General 
Permit TXG290000 had an effective date of February 8, 1995 and an 
expiration date of February 7, 2000. Since these expired permits were 
issued before the BCT and BAT guidelines were promulgated, BCT and BAT 
requirements were based on

[[Page 6608]]

best professional judgement. The current proposed permit incorporates 
the BCT, BAT and New Source Performance Standards from 40 CFR part 435, 
subpart D.

Changes From the Expiring Permit

    Although the 40 CFR part 435, subpart D, requirements are mostly 
the same as those in the expiring permits which were derived using best 
professional judgement, requirements for several waste streams are more 
stringent. The proposed permit, therefore, incorporates those more 
stringent guidelines limits. Specifically, the discharge of well 
treatment, completion and workover fluids is now prohibited. In 
addition, the discharge of dewatering effluent from reserve pits which 
received drilling fluids and/or drill cuttings after January 15, 1997, 
is prohibited. Since the guidelines do not address reserve pits which 
did not receive drilling fluids and/or drill cuttings after January 15, 
1997, the limits in the previous permit apply, with one exception. In 
the previous permit, the No Free Oil limit was to be measured by a 
visual sheen test with the option of using the static sheen test. Since 
the guidelines require the use of the static sheen test for all No Free 
Oil limits except for deck drainage, the No Free Oil requirement for 
the reserve pit dewatering effluent discharges and the formation test 
fluid discharges has been changed to use of the static sheen test only. 
The proposed permit also authorizes discharges from new source 
facilities, whereas, the expiring permit does not.

Summary of Proposed Permit Limitations

    A. Drilling fluids--No Discharge.
    B. Drill cuttings--No Discharge.
    C. Produced water--No Discharge.
    Exception: Facilities in the Stripper Subcategory located east of 
the 98th meridian whose produced water comes from the Carrizo/Wilcox, 
Reklaw or Bartosh formations in Texas and whose produced water does not 
exceed 3000 mg/l Total Dissolved Solids shall meet the following 
limits: 25 mg/l monthly average and 35 mg/l daily maximum for oil and 
grease.
    D. Produced sand--No discharge.
    E. Dewatering effluent--No Discharge.
    Exception: Dewatering effluent from reserve pits which have not 
received drilling fluids and/or drill cuttings since January 15, 1997, 
shall meet the following limits:

Free oil--No Discharge as determined by the static sheen test
Oil and grease--15 mg/l daily maximum
TSS--50 mg/l daily maximum
TDS--3000 mg/l daily maximum, except for discharges to tidally 
influenced watercourses if the TDS of the treated reserve pit effluent 
does not exceed the TDS concentration of the receiving water at the 
point of discharge at the time of discharge.
COD--200 mg/l daily maximum
pH-6.0-9.0 Std. Units
Chlorides--500 mg/l daily maximum (discharges to inland areas) and 1000 
mg/l daily maximum (discharges to tidally influenced water courses). 
Chloride concentration may exceed 1000 mg/l in tidally influenced 
watercourses (downstream of the upper limit of saltwater intrusion) if 
the chloride concentration of the treated reserve pit effluent does not 
exceed the chloride concentration of the receiving water at the point 
of discharge at the time of discharge.
Hazardous metals--The discharge must not contain concentrations of the 
substances classified as ``hazardous metals'' in excess of the levels 
allowed by TAC 319.21)

    F. Deck drainage--No discharge of free oil as determined by the 
presence of a film or sheen upon or a discoloration of the surface of 
the receiving water (visual sheen).
    G. Formation test fluids--No Discharge except to bays and estuaries 
where no chloride standards have been established.
    Where discharges are allowed:

Free oil--No Discharge as determined by the static sheen test.
pH-6.0-9.0 Std. Units

    H. Well treatment, completion and workover fluids--No Discharge.
    I. Sanitary waste--

No floating solids
BOD5-45 mg/l daily maximum
    TSS-45 mg/l daily maximum
Fecal coliform--200/100 ml daily maximum

    J. Domestic waste--No Discharge of floating solids or garbage or 
foam.
    K. Miscellaneous discharges: Desalinization unit discharge; blowout 
preventer fluid;uncontaminated ballast and bilge water; mud, cuttings 
and cement at the sea floor; boiler blowdown; excess cement slurry; 
diatomaceous earth filter media; uncontaminated water--Discharge of 
free oil is prohibited as determined by a visual sheen on the surface 
of the receiving water. Discharge is authorized only at times when 
visual sheen observation is possible. Discharge may occur at any time 
if the operator uses the static sheen method for detecting free oil.

Other Legal Requirements

A. State Certification

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

B. National Environmental Policy Act

    EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 6, subpart F, which implement the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C 4331, et 
seq., provide the procedures for carrying out the NEPA environmental 
review process for the issuance of new source NPDES permits. The 
purpose of this review process is to determine if any significant 
environmental impacts are anticipated by issuance of NPDES permits 
authorizing discharges from new sources. In order to make this 
determination, EPA has prepared an environmental assessment in 
accordance with 40 CFR 6.604. Based on this environmental assessment 
document, EPA has determined that there will be no significant impact 
as the result of issuing today's proposed permit adding coverage of 
discharges from new sources. EPA is, therefore, proposing to issue a 
Finding of No Significant Impact in accordance with 40 CFR part 6 
procedures concerning adding new source coverage to this general 
permit.

C. Endangered Species Act

    When EPA issued the previous Permit TXG330000, effective October 
21, 1993, covering existing sources, but not New Sources, the United 
States Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with EPA's finding that the 
permit was unlikely to adversely affect any threatened or endangered 
species or its critical habitat. When EPA issued Permit TXG290000, 
effective February 8, 1995, the Service also concurred with EPA's 
finding that the permit was unlikely to adversely affect any threatened 
or endangered species or its critical habitat. As discussed previously 
in this

[[Page 6609]]

Fact Sheet, the proposed permit requirements are the same as, and in 
some instances more stringent than, those in the previous permit. 
Furthermore, the proposed limits are sufficiently stringent to assure 
state water quality standards will be met. The effluent limitations 
established in these permits ensure protection of aquatic life and 
maintenance of the receiving water as an aquatic habitat. The Region, 
therefore, finds that adding New Source coverage to the permit is also 
unlikely to adversely affect any threatened or endangered species or 
its critical habitat. EPA is seeking written concurrence from the 
United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine 
Fisheries Service on this determination.

D. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act

    The 1996 amendments to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation 
and Management Act set forth a new mandate to identify and protect 
important marine and anadromous fisheries habitats. The purpose of 
addressing habitat in this act is to further the goal of maintaining 
sustainable fisheries. Guidance and procedures for implementing these 
amendments are contained in National Marine Fisheries Service 
regulations (50 CFR 600.805-600.930). These regulations specify that 
any Federal agency that authorizes or proposes to authorize an activity 
which would adversely affect an Essential Fish Habitat is subject to 
the consultation provisions of the Manguson-Stevens Act. The Texas 
Coastal Subcategory areas covered by this general permit include 
Essential Fish Habitat designated under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
    Based on the prohibitions and limitations and other requirements 
contained in this proposed general permit, as well as the Essential 
Fish Habitat Assessment prepared for this permit reissuance, the Region 
finds that adoption of the proposed permit is unlikely to adversely 
affect Essential Fish Habitat. EPA is seeking written concurrence from 
the National Marine Fisheries Service on this determination.

E. Coastal Zone Management Act

    The Coastal Zone Management Act and its implementing regulations 
(15 CFR part 930) require that any Federally licensed or permitted 
activity affecting the coastal zone of a state with an approved Coastal 
Zone management Program be consistent with that Program. EPA has 
concluded, based on the conditions, limitations and prohibitions of 
this permit that the discharges associated with this proposed permit 
are consistent with the Texas Coastal Management Program goals and 
policies. EPA has requested a consistency determination from the Texas 
Coastal Coordination Council.

F. Historic Preservation Act

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

G. Economic Impact (Executive Order 12866)

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to 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 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; create a serious 
inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by 
another agency; materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, 
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of 
recipients thereof; or raise novel legal or policy issues arising out 
of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set 
forth in the Executive Order. EPA has determined that this general 
permit is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of 
Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to formal OMB review 
prior to proposal.

H. Paperwork Reduction Act

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

I. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., requires that 
EPA prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for regulations that have 
a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. As 
discussed below, the permit being proposed to be reissued is not a 
``rule'' subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act. EPA prepared a 
regulatory flexibility analysis, however, on the promulgation of the 
Coastal Subcategory guidelines on which many of the permit's effluent 
limitations are based. That analysis shows that compliance with the 
permit requirements will not result in a significant impact on 
dischargers, including small businesses, covered by these permits. EPA 
Region 6 therefore concludes that the permits proposed today will not 
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

J. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

[[Page 6610]]

governments'' is defined by reference to the definition of ``small 
governmental jurisdiction'' under the RFA. (See UMRA section 102(1), 
referencing 2 U.S.C. 658, which references section 601(5) of the RFA.) 
``Small governmental jurisdiction'' means governments of cities, 
counties, towns, etc., with a population of less than 50,000, unless 
the agency establishes an alternative definition. The proposed permit 
issuance also would not uniquely affect small governments because 
compliance with the proposed permit conditions affects small 
governments in the same manner as any other entities seeking coverage 
under the permit.

    Dated: January 8, 2001.
Sam Becker,
Acting Director, Water Quality Protection Division, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 01-1829 Filed 1-19-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P