Petro-Refining Guidance June-1985 PDF

United States Industrial Technology June 1985
Environmental Protection Division

Agen~ WH-552
Washington, DC 20460
Wner · .
,.,EPA Guide for the

Application of Effluent
Limitations Guidelines
for the
Petroleum Refining Industry

GUIDE FOR THE APPLICATION
OF
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
FOR THE
PETROLEUM REFINING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
u.s. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Water Regulations and Standards
Industrial Technology Division
Washington, D.C. 20460
June 1g85
FOREWARD
The purpose of this document is to provide a consolidated

source for current effluent limitation guidelines (ELG) for
the petroleum refining industry as of June 1985 and to explain
the present status and applicability of the Best Available
Technology (BAT) and Best Conventional Technology (BCT) levels
of control for direct discharging petroleum refineries. Its
use will hopefully provide for uniform application of the
petroleum refining ELG•s in the manner intended and supported
by the record.
The final BAT and BCT regulations that were promulgated
in June 1985 are dependent upon a series of rulemaking
processes that commenced with the promulgation of Best
Practicable Technology (BPT) in 1974. The procedures for
applying the petroleum refining regulations for calculation
of water discharge permit limitations is somewhat involved
compared to the ELG•s for other industries. The procedure
has become more intricate with the final promulgation of BCT,
revised BAT, and effluent limitations for storm water runoff
in June 1985.
This document is structured to guide the permit writer
and permit applicant through the procedure to identify infar-
mation needs (e.g., production data, ·refining processes,
physical plant layout, precipitation data) and perfa·rm the
appropriate calculations to determine permit effluent
limitations (e.g., process wastewater, storm water runoff,
ballast water, non-contact cooling water).
The main body of the document is of a "cookbook" format
for applying the ELG and, as such, does not present information
pertaining to the development or underlying basis for the
final regulations. Should the user require such information,
the appendices of this document contain a copy of each petroleum
regulation preamble for referencing background material. If
more detailed background or supporting material (e.g., plant
data, treatability information, process information) is
required, the user may contact the Industrial Technology
Division for technical assistance and access to the official
rulemaking records.
Because the complete set of currently applicable regula-
tions were issued in a piecemeal fashion, a comprehensive
listing does not appear in the Federal Register. The annual
edition of the Code~ Federal Regulations, beginning
with the July 1986 edit1on, will contain such a listing for
petroleum refining codified at 40 CFR Part 419. For convenience
to the user, an unofficial version of the listing is included
in Section 2 of this document.
i i
In addition to the rulemaking records, there are two
technical development documents supporting the regulations:
Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and New Source Performance Standards for the Petroleum
Ref1ning Point Source Category, EPA 440/1-74-014-a,
April 1974. (BAT, NSPS)
Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines,
New Source Performance Standards, and Pretreatment
Standards for the Petroleum Refining Point Source Category,
EPA 440/1-82-014, October 1982. (BAT)
i i ;
CONTENTS
Section Page
FOREWORD ii
CONTENTS iv
1 NPDES PERMIT WRITERS WORKSHOP MATERIAL 1

Petroleum Refining Industry. • 2
Prior Regulations and Court Activity 3
Example Permit Calculations for Process
Wastewater. • • 9
Process Groupings Included in 1974 Flow
Model • • • • 19
Process Groupings Included in 1979 Flow
Model • • • • • • 20
Example Permit Calculations for Ballast
and Once-Through Cooling Water. 21
Storm Water Runoff Limitations • 22
2 AMENDED REGULATIONS, 40 CFR PART·419. 43
Authority
Subpaz:t A -
. . . . .
Topping Subcategory.
43
44
419.10 Applicabiiity • • • 44
419.11 Specialized definitions. 44
419.12 BPT. 44
419.13 BAT. 48
419.14 BCT. 53
419.15 PSES 57
419.16 NSPS • • • 58
419.17 PSNS • 60
Subpart B - Cracking Subcategory 62
419.20 Applicability • • • 62
419.22 BPT. 62
419.23 BAT. 65
419.24 BCT. 69
419.25 PSES 72
419.26 NSPS 73
419.27 PSNS • • 74
Subpart c - Petrochemical Subcategory • 76
419.32 BPT. 76
419.33 BAT. 79
419.34 BCT. 83
419.35 PSES • 86
419.36 NSPS 87
419.37 PSNS 88
iv
CONTENTS (continued)
Section
2 AMENDED REGULATIONS, 40 CFR PART 419 (contd.)
Subpart D - Lube Subcategory 90
419.42 BPT. 90
419.43 BAT. 94
419.44 BCT. 99
419.45 PSES 101
419.46 NSPS 102
419.47 PSNS • 104
Subpart E - Integrated Subcategory . 106
419.50 Applicability . • • 106
419.52 BPT. 106
419.53 BAT. 109
419.54 BCT. 113
419.55 PSES 116
419.56 NSPS 117
419.57 PSNS • 118
Regulation Appendix A - Processes
Included in the Determination of
BAT Effluent Limitations for
Total Chromium, Hexavalent
Chromium, and Phenolic Compounds
(4AAP) • 120
Appendix
A PRODUCTION-BASED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 121
Memorandum from J. William Jordan,
Chief, NPDES Technical Support
Branch, u.s. EPA to Regional Permits
Branch Chiefs, Re: Calculation of
Production-Based Effluent Limits,
December 18, 1984 • 122
40 CFR 122.45(b) • 126
B EXAMPLE NPOES PERMIT LIMITATIONS FOR
HYPOTHETICAL LUBE OIL REFINERY 127
v
CONTENTS (continued)
Appendix Page
c FEDERAL
30
REGISTER NOTICES. . . . .
FR 16560, May 9, 1974, Final BPT.
132
133
40 FR 21939, May 20, 1975, BPT Amendments 148
44 FR 75926, December 21, 1979,
Proposed BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS. 164
47 FR 46434, October 18, 1982, Final
BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS . 189
49 FR 34152, August 28, 1984, Proposed BAT
Amendments, BCT, Storm Water Runoff
Limitations • 214
so FR 28516, July 12, 1985, Final BAT
Amendments, BCT, Storm Water Runoff
Limitations • • • • 226
vi
SECTION 1
NPDES PERMIT WRITERS WORKSHOP MATERIAL
In an effort to provide guidance on the application of the recent

amendments to the BAT/BCT effluent limitations guidelines for the
petroleum refining point source category, the Agency's Industrial
Technology Division participated in the EPA NPDES Permit Writers
Workshops held in San Francisco, California and Dallas, Texas
during November and December 1984. Representatives from EPA
regional offices, state offices, and local regulatory authorities
were presented with the material that follows in this section.
1
PETROLEUM REFINING INDUSTRY
• SIC Code 2911
1 220 Operating Refineries in 1984
1 Crude Capacities Range From 400 to 525,000 Barrels Per Day
• Industry Uses About 150 Unique Processes
• 5 Subcategories:
A - Topping
B - Cracking
C - Petrochemical
D- Lube
E - Integrated
1 Texas, California and Louisiana Are Highest Producing States
2
PRIOR REGULATIONS & COURT ACTIVITY
• May 9, 1974 Promulgation

- BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSNS
• May 20, 1975

- Amendments to BPT Published
• August 11, 1976 Court Decision

- BPT and NSPS Upheld (Except
Storm Water Runoff Remanded)
- BAT Remanded in Entirety
• March 23, 1977 Promulgation

- Interim Final PSES
3
PRIOR REGULATIONS & COURT ACTIVJ1Y
(Continued)
• October 18, 1982 Promulgation
- BAT, PSES, PSNS
• January 27, 1983 Court Suit by NRDC

-BAT
1 April 17, 1984 Settlement Agreement

- EPA, NRDC, API, 7 Oil Companies
- More Stringent BAT
- BCT
- Storm Water Runoff
• August 28, 1984 Proposal

- Settlement Agreement Terms
4
REGULATION COVERAGE
Process Wastewater
BAT
Pollutant Technology Basis Permit Calculations
Ammonia Biological Treatment 1974 Flow Model
COD Biological Treabnent 1974 Row Model
Sulfide Biological Treatment 1974 Row Model
Pheno&cs Flow Red., Bio. Trml 1979 Flow Model

Tol Chrom. Row Red., Bio. Trml 1979 Flow Model
Hex. Chrom. Flow Red., Bio. Trml 1979 Row Model
BCT
8005 Biological Treatment 1974 Flow Model
on a: Gnae Bio. Trmt., Po&shing 1974 Flow Model
1SS Bio. Trmt., Po&shing 1974 Flow Model
pH Neutrarazation
5
REGULATION COVERAGE
Ballast Water
BAT
Pollutant Technotogy Basis Permit Calculations
Heat. Settle. Filter
COD and/or Bleed to Proc. Aow x Concennation
Waste Water Tnnl Sys

8005 Same Aow x Con~on
on & Grease kJ Aow x Concenb ation
1SS For Aow x Concenbvtion
pH BAT
6
REGULATION COVERAGE
Once-Through Cooling Water
BAT
Pollutant Technology Basis Pennit Calculations
Total No Leakage, etc.
Organic Into Concentration {Net)
Carbon Coofing Water System
BCT
Pollutant I Technology Basis f Pennit Calculations
No Umitations
7
REGULATION COVERAGE
Contaminated Storm Water Runoff
BAT
COD Treat with Proc. W.W. Aow x Concentration
Phenor.cs Treat with Proc. W.W. Row x Con~on
Tot. Chrom. Treat with Proc. W.W. Aow x ConcenUation
Hex. Chrom. Treat with Proc. W.W. Row x Con~on
BCT
8005 Treat with Proc. W.W. Aow x Concenttanon
on ct Grease Treat with Proc. W.W. Row x Con~on
TSS Treat with Proc. W.W. Row x Concentration

pH Neutralization
8
EXAMPLE PERMIT CALCULATIONS
BAT/BCT LIMITS FOR PROCESS WASTEWATER
• For All BCT Parameters

LIMIT = EFFLUENT LIMITATION FACTOR
X SIZE FACTOR
XPROCESS FACTOR
X REFINERY FEEDSTOCK RATE
1 For the BAT Parameters:

Ammonia, Sulfide and COD
LIMIT = EFFLUENT LIMITATION FACTOR
X SIZE FACTOR
X PROCESS FACTOR
X RERNERY FEEDSTOCK RATE
9
BAT/BCT UMITS FOR PROCESS WASTEWATER
1 For The BAT Parameters:

Phenolic Compounds, Tot. Chromium and Hex. Chromium
UMff = CRUDE PROCESS AllOCATION
+ CRACKING AND COKING PROCESS ALLOCATION
+ ASPHALT PROCESS ALLOCATION
+ LUBE PROCESS AllOCATION
+ REFORMING AND ALKYlATION PROCESS ALLOCATION
1 tACH PROCESS CATEGORY ALLOCATION IS BASED ON THE TOTAL

FEEDSTOCK RAlE FOR THE PROCESSES UTIUZED TIMES A PROCESS
SPECIFlC EFR.UENT UMITATION FACTOR
10
HYPOTHETICAL LUBE OIL REFINERY
Processes Process Feedstock Rate *

Utilized ( 1000 Bbls/Day)
CRUDE:
USE SUM
Atm. Dist 125
TO
Vee. Dist. 60
Desalting 125 DETERMINE
HIGH YEAR
CRACKING
and COKING:
FCC 41
Hydrocracking 20
USE SAME
LUBE:
Lube Hydrofining 5.3
yr:..AR'S DATA
Furfural Extr. 4.0 AS ABOVE
Phenol Extrac. 4.9
ASPHALT:
Asphalt Prod. 4.0
* CALCULATED ~ PER 40 CFR 122.45(b)(2)
THIS SINGLE VALUE TO BE USED FOR BOTH DAILY MAXIMUM AND

30-DAY AVffiAGE CALCULATIONS
11
PROCESS WASTEWATER
SIB' 1: DETERMINE S1ZE FACTOR
ntE SIZE FACTOR IS BASED ON ntE REFINERY FEEDSfOCK RAlE. lliE

REFINERY FEEDSTOCK RAlE IS ntE LARGEST OF Nff OF lliE CRUDE
PROCESS FEEDSTOCK RATES. FOR lliE EXAMPLE. ntE REflNERY FEED-
STOCK RAlE (IN 1000 BBLS/DAY) IS 125.
FROM THE S1ZE FACTOR TABL£:
1000 BBL OF Ft.t.USIOCK SIZE FACTOR

• •
• 0
• 0
100.0 to 124.9 0.88

125.0 to 149.9 0.97
150.0 to 174.9 1.05
• 0
• 0
• •
THE VALUE 0.97 IS OBTAINED.

12
PROCESS WASTEWATER
HYPOTHETICAL WBE OIL REFINERY
STEP 21 DETERMINE PROCESS FACTOR
THE PROCESS FACTOR IS BASm ON THE PROCESS CONFIGURAllON. THIS VALUE IS

CALCULATED AS FOU.OWS1
PROCESS PROCESS FEEDSTOCK RATE

PROCESS FEEDSTOCK RELAnVE TO WEIGHT PROCESS
RATE REFINERY FEEDSTOCK RATE FACTOR CONFIGURATION
CRUDE:
Atm. Dlst. 128.0 1.0
Vao. Diet. 60.0 0.48
w Dosaltlng 125.0 1.0
TOTAL 2.48 X 1 ... 2.4a
CRACKING:
FCC 41.0 0.328
Hydrocraoklng 20.0 0.180
TOTAL 0.488 X 6 ... 2.93
LUBE:
Lubo Hydro. 5.3 0.042
Furfural Extr 4.0 0.032
Phonol Extr. 4.& 0.039
TOTAL 0.113 X 13 .... 1.-4-7
ASPHALT I
Asphalt Prod. +.0 0.032
TOTAL 0.032 X 12 ... 0.38
TOTAL REFINERY ... 7.26

HYPOTHEriCAL LUBE OIL REFINERY
STEP 2: DETERMINE PROCESS FACTOR (CONTINUED)
FROM THE PROCESS FACTOR TABLE:
PROCESS
PROCESS CONRGURATION FACTOR
Less than 6.49 0.81

6.50 to 7.49 0.88
7.50 to 7.99 1.00
8.00 to 8.49 1.09
• •
• •
• •
THE VALUE 0.88 IS OBTAINED.

14
PROCESS WASTEWATER
STEP 3: CALCULATE EFFLUENT LIMITS
BASED ON THE PRECEDING RESULTS, MAXIMUM DAILY BCT UMITS

AND BAT LIMITS (FOR AMMONIA, SULFIDE AND COD ONLY) WOULD BE
CALCULATED AS FOLLOWS:
EFFLUENT REFINERY
....... LIMITATION FEEDSTOCK EFFLUENT
U1
POLLUTANT FACTOR SIZE PROCESS RATE LIMIT
PARAMETER (Lb/ 1 OOObbl) FACTOR FACTOR (1 000 bbl/day) (Lb/day)
BCT:
BOD-5 17.9 0.97 0.88 125.0 1900.
TSS 12.5 0.97 0.88 125.0 1330.
0 & G 5.7 0.97 0.88 125.0 608.
BAT:
Ammonia 8.3 0.97 0.88 125.0 886.
Sulfide 0.118 0.97 0.88 125.0 12.6
COD 127.0 0.97 0.88 125.0 13600.
PROCESS WASTEWATER
lffl'OniEJICAL LUBE OIL REFlNERY
STEP 4: ~TE AMENDED BAT Ut.fflS
BAT UMITS FOR PHENOUC COMPOUNDS. TOTAL CHROMIUM AND HEXAVALENT CHROWIUM
N£ BASED ON A RE'I1SB) { 1979 R.OW t.tODEL) PROCEDURE. THESE UMrTS .4R£
rJlCUI.AlED ON 'DiE BASIS OF 'TOTAL PROCESS FEEDSTOCK RATE FOR FM: DISTINCT
PROCESS C4TEGORIES AS FOU.OWS:
PROCESS PROCESSES PROCESS FEEDSTOCK

CATEGORY VTIUZED RATE ( ~ 00088LS)
USE SUM
CRUDE ATM. DISTILLATION 125
'IN:. DISTillATION 60
TO
DESALTING 125 DETERMINE
TOTAL 310 HIGH YEAR
CRACKING &: FCC 41
COKING HYDROCRACKING 20
TOTAL 61
LUBE LUBE HYDROANING 5.3
FURfURAL EXTRACT. 4.0 USE SAME
PHENOL EXTRACT. 4.9
~.J\R'SDATA
TOTAL 14.2
ASPHALT ASPHALT PROD. 4.0 ftSABOVE
TOTAL 4.0
REFORMING &:
AU<YlJ..TION NONE 0.0
16
EXAMPLE PERMIT C'ACULATIONS
PROCESS WASTEWATER
HYPOrnETJCAL LUBE OIL REF1NERY
DAILY YAXIUUU BAT UMITS FOR PHe«XJC COMPOUNDS. TOTAL CHROUIUU

AND HEXAVALENT CHROUIUU USING 1979 R.OW YODEl
CRACKING REFORMING
AND AND
CRUDE COKING ASPHALT LUBE Al..KYI..ATION TOTAL
PROCESS PROCESS PROCESS PROCESS PROCESS REFlNERY
UtJIT Ut.CJT UMIT WAIT Ut..fiT UMIT
POLLUTANT (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (!b/day) (lb/day) (lb/da'J)
Phenolic 310 X 0.013 61 X 0.147 4 X 0.079 14.2 X 0.369 0.0 X 0.132
Compounds = 4.03 = 8.97 = 0.32 = 5.24 = 0.0 18.56
TotaJ 310 X 0.011 61 X 0.119 4 X 0.064 14.2 X 0.299 0.0 X 0.107
Chromium = 3.41 = 7.26 = 0.26 = 4.25 = 0.0 15.18
Hexavalent 310 X 0.0007 61 X 0.0076 4 X 0.0041 14.2 X 0.0192 0.0 X 0.0069
Chromium = 0.217 = 0.464 = 0.016 = 0.273 = 0.0 0.97
Nota: For 3D-Day Average Umits, U. Same Praduction Data

le for Daily Yaximum Calculations
17
PROCESS WASTEWATER
HYPOTHETlCAL LUBE" OIL REFINERY
SlEP 5: COMPARE AMENDED BAT UMflS FOR PHENOUC COMPOUNDS,

TOTAL CHROMIUM AND HEXAVALDIT CHROMIUM WITH BPT UMflS
FOR lHE EXAMPLE REFINERY:
DAILY MAXIMUM 30-DAY AVFJOOE

(LB/DAY) (LB/DAY)
BPT BAT BPT BAT
PHENOUC
COMPOUNDS I 14.19 18.56 I 6.94 4.48
TOTAL
CHROMIUM 29.13 15.18 17.07 5.31
HEXAVALDIT
CHROMIUM 2.56 0.97 1 1.11 0.43
- SET DAILY MAXIMUM UMIT TO BPT (I.E., 14.19 LB/DAY) FOR PHENOUC
COMPOUNDS, BE~USE BAT CANNOT BE LESS SlRINGENT THAN BPT.
18
PROCESS GROUPINGS INCLUDED IN 1974 FLOW MODEL
USE 10 C6.LCU1A1E All BPT/B:T POLlUTANT UWns AND BAT UWns FOR
AMt.tONIA. SULFlDE AND COD ONLY
PROCESS WEIGHTING
CAlEGORY PROCESSES INCLUDED FACTOR
CRUDE AlMOSPHERIC DlsnUAllON t
VACUUM DlsnUAllON
DE5Al..11NG
CRACKING FLUID CATALYTIC CRACKING 6
AND VIS BRfAKING
COKING TiiERMAL CRACKING
MOVING BED CATALYTIC CRACKING
HYDROCRACKING
FlUID COKING,DEl.AYED COKING
LUBE LUBE HYDROFlNING 13
WHITE OIL MANUFACTURING
PROPANE-DEWAXING, DE"ASPHAL11NG
DUO SOL. SOLVENT DEWAXING
VACUUM TOWER, WAX FRACT10NA110N
CENTRIFUGING AND CHIWNG
MEK DE.WAXING, DEOIUNG(WAX)
·NAPHTHENIC LUBES
502 EXTRACTION
WAX PRESSING, WAX SWE"AllNG
WAX PLANT(WIJH NEUTRAL SEPARA110N)
FURFURAL EXTRACTlON
ClAY CONTAC11NG-PERCOLA110N
ACID lRE"AllNG
PHENOL EXTRACTlON
.ASPHALT PRODUcnON 12
OXIDA110N
EMULSIFYING
19
PROCESS GROUPINGS INCLUDED IN 1979 R.OW t.tODEL.
liE 10 C'.AU:lU1E IMliiD BAT LIIIS
RJR PtENDUC CDFQliGS. lOT. aii)IIW Ill) tEX. QID8JU CK.Y
PROCESS CATEGORY. PROCESSES INCLUDED
CRUDE An.tOSPHERIC DIST11.1A110N
DE3Al.11NG
VICUUW DIS11Uii110N
CRia<ING 'i1S BRE'MING
AND n&MAL aw:I<ING
COKING FlUID C\TILYTlC w.cKING
MOVING SED C\TJLYTIC ctW:I<ING
HYDROCP.AC<ING
DElAYED COKING
FlUID COKING
HYDROTRfAllNG
UJBE HYDROFININGJM)ROf'INSiiNG,WBE HYDROFINING
1WHilE OIL MANUFACJURE
PRQPN£ IDAXING,PROPANE DElSPHfi.llNG.PROPANE FPAClURJNG.PROPANE DERESlNJNG
DUO SOL.SOLVENT lR£.\liNG.SOLVENT EX1RACTION,DUUlR£AllNG.SOLVENT DEWAXING,SOLVENT DElSPt'.ALJlNG
WBE VICUUM lOWER.OL RW:TlONATION,BAltH S11U.(NiiHIHA STRIP).BRIGKT STOCK lREAnNG
CENTRIFUGE AND QiiUJNG
MEK DE'tiAXlNGJ<Eil DEWAXING.MEl< TOl.1Je£ DEWAXING
OEOIUNG(W.AX)
NAPHTH£MC UJBES PRODUCTlON
S02 EXTWtC1lON
WAX~
WAX PlANT{'tmH NE\Jl'RAL SEPARATlON}

FlJRfUfW.. CXJRACT10N
QAYCO~llON
WAX SWE'AllNG
ACID mE'AllNG
A9HAlJ PRODUCTION
200 Dm F SOFlENING POINT' UNFLUXED ASPtWJ
OXIDIZING
OOJISirnNG
REFORMING H2S04 ILJMATlON
AND C\TAI..YTIC RmlRMJNG
ILJMA110N
20
BAT/BCT LIMITS FOR
BALLAST AND ONCE-THROUGH COOUNG WATER
• Daily Maximum Umits for Ballast Water

(50,000 gal/day Flow Basis)
FACTOR X R.OW = Ut.trT

BOD-S 0.40 X 50 = 20. lb/day
1SS 0.26 X 50 = 13. lb/day
COD 3.9 X 50 = 195. lb/day
0 a: G 0.126 X 50 = 6.3 lb/day
• Once Through Cooling Water

- 5 mg/1 Total Organic Carbon as Concentration Umitation
(Not to Exceed)
- May be Net Basis if Requested by Pennittee
21
STORM WATER RUNOFF UMITATJONS
DEFINITIONS
1 RUNOFF
- Precipitation
- Contact with Petroleum Refinery Property
- Either Contaminated or Uncontaminated
1 CONTAMINATED RUNOFF
- Runoff
- Direct Contact With My:
Raw Material
Intermediate Product
Finished Product
By-Product, or
Waste Product
1 UNCONTAMINATED RUNOFF
- Any Other Runoff
22
STORM WATER RUNOFF UMITATIONS
OVERVIEW OF REGUlATIONS
POU.UTANTS BPT BAT BCT
PHENOUC COMPOUNDS • •
lOTAL CHROMIUM • •
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM • •
coo;roc • •
BIOCHEMIC4L OXYGEN DEMAND • •
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOUDS • •
OIL~ GREASE • •
pH • •
CASE DISPOSmON
- COll.ECTED SEPARA1El.Y - NO BPT UMfTS IF OctG ~ 15 mg/J ~D TOC < 110 mg/1
AND DISCK4RGED - NO BCT UMITS IF 04G ~ 15 mg/J
- NO BAT UMITS IF TOC ~ 110 mg/1
- OTHERWISE. TECHNOLOGY BASIS FOR
PROCESS WASTEWATER APPUES
- COMMINGLED wmt PROCESS - EFR.UENT UMITS B.ASED ON SAME

WASTEWATER TEatNOLOGY /IS FOR PROCESS W.W.
23
PERMIT CALCULATION PROCEDURE
BAT/BCT UMITS FOR CONTAMINATED STORM WATER RUNOFF
1 DETERMINE REFlNERY CONTAMINATED STORM WATER VOLUME
1 C'LCULATE MASS BASED EFFLUENT UMrT

(Volume X Effluent Umitation Guideline Concentration)
1 INCORPORATE INTO PERMIT
24
DETERMINATION OF CONTAMINATED STORM WATER VOLUME
1 FlEXIBIUlY TO PERMIT WRITERS

(Case-by-case Basis)
1 APPROPRIATE METHODS TO CONSIDER

- Difference in Wet/Dry Weather Flow to Treatment
- Area Runoff Calculations Based on:
Recurrent Precipitation Data
Local Weather Service Data
25
OIL REFINERY LAYOUT
WASTEWATER WASTE
000 TREATMENT ATERIAL
TANK rARM AREA STORAGE
rCCCLittG
00 WATER
N
01
00 0
0
DIL 0
REriNERV 0
PARKING AREA AREA 0
I CFFICE
I
I I
I TRUCK LOADING AREA
I
STORM WATER RUNOFF LIMITATIONS
DETERMINATION OF AREA-RUNOFF VOLUME
(NOTE: STORMWATER SEGREGATION IS NOT REQUIRED BY REG.)
CONTAMINATED AREAS UNCONTAMINATED AREAS
Processing Areas Parking Lots

Product Storage Areas Office Areas
Raw Material Storage Areas Roads, Access Ways
Tank Farms
Material Loading/Transfer Areas
Waste Product Storage Areas
Wastewater Treatment Areas
Runoff Holding Ponds
27
MASS BASED UMITS
CONTAMINATED RUNOFF EFFLUENT UMITA110N MASS

X
VOLUME CONCENTRATION UMIT
1000 CUM KILOGRAMS KILOGRAMS

X
DAY 1000 cu t.4 DAY
1000 GALS POUNDS POUNDS

X
DAY 1000 GALS DAY
28
STORM WATER RUNOFF LIMITATIONS
BAT/BCT EFFLUENT UMITATIONS
Average of Daily
Pollutant or Maximum for Values for 30
Pollutant Property Any 1 Day Consecutive Days
Ki:ograms per 1000 cubic me:ers
of f!ow (Pounc!s per ~ 000 gc!:ons)
Phenolic Compounds (4MP) 0.35 (0.0029) 0.17 (0.0014)

Total Chromium 0.60 (0.005) 0.21 (0.0018)
Hexavalent Chromium 0.062 (0.00052) 0.02~ (0.00023)
COD 360.0 (3.0) 180.0 (1.5)
BOD-S 48.0 (0.40) 26.0 (0.22)

TSS 33.0 (0.28) 21.0 (0.18)
Oil &: Grease 15.0 (0.13) 8.0 (0.067)
pH .1.l. m 1i.,he range 6.0
l\lj.l.~· l.~o 9.0
NO ADDmONAL CREDIT FOR AMMONIA OR SULADE
29
METHODS TO INCORPORATE MASS BASED UMITS INTO PERMIT
1 PROCESS WASTEWATER AND CONTAMINATED RUNOFF TREATED TOGrntER
1. Continuous Allocation
2. Variable Allocation
3. Wet/Dry Weather Allocations
1 SELECTION BY PERMIT WRITER
- Site Specific Factors

Local Precipitation Patterns,
Design of Runoff Holding Facilities
- Detennines Method Used to Calculate

Contaminated Runoff Volume
30
CONTINUOUS ALLOCATION METHOD
1. CONTINUOUS ALLOCATION
• One Set of Effluent Umits Which is the Sum of

Process Wastewater and Contaminated Runoff Umits
• Problem - Allocation When No Runoff is Present
• Appropriate -
- Where Precipitation Patterns Relatively Constant
- When Holding Facilities Used to Bleed Runoff to
Treatment During Most or All of the Year
31
VARIABLE ALLOCATION METHOD
2. VARIABLE ALLOCAT10N
• One Set of Effluent Umits for Process Wastewater Only
• An Adadional Prorated Allocation for Each 1000 Gal.

of Contaminated Runoff, Specific to Each Precipitqtion Event
t Most Ideal
• Based on Measurement or Calculation of Actual Contaminated

Runoff (for the Specific Precipitation Period)
• Similar to Variable Batch Discharge Allocation
1 Compfiance Measurement and Enforcement Complexities
32
WEf/DRY WEATHER ALLOCATION METHOD
• One Set of Effluent Limits for Process Wastewater Only

- Dry Weather Umits
• One Set of Mass Umits Based on the Sum of Process and

Contaminated Runoff Allocations
- Wet Weather Umits
- Contaminated Runoff Portion is a tiXed Mass
Allocation, Based on Historic Precipitation Data
• Triggered by Ether
-lime of Year
- Precipitation Events. or
- Actual Contaminated Runoff Volume
• Used When:
- Precipitation Amount and Frequency Varies
Sgnificantly During the Year
- Significant Precipitation Events Occur Infrequently
33
A. DIVERT CONTAMINATED RUNOFF TO SURGE POND/TANK, AND

81 FED BACK TO PROCESS WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
1. Wet/Dry Weather Allocation (Bleed Rate Intermittent)

2. Continuous Allocation (Bleed Rate Continuous)
B. DIRECT CONTAMINATED RUNOFF DIRECTLY TO PROCESS

WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
1. Variable Allocation
34
EXAMPLE A
CDNT AMINATE
WASTEWATER WASTE
000 TREATMENT ATERIAL
TANK FARM AREA STORAGE
CODLING
00 WATER
w
c.n
00 0
0
OIL 0
REFINERY 0
PARKING AREA AREA 0
..____ ______ __,
------·-·------·---------·- - --·--· ------__ - - - -J- - ·- - -----l

--------
---~
___________.
_l__L _______________
L TRUCK LOADING AREA

- -a-•-•--- ---··-·-- --- • • • -··------•
5rORM WATER RUNOFF UMITATlONS
EXAMPLE A - DETERMINATION OF CONTAMINATED RUNOFF VOLUME

ANNUAL PRECIPITAllON = 60 IN/YR
Araal Extent PenneabtTif¥ ~.Fl Runoff Area

Source Area (acres) Factors kre (Sq. Ft)
Process Units 5.0 X 1.0 X 43,560 = 217,800
Storage 2.0 X 0.6 X 43,560 = 52,300
Tank Fann 15.0 X 0.4 X 43.560 = 261,400
Truck Loading 3.0 X 1.0 X 43,560 = 174.200
Holding Pond 1.0 X 1.0 X 43,560 = 43,600
Waste Storage 1.0 X 0.8 X 43,560 = 34,800
wwr Area 3.0 X 1.0 X 43,560 = 130,700
TOTAL MFA 914,800
ANNUAL RUNOFF = 914,800 Sq.Fl x 60 ln/Yr x 1/12 Ft/ln x 7.48 Gal/CuR

= 34.210,000 Gai/Yr
AVER. DAILY RUNOFF = 34.210,000/365 = 94,000 Gal/Day
36
EXAMPLE A.1 - RUNOFF BLEED RAlt: =120,000 GJ.L/DAY

o WET WE'ATHER Ut.tns = DRY WEATHER (e.g., PROCESS W~AlER) UMrTS
PlUS stORM WATER ~liON
o FOR PRECEDING WBE RERNERY EJW.4Pl.E AND 120,000 GJ.L/DAY S'TORMWAlER:
SRRtWA1ER IWLY WAX. 30-DAY DM.YYAX.· »-DAY AVG.

ROW FICit)R FlaCH Ull1' Ulll'
PQl1.U1M1' (1CII!W/I!'t) {lBS/1CX!lGM.) Q.Bs/1CX!lGM.) (LSSJDAY) (LBSjDA'f2
D-5 120 0.-to G.22 48.00 16.40

1SS 120 Q.28 0.18 33.1) 21.60
OIG 120 0.13 D.OS7 15.60 8.04
• •
o MlDrTION OF MYJVE VAJ..UES TO DRY WEATHER UMITS RESULTS

IN WET' WE:ATHER Ut.tiTS ON FOlLOWING PAGE
37
EXAMPLE A.l WET/DRY WEATHER LIMITS
!INTERMITTENT BLEED RATE = 120,000 GAL/DAY>
DRY WEATHER LIMITS
DAILY MAXIMUM 30-DAY AVERAGE *

PARAMETER !LBS/DAY> <LBS/DAY>
--------- ------------- --------------
BOD-S 1900.00 970.97
TSS 1330.00 853.60
OIL & GREASE 608.00 320. 10
AMMONIA 886.00 405.46
SULFIDE 12.60 5.66
COD 13600.00 7042.20
PHENOLIC COMPOUNDS 18 •. 56 4.48
TOTAL CHROMIUM 1s. 1a 5.31
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM 0.97 0.43
WET WEATHER LIMITS <FOR DAYS WHEN BLEEDING TO PROCESS TREATMENT SYSTEM OCCURS>
DAILY MAXIMUM 30-DAV AVERAGE **

PARAMETER <LBS/DAY> <LBS/DAY>
--------- ------------- --------------
BOD-S 1948.00 997.37
TSS 1363.60 875.20
OIL & GREASE 623.60 328. 14
AMMONIA 886.00 405.46
SULFIDE 12.60 5.66
COD 13960.00 7222.20
PHENOLIC·CDMPOUNDS 18. 91 4.65
TOTAL CHROMIUM 15.78 5.52
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM 1. 03 0.46
t 30-DAY AVERAGE COMPLIANCE BASED ON AVERAGE OF ALL ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR DRY
WEATHER SAMPLES.
** 30-DAY AVERAGE COMPLIANCE BASED ON AVERAGE OF ALL ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR WET
WEATHER SAMPLES, PROVIDING MORE THAN ONE SAMPLE WAS TAKEN DURING 30 DAY PERIOD.
OTHERWISE, 30-DAY AVERAGE NOT APPLICABLE.
38
STORM WAlER RUNOFF UMITATIONS
EXU'LE A.2. - RUNOFF BLEED RAlE =94,000 GN./DAY
o WEJ WE'AniER UMITS = DRY WE'AniER (e.g., PROCESS W,ASTEWAlER) UMITS

PLUS sroRM WAlER Al..l.OrAllON
o FOR PRECEDING WBE REF1NERY EXAMPLE AND 94,000 GN./DAY S'TORMWAlER:
S10IMlA1ER 30-Q\Y IWLY Y.4X. ~YAVG.
uurr UYlT
POWJTAN1' (LBSJI!Y) (lBSjpAY)
ID-5 94 0..40 G.22 :r!JIJ 20.68

1$ 94 Q.28 0.18 26.32 16.92
OIG 94 0.13 OJJr1 12.22 6.JO
o ADDffiON OF APDIE VM..UES lO DRY WEAniER UMITS RESULTS

IN m WE'ATiiER UMllS ON FOU.OWING PAGE
39
EXAMPLE A.2 CONTINUOUS RUNOFF ALLOCATION
<CONTINUOUS BLEED RATE = 94 1 000 GAL/DAYI
EFFLUENT LIMITS <THE FOLLOWING VALUES ARE APPLICABLE AT ALL TIMESl
DAILY 11AXI11Ul1 30-DAY AVERAGE

PARAMETER <LBS/DAYI <LBS/DAYl
--------- ------------- --------------
BOD-:5 1937.60 991. 65
TSS 1356.32 870.52
OIL & GREASE 620.22 326.40
AMMONIA 886.00 405~46
SULFIDE 12.60 5.66
COD 13882.00 7183.20
PHENOLIC COMPOUNDS ta.a3 4.61
TOTAL CHROMIUM 15.65 5.48
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM 1. 02 0.45
40
EXAMPLE B
CDNT AMINATE
000 WASTEWATER
TREATMENT
WASTE
ATERIAL
TANK FARM AREA STORAGE
rCDDLING
00 WATER
00 0
0
OIL 0
REFINERY 0
PARKING AREA AREA 0
OFFICE
L_
_____________
.___
-- ~----- }__l__ --- ----~~-

C TRUCK LOADING AREA
--------------- - - l
EXAMPLE 8. 1 VARIABLE ALLOCATION
<RUNOFF DIRECTLY TO PROCESS TREATMENT SYSTEM>
DRY WEATHER LIMITS
DAILY MAXIMUM ::SO-DAY AVERAGE •

PARAMETER <LBS/DAY> <LBS/DAY>
--------- ------------- --------------
BOD-5 1,900.00 970.97
TSS 1,3'30.00 853.60
OIL 8c GREASE 608.00 320. 10
AMMONIA 886.00 405.46

SULFIDE 12.60 5.U
COD 13,600.00 7042.20
PHENOLIC COMPOUNDS 18.56 4.48
TOTAL CHROMIUM 15. 1a 5.31
HEXAVALE~T CHR~MIUM 0.97 0.43
WET WEATHER LIMITS <ADDITIONAL ALLOCATION FOR EVERY 1000 GALLONS OF CONTAMINATED
------------------ RUNOFF BASED ON CONTINUOUS FLOW MONITORING LESS NORMAL DRY
WEATHER FLOW)
DAILY MAXIMUM ::SO-DAY AVERAGE

PARAMETER <LBS/1000GAL/DAY>
BOD-5 0.40 NA
TSS 0.28 NA
OIL II GREASE 0. 13 NA
AMMONIA o.oo NA
SULFIDE 0.00 NA
COD 3.00 NA
PHENOLIC COMPOUNDS .00 NA
TOTAL CHROMIUM 0.01 NA
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM .1)0 NA
* 30-DAY AVERAGE COMPLIANCE BASED ON AVERAGE OF ALL ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR DRY
WEATHER SAMPLES.
42
SECTION 2
AMENDED REGULATIONS
40 CFR PART 419
The following is a complete set of the amended regulations that

will appear in the upcoming edition of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Title 40, Chapter I, Part 419, Petroleum Refining
Point Source Category:
Authority: Sees. 301, 304(b), (c), (e), and (g), 306(b) and (c),
307(b) and (c), and 501, Federal Water Pollution Control Act as
arne nd ed ( the Act ) ; 33 U. S • C • 13 1 1 , 13 1 4 ( b ) , ( c ) , ( e ) 1 and (g ) 1
1316(b) and (c), 1317(b) and (c), and 1361; 86 Stat. 8l61 Pub. L.
9 2- 50 0 ; 91 Stat • 156 7 • Pub . L. 9 5-2 17 .
43
Subpart A - Topping Subcategory
419.10 Applicability: description of the topping subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart apply to discharges from any faci-
lity that produces petroleum products by the use of topping and
catalytic reforming, whether or not the facility includes any
other process in addition to topping and catalytic reforming.
The provisions of this subpart do not apply to facilities that
incl~de thermal processes (coking, visbreaking, etc.) or cataly-
tic cracking.
419.11 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:

(a) Except as provided below, the general definitions, abbre-
viations, and methods of analysis set forth in Part 401 of this
chapter shall apply to this subpart.
(b) The term "runoff" shall mean the flow of storm water
resulting from precipitation coming into contact with petroleum
refinery property.
(c) The term "ballast" shall mean the flow of waters, from a
ship, that is treated along with refinery wastewaters in the main
treatment system.
(d) The term "feedstock" shall mean the crude oil and natural
gas liquids fed to the topping units.
(e) The term "once-through cooling water" shall mean those

waters discharged that are used for the purpose of heat removal
and that do not come into direct contact with any raw material,
intermediate, or finished product.
(f) The following abbreviations shall be used: (1) Mgal means

one thousand gallons; (2) Mbbl means one thousand barrels (one
barrel is equivalent to 42 gallons).
(g) The term "contaminated runoff" shall mean runoff which comes
into contact with any raw material, intermediate product,
finished product, by-product or waste product located on petro-
leum refinery property.
419.12 Effluent limitations guidelines representing the degree
of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the best
practicable control technology currently available (BPT).
(a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30-32, any existing point

source subject to this subpart must achieve the following
effluent limitations representing the degree of effluent reduc-
tion attainable by the application of the best practicable
control technology currently available (BPT):
44
BPT effluent limitations
Average of
daily values
Pollutant or pollutant property Maximum for for 30
any 1 day consecutive
days shall
not exceed
Metric units (kilograms per
1 ,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BOD 5 • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 22.7 12.0
TSS . . . . • . . • • . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . 15.8 10. 1
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 11 7 • 60.3
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••••• 6.9 3.7
Phenolic compounds •••••••••••••••••••• 0.168 0.076
A.mmon i a as N •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 2.81 1. 27
Sulfide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.149 0.068
Total chromium •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.345 0.20
Hexavalent chromium ••••••••••••••••••• 0.028 0.012
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 2) ( 2)
English units (pounds per
1,000 bbl of feedstock)
BOD 5 ••••• ~ •••••••••••••••••••••• • • • .... 8.0 4.25

TSS • ..••••••••.•••.•••.•.•.•..•..•••.• 5.6 3.6
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 41.2 21.3
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••••• 2.5 1.3
Phenolic compounds ••••.••••••••••••••• 0.060 0.027
Ammonia as N •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.99 0.45
Sulfide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.053 0.024
Total chromium ..•..................... 0.122 0.071
Hexavalent chromium •••.•••.••••••••••• 0.01 0.0044
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .....__.....:(:..;2~).___._.......~ -~<2;;;;..:....)_
1 See footnote following Table in 419.13(d).
2 Within the range of 6.0 to 9.0
(b) The limits set forth in paragraph (a) of this section are to
be multiplied by the following factors to calculate the maximum
for any one day and maximum average of daily values for thirty
consecutive days.
( 1) Size factor.
----- -----------
Size
1,000 bbl of feedstock per stream day factor
Less than 2~.9..................................... 1.02

2 5 • 0 to 4 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • o6
50 • 0 to 7 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 16
7 5 • 0 to 9 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 26
10 0 to 1 2 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 38
45
125.0 to 149.9 ••••
150.0 or greater •• .......................... ......... ................. 1.50
1. 57
(2) Process factor.
Process
Process confi uration factor
Less than 2.49.

2.5 to 3.49 ••••
.......... ...... ........... ................ .. .. .... . ...
... 0.62
0.67
3.5 to 4. 49 •••• .... .. ... ..... . ..... .... ... . ... . 0.80
4.5 to 5. 49 •• ·•• ..... ... ............... ......
5.5 to 5. 99 . . . . . . . . . .... . ........
.. .... 0.95
. . ....... ...... . ..
1.07
6.0 to 6. 49 ••••
6.5 to 6. 99 ••••
..... . . . .
.... ............................... . . .... ...... 1.17
l.27
7.0 to 7. 49 ........•. 1. 39
7.5 to 7.99. . .. ..
. . . . .. ....... . ... ...... . .
... 1. 51
8.0 to 8.49 •.•• 1.64
........ .. .... .. .......... ...
8.5 to 8.99 •• ......
9.0 to 9. 49 •• . ........ 1. 79
1.95
... . ..... .. ......
9.5 to 9 • 99 •••••••••••••
10.0 to 1 0. 49 ••
.... . ........... 2.12
. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . .
2.31
10.5 to 10.99 ••• 2.51
11.0 to 11.49 ••
11.5 to 11 • 99 ••••• ..... ......
.. . . . ........... . .. .. ..
... 2.73
2.98
12.0 to 12.49 ...... .... . ... . ..... .... ... . . 3.24
12.5 to 12.99 ••
. .......................... ..
. 3.53
1'"3. 0 to 13.49 ••••.•••.••
1 3. 5 to 1 3. 99 •••. ... ... ... ...
••••• 3.84
4.18
14.0 or greater ••• . .. .... ..... ..... . ... 4.36
(3) See the comprehensive example in Subpart o, 419.42(b)(3).
(c) The following allocations constitute the quantity and

quality of pollutants or pollutant properties controlled by this
paragraph and attributable to ballast, which may be discharged
after the application of best practicable control technology
currently available, by a point source subject to this subpart,
in addition to the discharge allowed by paragraph (b) of this
section. The allocation allowed for ballast water flow, as
kg/cum (lb/M gal), shall be based on those ballast waters
treated at the refinery.
46
-BPT-efffuerit1fmTiations-
for ballast water
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
cubic meter of flow)
BODS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.048 0.026
TSS • ••....•••...•...•..••.•.•...•.••.•. 0.033 0.021
coo ( 1 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.47 0.24
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.015 0.008
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••• (2) (£1_ ____ _
1,000 ~al o~flow)
BOD 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • 40 0•21
TSS................................... 0.26 0.17
coo ( 1 } • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3 •9 2•0
Oil and grease........................ 0.126 0.067
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 2) (2)
----~~------~--~~------
(d) The quantity and quality of pollutants or pollutant proper-
ties controlled by this paragraph, attributable to once-through
cooling water, are excluded from the discharge allowed by
paragraph (b) of this section. Once-through cooling water may be
discharged with a total organic carbon concentration not to exceed
5 mg/1.
(e) Effluent Limitations for Contaminated Runoff
The following effluent limitations constitute the quantity and
paragraph and attributable to contaminated runoff, which may be
discharged after the application of the best practicable control
technology currently available by a point source subject to this
subpart.
(1) If wastewater consists solely of contaminated runoff and is
not commingled or treated with process wastewater, it may be
discharged if it does not exceed 15 mg/1 oil and grease and 110
mg/1 total organic carbon (TOC) based upon an analysis of any
single grab or composite sample.
(2) If contaminated runoff is commingled or treated with process
wastewater, or if wastewater consisting solely of contaminated
runoff which exceeds 15 mg/1 oil and grease or 110 mg/1 TOC is
not commingled or treated with any other type of wastewater, the
47
quantity of pollutants discharged shall not exceed the quantity
determined by multiplying the flow of contaminated runoff as
determined by the permit writer times the concentrations listed
in the following table:
BPT effluent Limitations
for contaminated runoff
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters of flow)
BOD 5 • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • •••• 48. 26.

TSS • . • . . . . . . . • . • • • . . • . . . . . . . . . • . . • . . • . 33. 21.
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 360. 180.
Oil and grease .•••••••..•••••••••••••• 15. 8.
Phenolic compounds ( 4AAP) .••.••.•••••• 0.35 0.17
Total chromium •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.73 0.43
Hexavalent chromium ••.•.••....•.•••••• 0.062 0.028
pB. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ( 2) ( 2)
----~~----~----~~------
1,000 gal of flow)
BOD 5 • •••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • 0.40 0.22

TSS • ••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0.28 0.18
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3.0 1.5
Oil and grease ••••.•.••••.•••.•••••.•• 0.13 0.067
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) •..•••••••..• 0.0029 0.0014
Total chromium •.•...••.......•.•••..•. 0.0060 0.0035
Hexavalent chromium .•.•.•.....•.•••..• •
0.00052 0.00023
pH. • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • . • • • • • • . . • . • • . • . . . . . ( 2) ( 2)
----~~----~----~~------
1 See footnote following table in 419.13(d).

of effluent reduction attainable by the application of best
available technology economically achievable (BAT).
(a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30-.32, any existing point

tion attainable by the application of the best available
technology economically achievable (BAT):
48
BAT effluent limitations
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1 ,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
COD ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 17 • 60 • 3
Ammonia as N • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2. 8 1 1 • 27
Sulfide............................... 0.149 0.068
coo ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 41•2 2, •3
Ammonia as N.. ••• • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • •• • • • • 0.99 0.45
Sulfide •••.••••••••.••••••••••.••••••• ~--~0~-~0~5~3--~-----0~·~0~2~4___
be multiplieq by the following factors to calculate the maximum
consecutive days.
( 1) Size factor.
Size
1,000 bbl of feedstock er stream da factor
Less than 24.9..................................... 1.02
25.0 to 49.9....................................... 1.06
5 a• 0 to 7 4 • 9 . • • . • . . • • . . . . . . . . . . • • . . • . . • • . • • • • . . • . . . , . 16
7 5 • 0 to 9 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 26
100 to 124.9....................................... 1.38
1 2 5 • a to 1 4 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 50
150.0 or greater................................... 1.57
(2) Process factor.

Process
Less than 2.49 ••••.•••••••.•...•.••.•.•..••.•••.•.• 0.62
2. 5 to 3 • 4 9 . . . • . . • . . . . • . • . . • • . • • • . • • • . • . . . . • . . . . • . • 0.67
3 • 5 to 4 • 4 9 •.•.•••.•••••••.••...••••••••.••.•••••.• 0.80
4 • 5 to 5 • 4 9 ••...•.•.•.•...••....••.••.•..•••••.•... 0.95
5. 5 to 5. 9 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 • 07
6. 0 to 6 • 4 9 •••.•••..•••...••.•••..•••••••.......•.. 1. 17
49
6.5 to 6. 99 . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . 1. 27
7.0 to 7 • 49 .•......•.••••....•.....••...•••..•..••. 1 • 39
7.5 to 7 • 99 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 • s1
8.0 to 8 . 49 ............•••... ...................... 1. 64
8.5 to 8 • 99 . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . 1.79
9.0 to 9. 49 .••• ..••..•.•••••....•...••...••......•. 1.95
9.5 to 9. 99 ...•... .... ... . . . . ............ ....... . ..
10.0 to 10.49 •. •.....••.••..•...•.•...•.•......•..•
2.12
2.31
10.5 to 10.99 •.•.. ...••••••••.•.•...•••..••.....••. 2.51
11.0 to 11.49 •••••.•.••.••••.•..••.•••.•••.••..•... 2.73
11.5 to 1, • 99 •..•• •..••••••..•..•.•.•...•.•.•••••.. 2.98
12.0 to 12. 49 . ••.•••.•••••.•.•..•.••••...••.....•.. 3.24
12.5 to 12.99 ••.•• .•.••.•••.••......••..••....•••.. 3.53
13.0 to 1 3. 49 • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3.84
13.5 to 1 3. 99 • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 4. 18
14.0 or greater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.36
(3) See the comprehensive example in Subpart o, 419.42(b}(3).

(c)(l) In addition to the provisions contained above pertaining
to COD, ammonia and sulfide, any existing point source subject to
this subpart must achieve the following effluent limitations
representing the degree of effluent reduction attainable by the
application of the best available technology economically
achievable (BAT):
For each of the regulated pollutant parameters listed below, the

eff!uent limitation for a given refinery is the sum of the pro-
ducts of each effluent limitation factor times the applicable
refinery process feedstock rate, calculated as provided in 40 CFR
122.45(b). Applicable production processes are presented in
Appendix A, by process type. The process identification numbers
presented in this Appendix A are for the convenience of the
reader. They can be cross-referenced in the Development Document
for Effluent Limitations Guidelines, New Source Performance
Standards, and Pretreatment Standards for the Petroleum Refinin
Po1nt ource ategory EPA I - , pp.
50
BAT effluent l~m~tat~on
factor
Average of
daily values
and process type .any 1 day consecutive
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
Phenolic compounds (4AAP):
Crude ••.•.•.•••.•••••••.•••••••••.••• 0.037 0.009
Cracking and coking •••••••••••••••••• 0.419 0. 10 2
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . 0.226 0.055
Lube • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•.. 1.055 0.257
Reforming and alkylation ••••..•••••.• 0.377 0.092
Total chromium:
Crude • •••••••••••••••••.•••.••••.•••• 0.030 0. 0 11
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 183 0.064
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.855 0.297
Reforming and alkylation ••••••••••••• 0.305 0. 106
Hexavalent chromium:
Crude ••••.•.. ·•••••••...••.•••.••..•.. 0.0019 0.0009
Cracking and coking •••••••.••.•••••.• 0.0218 0.0098
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0117 0.0053
Lube • ••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••.••• 0.0549 0.0248
Reforming and alkylation ••••••.•.•••• ~--~0~·~0~1~9~6~L---~0~·~0~0~8~8~

Crude •..•.••.•....•••..••.•••••••.... 0.013 0.003
Cracking and coking ••.•.••••••.•.•••• 0.147 0.036
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.079 0.019
Lube • ••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0.369 0.090
Reforming and alkylation ••••••••.•••• 0.132 0.032
Total chromium:
Crude • . • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . • . . 0.011 0.004
Cracking and coking ••••••....•...•••• 0. 119 0.041
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.064 0.022
Lube • ••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••.. 0.299 0. 10 4
Reforming and alkylation •.•.•.••.•..• 0.107 0.037
Crude • •••.....•••••.•......•.•.••.•.. 0.0007 0.0003
Cracking and coking •••••.••..•.•••••• 0.0076 0.0034
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0041 0.0019
Lube • ••••.•.••.••.•••••••••••.••••••. 0.0192 0.0087
Reforming and alkylation............. 0.0069 0.0031
(2) See the comprehensive example in Subpart ------------~-------------
o, 419.43(c)(2).
51
(d) The following allocations constitute the quantity and
paragraph, attributable to ballast, which may be discharged after
the application of best available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to the provisions of this
subpart. These allocations are in addition to the discharge
allowed by paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. The alloca-
tion allowed for ballast water flow, as kg/cum (lb/M gal), shall
be based on· those ballast waters treated at the refinery.
BAT ettluent 11m1tat1ons
for ballast water
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
.__ __;0:;..•:;..4.;.7.;...._--'---_.;;..0.;..•.;;;2..;;4~-
COD ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .[
1,000 gal of flow)
COD (1) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ._1_ _ _ _;3:;..•:;..9~---._----~2.;.•.;;;0______:
In any case in which the applicant can demonstrate that the

chloride ion concentration in the effluent exceeds 1,000
mg/1 (1,000 ppm), the permitting authority may substitute
TOC as a parameter in lieu of COD. A TOC effluent limita-
tion shall be based on effluent data from the particular
refinery which correlates TOC to BODS. If in the judgment
of the permitting authority, adequate correlation data are
not available, the effluent limitations for TOC shall be
established at a ratio of 2.2 to 1 to the applicable
effluent limitations on BOOS.
(e) The quantity and quality of pollutants or pollutant proper-
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. Once-through cooling
water may be discharged with a total organic carbon concentration
not to exceed 5 mg/1.
(f) Effluent Limitations for Contaminated Runoff

discharged after the application of the best available technology
economically achievable by a point source subject to this sub-
part.
52
discharged if it does not exceed 110 mg/1 total organic carbon
(TOC) based upon an analysis of any single grab or composite
sample.
runoff which exceeds 110 mg/1 TOC is not commingled or treated
with any other type of wastewater, the quantity of pollutants
discharged shall not exceed the quantity determined by
multiplying the flow of contaminated runoff as determined by the
permit writer times the concentrations listed in the following
table:

Average of
daily values
any 1 ~ay consecutive
days shall
not exceed
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) .•••••••••••• 0.35 0.17
Total chromium •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.60 0.21
Hexavalent chromium •••••.••••••••••••• 0.062 0.028
COD ( 1 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360. 180.
--------------~------------
1,000 gal of flow)
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) ••••••••••••• 0.0029 0.0014
Total chromium •••••••.•..•••••..•••••• 0.0050 0.0018
Hexavalent chromium ••••••••••.•••••••. 0.00052 0.00023
COD 1 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3.0 1.5
of effluent reduction available by the application of the best
conventional pollutant control technology (BCT).
(a) Any existing point source subject to this subpart must
achieve the following effluent limitations representing the
degree of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the
best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT):
53
BCT effluent limitations
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BODS • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••
TSS . . • . . . • • . . . . . . . • . . . . • . . • . .
Oil and grease ••••••••••••.•••••••••••
... ......
22.7
15.8
12.0
10.1
6.9 3.7
pH. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • ( 1) ( 1)
----~~------._--~~-------
BODS • •••••••••••
TSS • ..•••••...• ·
.. .................................
. . .. . 8.0
5.6
4.25
3.6
Oil and grease •••• ....................... ...... .....•
. 2.5
( 1)
1.3
( 1)
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

consecutive days.
( 1) Size factor.
Size
.................. ... ..................... .................

Less than 24.9 •••••••••.• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1.02
25.0 to 49.9 ••••••••••••• ~ 1.06
50.0 to 74.9 ••••••••••••• 1.16
7 5. 0 to 9 9 • 9 .•••••.••••••..•.••. .................................
. 1 • 26
1 0 0 to 1 2 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••
125.0 to 149.9 .•.. : • . . . . • . . . . . . .
150.0 or greater ••••••••..••••••
... ..... .........
. .. . . .. ..........
1. 38
1 • so
1. 57
(2) Process factor
Process
Less than 2.49 ••.••••••••.•• ...................
. . . .. . . .. . . .. ... . . .
0.62
2 • 5 to 3 • 4 9 ••...•.•...•...•.•••• 0.67
3 • 5 to 4. 4 9 . . . . . . . . • • . . . • . . . • . . . . . . . . . ... . ...... . 0.80
4 • 5 to 5 • 4 9 •...••••...•....•••.• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.95
54
5.5 to 5.99 ••••• . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.0 to 6. 49 ••••• • • • • • • • • • • • •
1. 07
6.5 to 6. 99 . . . . . . . . •.• ..
. . .
• • • • • • • •••••••••••••
..... .....
. . . . . . .
..... ..... . ..
. . . ... . . . .. . ...
1.17
1. 27
7.0 to 7. 49 . •...•...
7.5 to 7 • 9 9 •••.••••• ... ..... .. . .. ................ .... .... ....
~
....
1. 39
1. 51
8.0 to 8 • 49 .•...•..•.•••.••••.•• 1 • 64
8.5 to 8. 99 ••••• • • • • • • •
9.0 to 9. 49 ••••
. . . . . . .
... .. ..... ......... .......... .
• • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••••
. . . .. . . 1 • 79
1 •9 5
9.5 to 9. 99 ••••
10.0 to 10.49 ••
... ...................................... .............. ... . 2. 12
2.31
10.5 to 10.99 ••
11 • 0 to 11.49 ••••••• • •
. . ......... ... .. . .......
••• ....... .... 2.51
2.73
11 • 5 to 11.99 •••••••
12.0 to 1 2. 49 ••••••• ..... .... .. .... . . . . . . .. 2.98
3.24
12.5 to 12.99 ••• ........ 3.53
13.0 to 13.49 ••••••• ..... . ......
13.5 to 13.99 ••••••• • • • • • • • • • • •
.... ... 3.84
4.18
14.0 or greater ••••• ........ . . .. . ......
•• ••••••••••
4.36

after the application of best conventional pollutant control
technology by a point source subject to this subpart, in addition
to the discharge allowed by paragraph (b) of this section. The
allocation allowed for ballast water flow, as kg/cu m (lb/M
gal), shall be based on those ballast waters treated at the refi-
nery.
BCT effluent limitatlons

for ballast water
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BOD 5 •••••••••••••••• 0.048 0.026

TSS • ••••••••••• • • • • •
Oil and grease •••
........ • ••• 0.033 0.021
0.015 0.008
pH • •. • • • • • • •.• • • • •••••• (1) (1)
----------------~----~~--------
55
1,000 gal of flow)
8005.................................. 0.40 0.21

TSS................................... 0.26 0.17
Oil and grease •••••••• ·•••••••••••••••• 0.126 0.067
pB. • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • ( 1) ( 1)
----~~------~--~~-------

paragraph (b) of this section.
paragraph and attributable to contaminated runoff which may be
discharged after the application of the best conventional pollu-
tant control technology by a point source subject to this sub-
part.
discharged if it does not exceed 15 mg/1 oil and grease based
upon an analysis of any single grab or composite sample.
runoff which exceeds 15 mg/1 oil and grease is not commingled or
treated with any other type of wastewater, the quantity of pollu-
tants discharged shall not exceed the quantity determined by
permit writer times the concentrations listed in the foliowing
table:
Average ot
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BOD 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 48 • 26 •
TSS................................... 33. 21.
Oil and grease........................ 15. 8.
pB•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••·······~~(~1~)--------~~(~1~)~------
56
1,000 gal of flow)
BOD 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • 40 0 • 22
TSS................................... 0.28 0.18
Oil and grease........................ 0.13 0.067
pH. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
~--~~------~--~~-------
419.15 Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).
Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7 and 403.13 any existing source
subject to this subpart which introduced pollutants into a
publicly owned treatment works must comply with 40 CFR Part 403
and achieve the following pretreatment standards for existing
sources (PSES). The following standards apply to the total refi-
nery flow contribution to the POTW:
Pretreatment
standards
Pollutant or pollutant property for existing
sources -
maximum for
an 1 da
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Oil and grease ....................................

Ammonia as N ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
·L 100
10 0
~-_.;...;;....;;.. _____
Where the discharge to the POTW consists solely of sour
waters, the owner or operator has the option of complying
with this limit or the daily maximum mass limitation for
ammonia set forth in 419.13(a) and (b).
57
419.16 Standards of performance for new sources (NSPS).
(a) Any new source subject to this subpart must achieve the
following new source performance standards (NSPS):
NSPS effluent limitations
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BODS • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• I ••• 11.8 6.3
TSS • .•.••••.•.•..•....•...••..•...••.. 8.3 4.9
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 61 • 0 32.0
Oil and grease •••.•••••••••••••••••••• 3.6 1.9
Phenolic compounds •••••••••••••••••.•• 0.088 0.043
Amlnonia as N •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 2.8 1.3
Sulfide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.078 0.035
Total chromium ••••.••••••••••••••••.•• 0. 18 0. 10 5
pB • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 2) ( 2)
.NSPS effluent limitations

Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
English units (pounds
per 1,000 gal of flow)
BOD 5 • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 4.2 2.2
TSS . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • . . . • • . . . . . . . . . • . . . . • 3.0 1.9
coo ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 21.7 11.2
Oil and grease ••••..•.••••.•.......••• 1.3 0.70
Phenolic compounds •.••••••••..•••••••• 0.031 0.016
Ammonia as N ••••••••••••••••• ••••••••• 1.0 0.45
Sulfide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.027 0.012
Total chromium ••••....••.•.•.••••..... 0.064 0.037
Hexavalent chromium •.•••••••..•.••••.• 0.0052 0.0025
pH • ••••••••••••••••••••••••• ·• • • • • • • • • • ( 2) ( 2)

----~----------------------
58
consecutive days.
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 24.9 ••• .... ...... ... .... .... .... .. ... 1. 02
25.0 to 49.9 ••••• .. .. ... ........ • • • .. .. .. ....
... . . .......... 1.06
. .. .. .......
50.0 to 74.9 •••
.. .. " . .. . . . .. 1.16
... . .... ........ .. ........ ....... . ..

7 5.0 to 99. 9 ••••• 1 • 26
100 to 124.9 ••••• 1.38
125.0 to 149.9 •••
150.0 or greater.
....
.. . . ... .. .... ... .... . ... . . . 1. so
1.57
(2) Process factor

Process
Less than 2.49. . . .... ........ .. ...... ... .... .... 0.62
2.5 to 3.49 •• ............ .... ... .... . .......... ... ... 0.67
4.5 to 5. 49 •••...................... ..... .... .... .. ... ...... ....
3.5 to 4. 49 •••• 0.80
0.95
5.5 to 5. 99 •• 1.07
6.0 to 6.49 •• .... .. . ..... ............ .... . . . ..... 1.17
6.5 to 6. 99 •• • • ••• •• • • • . ••• 1.27
7.0 to 7.49 •••
••
.. . . . ...... ......
•
. . . . . ... 1. 39
7.5 to 7. 99 •• . . . . . . . ...
.......... .. . .................
1. 51
8.0 to 8.49 •••
8.5 to 8.99 ••••
.. ..
.. ... .......... ..... 1.64
1. 79
9.0 to 9. 49 •••••• 1.95
9.5 to 9. 99 ••••• .... . .... .. . ... .. 2.12
10.0 to 10. 49 ••• . ... .. . ... ... .. 2.31
10.5 to 10.99 ••
11.0 to 11.49 ••
.. ..... .. . . . . . .... . .. . .... .. .. ... 2.51
2. 7 3
. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .
11.5 to 11 • 99 ••
12.0 to 12.49 ••
.. . .. ....... ...... . .......... .. .... 2. 9 8
3.24
12.5 to 12.99.
13.0 to 13.49 •••••
13.5 to 13.99 ••••
.... . ..• • • .• ...... ... ....... .... ....• • • 3.53
3.84
4. 18
14.0 or greater ••••• ..... . . . . . .. 4.36

by a new source subject to this subpart, in addition to the
discharge allowed by paragraph (b) of this section. The alloca-
tion allowed for ballast water flow, as kg/cum (lb/Mgal), shall
be based on those ballast waters treated at the refinery.
59
for ballast water
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BODS.................................. 0.048 0.026

TSS................................... 0.033 0.021
COD ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • 47 0 •24
Oil and grease........................
pH. • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ____________
0.015
( 2)
0.008
_.____ ( 2)
~~------

1,000 gal of flow)
BODS ••••••••••• • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •• • • 0.40 0.21

TSS........ .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 0.27 0.17
COD ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3•9 2 •0
Oil and grease........................
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • _____________.____
0.126
( 2)
0.067
( 2)
~~------
1 See footnote following table in 419.13(d.


discharged with a total organic carbon concentration not to exceed
5 mg/ 1.
(e) Effluent Limitations for Runoff - (Reserved)
419.17 Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS)
Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7, any new source subject to
this subpart which introduces pollutants into a publicly owned
treatment works must comply with 40 CFR Part 403 and achieve the
following pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).
(a) The following standards apply to the total refinery flow
contribution to the POTW:
60
Pretreatment
standards
sources -
maximum for
an 1 da
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Oil and grease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ·L 10 0

1 aa
Ammonia as N ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
--------
(b) The following standard is applied to the cooling tower
discharge part of the total refinery flow to the POTW by
multiplying: (1) The standard; (2) by the total refinery flow to
the POTW; and (3) by the ratio of the cooling tower discharge
flow to the total refinery flow.
Pretreatment
standards
Pollutant or pOllutant property for existing
sources -
maximum for
an 1 da
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Total chromium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [ 1
61
Subpart B - Cracking Subcategory
419.20 Applicability; description of the cracking subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are applicable to all discharges
from any facility that produces petroleum products by the use of
topping and cracking, whether or not the facility includes any
process in addition to topping and cracking. The provisions of
this subpart are not applicable, however, to facilities that
include the processes specified in Subparts C, o, or E of this
part.
The general definitions, abbreviations.and methods of analysis
set forth in Part 401 of this chapter and the specialized defini-
tions set forth in 419.11 shall apply to this subpart.
BPT effluent l1m1tat1ons
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BODS • •••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 28.2 15.6
TSS • .....•...•.••••.....•.....•..•...• 19.5 12.6
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 210. 10 9.
Oil and grease .•••..•••.....•••.•••.•• 8.4 4.5
Phenolic compounds •.••....••.••.•••••• 0.21 0 10
0
Ammonia as N ••••••••••••• ••••••••••••• 18.8 8.5

Sulfide .............................. . 0.18 0.082
Total chromium •••••.••.•...••••••••••• 0.43 0.25
Hexavalent chromium •....•....•••••••.. 0.035 0.016
pH • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • . • •• • • • • • • • • • • • ( 2) ( 2)
62
................. .......... ........

..
.• ..........
BODS ••• 9.9 5.5
..
TSS ••••
COD ( 1 ) ••••
Oil and grease •••
............... ..... ..• ...... 6.9
74.0
4.4
38.4
Phenolic compounds •••
Ammonia as N •• ••••••
.. ......................... 3.0
0.074
1.6
0.036
Sulfide •••••••••••••
Total chromium ••••••
................
. . . . . ...
.
6.6
0.065
3.0
0.029
Hexavalent chromium. ...............

.......... 0.15
0.012
( 2)
0.088
0.0056
( 2)
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
(b) The limits set forth in paragraph {a) of this section are to
consecutive days.
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 2 4. 9 ••••••

25.0 to 49.9 .••••
...... .. ...... .....
....... ..... • • . . ......... 0.91
0.95
. . .. . ....
... ......................... . ...
so.o to 7 4 • 9 ..•..•.. 1.04
75.0 to 99.9 •••••
100 to 124.9 ••••••••
. . . .. . . . . .. .
. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . 1.13
1. 23
125.0 to 149.9.
150.0 or greater. .... .......... .......... ....... ..... . . . .. 1. 35
1. 41
(2) Process factor.
Process
Less than 2.49 •••••.•.••• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 0.58
2.5 to 3.49.
3.5 to 4. 49 ••• .. . . ... . ..........
.... ...• ..... .. 0.63
0.74
..... ....... ......

4.5 to 5.49 ... . . . . . . .
5.5 to 5.99 ••
........ . ... ..... 0.88
.... ....... . . . ........ .. ......

1.00
6.0 to 6. 49 •• 1.09
6.5 to 6.99 •• 1.19
7.0 to 7. 49 • . . . . . . . . . . • . .
7.5 to 7. 9 9 •••••
8.0 to 8.49.
...
... .. ........ ..... ........ 1. 29
1. 41
8.5 to 8.99. ... .. .. ....... .. . ........ .. ......

9.0 to 9 • 49 ..••....•.••••
1.53
1. 67
9.5 or greater. . .. . . . . . . . . . .. 1. 82
1.89
63
(c) The provisions of 419.12(c) apply to discharges of process
wastewater pollutants attributable to ballast water by a point
source subject to the provisions of this subpart.
ties controlled by thi~ paragraph, attributable to once-through
paragraph (b) of this section. Once~through cooling water may be
discharged with a total organic carbon concentration not to
exceed 5 mg/1.
subpart.
(2) If contaminated runoff is commin~led or treated with process
wastewater, or if wastewater consist1ng solely of contaminated
runoff which exceeds 15 mg/1 oil and grease or 110 mg/1 TOC LS
64
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BODS • •••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 48. 26.

TSS • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 33. 21.
coo ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 360. 180.
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••.•• 15 • 8.
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) ••••••••••••• 0.35 0. 17
Total chromium •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.73 0.43
Hexavalent chromium •••••••••••••••.••• 0.062 0.028
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .••• ( 2) ( 2)
1,000 gal of flow)
BODS • ••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0.40 0.22

TSS • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.28 0.18
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3.0 1.5
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.13 0.067
Total chromium ••••.••••••••••••••••••• 0.0060 0.0035
pH • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ''----'(...;;2;..::)_ _ _.....__.-:...(.;;;;.2~)- - -

tion attainable by the application of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable (BAT):
65
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
COD ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Ammonia as N•••••••••
..................................
210. 109.
18.8 8.5
Sulfide............................... 0.18 0.082
~----~------~----~~------
COD ( 1 ) • • • • • • • .............. ........................ ...... 74.0 38.4
Ammonia as N • • 6.6 3.0
Sulfide ••••••• ............... ....... 0.065 0.029
consecutive days.
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 24.9 ••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.91
25.0 to 49.9 ••••• 0.95
50.0 to 7 4. 9 •••••
7 5 • 0 to
.. . . .. . ... .. .. ... ... . .
9 9 • 9 ••••.•..••.••.•••••••.••..••••.••••••.•
... . . . .... .. 1.04
1. 1 3
100 to 1 24.9 ••.........••.•.•... . . ... . . 1.23
1 2 5 • 0 to 149 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1. 35
150.0 or greater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 41
(2) Process factor

Process
Less than 2. 49. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . ... ......... . .... . ....
0.58
2.5 to 3.49 ••••
3.5 to 4.49 ••••••••••
4.5 to 5.49 ••••••••••
... ............ .... .......... .............. .......... .. 0.63
0.74
0.88
5.5 to 5.99 ••
6.0 to 6 • 4 9 ••••.•••••
... . ..... .. ...... .. ...... ...... .. .... .... . .. 1.00
1.09
66
6. 5 to 6 • 9 9 •••......••••••.....••.•••••.....•.•.••. 1 • 19
7 •0 to 7 • 4 9 ......................................... . 1. 29
7 •5 to 7 • 9 9 •••••...••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••• 1. 41
8 •0 to 8 • 4 9 •••.••..•••••••••.•.•••••••••.•••••••••• 1.53
8.5 to 8 . 9 9 •••..•.....•.••.••.•..••••.••.....••.••. .1 • 67
9 •0 to 9 • 4 9 •••••.•.•••••••••••••..•••••••••.••••••. 1•82
9.5 or greater .................................... . 1.89
{3) See the comprehensive example in Subpart c, 419.42(b)(3).

{c)(l) In addition to the provisions contained above pertaining
achievable (BAT):
FQr each of the regulated pollutant parameters listed below, the
effluent limitation for a given refinery is the sum of the pro-
ducts of each effluent limitation factory times the applicable
reader. They can be cross-referenced in the Develo!ment Document
for Effluent Limitations Guidelines, New Source Per ormance
Standards, and Pretreatment Standards for the P troleum Refinin
Po1nt ource ategory E A 4), Ta e III- , pp. 4- 4.
BAT effluent limitation
factor
Average of
daily values
and process type any 1 day consecutive
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
Crude •.•••••••....•.••...•...• · · • · · · . 0.037 0.009
Cracking and coking •••••••.•••••••... 0.419 0. 10 2
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.226 0.055
Lube • •.•••••••••.•••••••••••••••••.•. 1.055 0.257
Reforming and alkylation •..•.•••••..• 0.377 0.092
Total chromium:
Crude ••••••••••.••...•••••••.•••••••. 0.030 0.011
Cracking and coking •••••••••••••.••.. 0.340 0. 118
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.183 0.064
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.855 0.297
Reforming and alkylation ••••••••••••• 0.305 0. 106
67
Crude •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.0019 0.0009
Cracking and coking •••••••••••••••••• 0.0218 0.0098
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0117 0.0053
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.0549 0.0248
Reforming and alkylation ••••••••••••• 0.0196 0.0088

Crude •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.013 0.003
Cracking and coking •••• ~ ••••••••••••• 0.147 0.036
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.079 0.019
Lube • •.••••••••.•.••••••.••••••••••.• 0.369 0.090
Total chromium:
Crude •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.011 0.004
Cracking and coking •••••••••••••••••• 0. 119 0.041
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.064 0.022
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.299 0. 10 4
Crude •••••••••••••.•.•••••••••••.•.•• 0.0007 0.0003
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0041 0.0019
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.0192 0.0087
Reforming and alkylation ••••••••••••• 0.0069 .0.0031
.. ~----------~-------------
(2) See the comprehensive example in Subpart o, 419.43(c)(2).
(d) The provisions of 419.13(d) apply to discharges of process

source subject to tpe provisions of this subpart.

part.
sample.
68
table:

Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed

Total chromium •••••••••.••••.••••••.•. 0.60 0.21
Hexavalent chromium ••••••••••••••..••. 0.062 0.028
COD 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 36 0 • 18 0 •
~~~~------~--~~-------
1 ,000 gal of flow)
Phenolic compounds ( 4AAP) •..•.•••••... 0.0029 0.0014

Total chromium •.••••••..••••••••••••.• 0.0050 0.0018
Hexavalent chromium ••..•••••••.••.•••• 0.00052 0.00023
coo 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3•0 1•5
--------------~-------------

69
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BODS • •••••••••••••••• ... ... 28.2 15.6
19.5 12.6
TSS • ••••••••••••••••
Oil and grease ••••• .. . . . . . . .. . 8.4
( 1)
4.5
( 1)
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
BODS • ••••••••••••••••• 9.9 5.5

TSS • ....••••••••.•••.••. • • 6.9 4.4
Oil and grease ..••••.••••...••••.• 3.0 1.6
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• •~..,__..:(:...;.1..:)-...___-..~~--~(-1~)-----
Within the range of 6.0 to 9.0

consecutive days.
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less
25.0
50.0
than 24.9 •••••..
to 49.9 •••••••••
to 7 4. 9 •••••••••
... ........ ... ......
. ... ................... 0.91
0.95
1•04
75.0 to 99.9 •••••••.•.•••. .. .. . 1. 1 3
1 0 0 to 1 2 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • •
125.0 to 149.9 •••.••...•
...... .. ....... .... .. . 1 • 23
1. 35
150.0 or greater •••..••. .. 1•41
(2) Process factor.
Process
...... ..
... ......... .................. ... ... ...... ......
Less than 2.49 •.• 0.58
2.5 to 3.49 .••• 0.63
3.5 to 4. 49 ••••
4.5 to 5.49 .•••
........ ....... .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . 0.74
0.88
70
5.5 to 5.99........................................ 1.00
6.0 to 6.49........................................ 1.09
6.5 to 6.99........................................ 1.19
7.0 to 7.49........................................ 1.29
7.5 to 7.99......................................... 1.41
8.0 to 8.49......... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 1.53
8.5 to 8.99........................................ 1.67
9.0 to 9.49......... .. . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.82
9.5 or greater..................................... 1.89

discharged after the applic~tion of the best conventional pollu-.
tant .~ontrol technology currently available by a point source
subject to this subpart.
table:
71
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BOD 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 48 • 26 •
TSS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . . • • • • • • • • 33 • 21•
Oil and grease........................ 15. 8.
pB. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
--~~------~----~~------
1,000 gal of flow)
BOD 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • 40 0 • 22
TSS ..•....•.. •••.... •. • • • •• . .• • • . • • .• • 0.28 0.18
Oil and grease........................ 0.13 0.067
pB •••••••••••••••••••••• ; • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
----~~----~~--~~------
419.25 Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES). ·
subject to this subpart which introduces pollutants into a
Pretreatment
standards
sources -
maximum for
an 1 da
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Oil and grease . ...................................

Ammonia as N ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
·L____ _____
10 0
_;.,;;.....;....
10 0
1 Where the discharge to the POTW consists solely of sour

72
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1 ,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BOD 5 • •••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • 16.3 8.7
TSS • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . • • . . • . 11 • 3 7.2
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 118. 61.0
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••••• 4.8 2.6
Ammonia as N •••• •••••••••••••••••••••• 18.8 8.6
Sulfide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 1OS 0.048
Total chromium ••••••••••••••••••••••.• 0.24 0.14
Hexavalent chromium •••••.•.••••••••••• 0.020 0.0088
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • ( 2) ( 2)
BODS • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5.8 3• 1
TSS • • . . . . • . . . . . • • • . . · · • · · · · • • · • • · • · · • · 4.0 2.5
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 41 • 5 21.0
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••••• 1.7 0. 9 3
Phenolic compounds ••••••.•.••.•..••••. 0.042 0.020
Ammonia as N ••.••••••••••....••••••••• 6.6 3.0
Sulfide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.037 0.017
Total chromium ••••.••••••••••••••••••• 0.084 0. 0 49
Hexavalent chromium ••••••..••.••.•.••. 0.0072 0.0032
pH • • • . • •••. • • • • • • • .•• • • ••• • • • .•. • • • • • • ( 2) ( 2)
consecutive days.
73
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 24.9 •••••••••••.•••••••..•••••••••••••••• 0.91
25.0 to 49.9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.95
50 • 0 to 7 4 • 9 • . . . • • . • • . . • . . • . . . • • • . . . • • . . • • • . . . • . . • . 1 • Q4
7 5 •0 to 9 9 • 9 • • . • . • . • . . • • • . • . • • . • • . . . • • . . • • . . • • • . . . . 1 • 13
1 0 0 to 1 2 4 • 9 •••••••••••••••••••••••• ~••••••••••••••• 1 • 23
1 2 5 • 0 to 1 4 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• 1 • 35
150.0 or greater .................................. . 1 • 41
(2) Process factor.

Process
Less than 2. 49 • ••••.•..••••••••••••••••••••••••••.. 0.58
2.5 to 3.49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 0.63
3.5 to 4.49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 0.74
4 • 5 to 5 • 4 9 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. 0.88
5.5 to 5.99 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 • 00
6 • 0 to 6 • 4 9 ••••••••••••••••••....••••••••••••.••••. 1 • 09
6 • 5 to 6 • 9 9 •••.••.••.•.••...•...•...•••.•••..•••... 1 • 19
7 • 0 to 7 • 4 9 •.••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••.•••••••. 1 • 29
7 • 5 to 7 • 9 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • , • • • • • • • • • . • • • ... • • • • . .• 1•41
8 • 0 to 8 • 4 9 •••..••••.••••••••.•••••••••..•••.••••.• 1. 53
8 • 5 to 8 • 9 9 •••.•.••••....••.••...••.••.••••••••.... 1 • 67
9 • 0 to 9 • 4 9 .•.••••••••.••.••...•....••...•....••... 1•82
9. 5 or greater .................................... . 1 • 89
(3) See the comprehen~ive example in Subpart D, 419.42(b)(3).

exceed 5 mg/1.
(e) Effluent Limitations for Runoff-(Reserved)

74
Pretreatment
standards
Pollutant or pollutant property for new
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Oil and Grease . ••••.••.•.••••...••..••...••••••..• ·L 10 0

Anunonia as N ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • '-~--1;..;0;...0;_.,_ __
multiplying: (1) The standard: (2) by the total refinery flow to
the POTW~ and (3) by the ratio of the cooling tower discharge
Pretreatment
standards
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Total chromium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [ 1
75
Subpart C - Petrochemical Subcategory
419.30 Applicability~ description of the petrochemical sub-
category.
topping, cracking, and petrochemical operations whether or not
the facility includes any process in addition to topping,
cracking, and petrochemical operations. The provisions of this
subpart shall not be applicable, however, to facilities that
include the processes specified in Subparts D or E of this part.
For purposes of this subpart:
(a) The general definitions, abbreviations and methods of analy-
sis set forth in Part 401 of this chapter and the specialized
definitions set forth in 419.11 shall apply.
(b) The term "petrochemical operations" shall mean the produc-
tion of second-generation petrochemicals (i.e., alcohols, keto-
nes, cumene, styrene, etc.) or first generation petrochemicals
and isomerization products (i.e. BTX, olefins, cyclohexane, etc.)
when 15 percent or more of refinery production is as first-
generation petrochemicals and isomerization products.

76
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock}
BODS • •••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 34.6 18.4
TSS • . . . . • . . . • • • . . . . • . . . . . • • . . . . • . . . . • . 23.4 14.8
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 210.0 109.0
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••••• 11 • 1 5.9
Phenolic compounds •••••••••••..••••••• 0.25 0.120
Ammonia as N •••• •••••••••••••••• : ••••• 23.4 10.6
Sulfide .•..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.22 0.099
Total chromium •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.52 0.30
pB • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 2} ( 2}
1,000 bbl of feedstock}
BODS • ••••••••••••• • •••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 12. 1 6.5

TSS e •••••••••••••• ~ •••••••••••••••••••• 8.3 5.25
coo ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 74.0 38.4
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••.•• 3.9 2•1
Phenolic compounds .••••••••••••••••••• 0.088 0.0425
Ammonia as N •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8.25 3.8
Sulfide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.078 0.035
Total chromium ••••..•••••••••••••..••. 0. 18 3 0. 107
Hexavalent chromium •••••••••••.••.•••• 0.016 0.0072
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••• • • • • • • • •.•. ( 2} ( 2}
1 See footnote following table in 419.13(d}.
(b) The limits set forth in paragraph (a} of this section are to
consecutive days.
(1} Size factor.
S1ze
Less than 24.9 .•...••.••••.•..•••.•.••.•••.•.•.•... 0.73

25.0 to 49.9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.76
50 • 0 to 7 4 • 9 . • . . . . • . . . • • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • . . • . . . • . . . . 0.83
7 5 • 0 to 9 9 • 9 • • • • . . • • • • . . • . . • . . • • • . . . . • . • • • • . . . . • • . . 0.91
1a0 to 1 2 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0.99
77
1 2 5 • 0 to 1 4 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 08
150.0 or greater................................... 1.13
(2) Process factor.

Process
Less than 4.49 ..................................... . 0.73
4 • 5 to 5 • 4 9 • • • • . • . • . • • • • • . • • . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . • . . • . . . 0.80
5.5 to 5.99 .. •..............................•...... 0.91
6 • 0 to 6 • 4 9 ••••••••••••••••••••••••.••.•••••••••••• 0.99
6.5 to 6.99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 1.08
7 • 0 to 7 • 4 9 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••.....•.. 1.17
7 . 5 to 7 • 9 9 • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . 1.28
8.0 to 8.49 .. . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 39
8 • 5 to 8 • 9 9 •••...•.•.••••.••.....•••....•..•••••••. 1. 51
9 • 0 to 9 • 4 9 • • • . . . . . • . . • . • . . • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . • • . . 1. 65
9.5 or greater .................................... . 1. 72

exceed 5 mg/ 1 •
(e) Effluent LimitationR for Contaminated Runoff
subpart.
78

Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BODS • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 48. 26.

TSS • •••••.•••••••.•••••••••••••••••••• 33. 21.
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 360. 180.
Oil and grease •.•...••••••••••.••••••• 1s. a.
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) ••••••••.•.•• 0.35 0.17
Total chromium •••••••••••••••.•••••••• 0.73 0.43
Hexavalent chromium ••••••••.•••••••••• 0.062 0.028
pH. • • • • • • • • . • . • • • . • • • • . • • . . . • . . • • . • . . . (2) ( 2)
----~~----~----~~-----
1,000 gal of flow)
BODS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.40 0.22

TSS • .•••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••• 0.28 0.18
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3.0 1.5
Oil and grease •••••...••••.••..•..•... 0.13 0.067
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) .•.••••.••... 0.0029 0.0014
Total chromium •••••••..•••..•••••••••. 0.0060 0.0035
Hexavalent chromium •••.••••.•••••.•••. 0.00052 0.00023
pH. • . • • • . . . • • • . . • • • • • • • . . • • • • • . • • . • • • . ( 2) ( 2)
----~~----~----~~-----
79
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1 ,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••
Ammonia as N •••
................................ ...... . 210.
23.4
109.
10.6
Sulfide •••••••• ........ ...... .. ·······~---0~.2~2~--~--~0~·-0~9~9___
COD ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 74.0 38.4

Ammonia as N ••• . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 8.25 3.8
Sulfide............................... 0.078 0.035
~--------------~----------------
(b) The limits set forth in paragraph (a)- of this section are to
be multiplied by the following. ~actors to calculate the maximum
consecutive days.
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 24.9 •••••••••••••••••

25.0 to 4 9 • 9 ••••.•••••••••.••.•
.................... .. .. ............. 0.73
0.76
50.0 to 7 4 • 9 ••••••••..••••.••••
75.0 to 99.9 •••••••••••
100 to 124.9 •••••••••••
.................................. ..................... .................. 0.83
0.91
0.99
125.0 to 149.9 •••••••••
150.0 or greater ••••••• ... . ... ....... ... ......... 1.08
1.1 3
(2) Process factor.
Process
Process con£i uration factor
Less than 4.49.
... .... .. .... .. ....... .. .. .. .. .... .. .... 0.73
4.5 to 5.49 ••••
5.5 to 5. 99 ••••
6.0 to 6.49 ••••
..... ............. ....... ................. 0.80
0.91
0.99
6.5 to 6. 99 •••.
7.0 to 7.49 ••••
...... . .... .................... .. ...... . . .. 1.08
1.17
80
7 • 5 to 7 • 9 9 • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • . • 1 . 2a
8 • 0 to 8 • 4 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 39
8 • 5 to 8 • 9 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 51
9 • 0 to 9 • 4 9 • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • 1•65
9 • 5 or greater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 1•72

(c)(1) In addition to the provisions contained above pertaining
achievable (BAT):
122.4S(b). Applicable production processes are presented in
Standards, and Pretreatment Standards for the Petroleum Refining
Point Source Category (EPA 440/1-82/014), Table III-7, pp. 49-54.
BAT effluent l~m~tat1on
factor
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
Crude ••••••••••••....•.••.••.•••.••.. 0.037 0.009
Cracking and coking •••.•••••••••••••• 0.419 0.102
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.226 O.OS5
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1. ass 0.2S7
Total chromium:
Crude • •.••..••••..••...•..••.•.•••.•. 0.030 0.011
Cracking and coking ••..•••••••.•••••. 0.340 0. 1 18
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.183 0.064
Lube • •••.••••.•••••••••••••.•••••.•.• 0.8SS 0.297
Reforming and alkylation ••••••••••••• 0.30S 0. 106
81
Crude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0019 0.0009
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0117 0.0053
Lube • ••••.•••.•••••••. • • • • • · • • • • • • • · • 0.0549 0.0248
Reforming and alkylation •••••••••••.• 0.0196 0.0088

Crude •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.013 0.003
Cracking and coking ••••••.•.••••••••• 0.147 0.036
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.079 0.019
Lube • ••.••••••••••••••..••..••••.••.• 0.369 0.090
Reforming and alkylation ••••.•••••••• 0.132 0.032
Total chromium:
Crude •.•..••.••.•••••...••...•.••...• 0.011 0.004
Cracking and coking •...•••..••.•.••.• 0. 1 19 0.041
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.064 0.022
Lube • ••••••••.•••••••...•.•.•••••••.• 0.299 0.10 4
Reforming and alkylation ••••••.•••••• 0.107 0.037
Crude ••••••••••••.•••••••••••••.••••• 0.0007 0.0003
Cracking and coking •••.••••.••••••••• 0.0076 0.0034
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0041 0.0019
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.0192 0.0087
Reforming and alkylation ••••••••.•••• 0.0069 0.0031
(2) See the comprehensive example in Subpart
~----~----~~------~----
o, 419.43(c)(2).
part.

sample.
82
table:

Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
Phenolic compounds ( 4AAP) ••. ·•••••••••• 0.35 0.17

Total chromium ••••.••••••••••••••••••• 0.60 0.21
Hexavalent chromium •••••.••••••••••••. 0.062 0.028
COD ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 360 • 18 0 •
------~------~--~~------
1,000 gal of flow)
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) •........•••. 0.0029 0.0014

Total chromium •••••••••••••.•••••••••• 0.0050 0.0018
Hexavalent chromium .•••••••••••••••••• 0.00052 0.00023
coo ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3•0 1• 5
--------------~------------
83
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1 ,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BODS • ••••••••••••••••••• .. ...... ..... .
34.6 18.4
TSS • .•...••...•••••••... 23.4 14.8
Oil and grease........................ 11.1 5.9
pH • ••••••••••• ·• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
----~~------~--~~~------
BODS • ••••••••••••••••••• • • •••• • •

TSS • •..••.•..•••••••
......
.............. 12.1
8.3
6.5
5.25
Oil and grease ••• 3.9 2.1
pH. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
----~~------~--~~--------
1 W1thin the range of 6.0 to 9.0
be multiplied by the follow~ng factors to calculate the maximum
for any one day and maximum average of ~aily values for thirty
consecutive days.
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 24.9 •••..• . ... . .. .. . .. 0.73
25.0 to 49 • 9 .•••.••• ........ ... . ..... ..........................
50 • 0 to 7 4 • 9 • • . . . . . • • • . . • . . . . . .•
0.76
0.83
7 5. 0 to 9 9 . 9 . . . . . . • . • . . . . • . . . • . .
100 to 124.9 ••••. . . ...... .
........... .... ..
. 0.91
1 2 5 • 0 to 1 4 9 • 9 • . •
150.0 or greater .••••.•
.......... ............ 0.99
1.08
1 • 13
(2) Process factor.

Process
Less than 4.49 ••...•.••.••••• . ......... .. 0.73
4 • 5 to 5 • 4 9 •••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.80
5 • 5 to 5 • 9 9 .••••.•••.•.••••.••••.•
6 • a to 6 • 4 9 .•.•..••••••••••••••• ........ .... ... ... .. 0.91
0.99
84
6.5 to 6. 99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 • 08
7.0 to 7. 49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 • 17
7.5 to 7.99 . . • . . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 1 • 28
8.0 to 8 • 49 .•••••••••.••.....•..••..••...•.•..•.... 1. 39
8.5 to 8. 99 .. • . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 • 51
9.0 to g. 49 • ••.••••.••.•........•••.••...••..••..•. 1. 6 5
9.5 or greater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 • 72


part.
{1) If wastewater consists solely of contaminated runoff and is
table:
85
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters of flow}
8005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48. 26.

TSS................................... 33. 21.
Oil and grease........................ 15. 8.
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
--~~--------~--~~-------
1,000 gal of flow)
BOD 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • 40 0 • 22
TSS.. •. . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . • .. •. . . . . . 0.28 0.18
Oil and grease........................ 0.13 0.067
pH. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
----~~------~--~~-------
Pretreatment
standards
sources -
maximum for
an 1 da
{Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Oil and Grease • .•.•..•••....•..••••••...••......•.
Ammonia as N ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
·L 10 0
----------
10 0

_with this limit or the daily maximum mass limitation for
ammonia set forth in 419.33(a} and {b).
86
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
Metric units {kilograms per
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BOO 5 • ••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 21.8 11.6
TSS • •.••...•••••.••••••••.••.••...•••. 14.9 9.5
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 133. 69.0
Oil and grease ••••••••••••••••••.••••• 6.6 3.5
Phenolic compounds •••••••••.•••••••••• 0.158 0.077
.Ammon i a as N • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• 23.4 10.7
Sulfide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.140 0.063
Total chromium ••••••••••••••••••••..•• 0.32 0.19
pH. .. . • • • • • • .. . . • • • • • • • • • • . . . . • • . •. • .. . . . . (2) ( 2)
----~~----~----~~-----
1 ,000 bbl of feedstock)
BODS • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 7.7 4.1
TSS • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5.2 3.3
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 47.0 24.0
Oil and grease •••••••••.••.••.•••...•• 2.4 1.3
Phenolic compounds •••••.••.••••••••••• 0.056 0.027
Ammonia as N • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.3 3.8
Sulfide .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.050 0.022
Total chromium ••••••••••••••••.•••...• 0.116 0.068
Hexavalent chromium •••••••••••••••.••• 0.0096 0.0044
pH • ••• • .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 2) ( 2}
~--~---------------------
1 See footnote following Table in 419.13(d}.
{b) The limits set forth in paragraph {a) of this section are to
consecutive days.
87
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 2~.9..................................... 0.73
25.0 to 49.9... ... . • . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.76
5 0 • 0 to 7 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • . 0.83
7 5 • 0 to 9 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ; 0 •91
1 0 0 to 1 2 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 •99
1 2 5 • 0 to 14 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 08
150.0 or greater................................... 1.13
(2) Process factor.
Process
Less than 4.49 ••.••• •••••••.....•••••••.••••••••••• 0.73
4 • 5 to 5 • 4 9 •••••.••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••. 0.80
5 • 5 to 5 • 9 9 •.•....•••....•..•..•••........••••..•.. 0.91
6 • 0 to 6 • 4 9 •••••••.••••••••••••..••.••.•.•••••••••. 0.99
6 • 5 to 6 • 9 9 ••.••..••••••••••.••.•••.•••••••••••••.. 1.08
7 • 0 to 7 • 4 9 ••••.•••••.••••••••••..••••••••••••••••. 1.17
7 • 5 to 7 • 9 9 •••.•••••••••••••••..•..••••••••.•••.••• 1. 28
8 • 0 to 8 • 4 9 ••••••••••••••••••..•.••••••••••••••.••• 1. 39
8 • 5 to 8 • 9 9 •.•...•.•••.•••.•••••.•••••.•.•..•.•.•.. 1. 51
9 • o to 9 • 4 9 .••••••••••••••.•......•••••••••••.•.•.. 1.65
9.5 or greater .................................... . 1. 72

exceed 5 mg/1.
(e) Effluent Limitations for Runoff - (Reserved)


88
Pretreatment
standards
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Oil and grease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ·j 100 ••

Ammonia as N ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •...._ _1_0-.0...______
Pretreatment
standards
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Total chromium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ·L
...._______
89
Subpart D - Lube Subcategory
419.40 Applicability: description of the lube subcategory.

topping, cracking, and lube oil manufacturing processes, whether
or not the facility includes any process in addition to topping,
cracking, and lube oil manufacturing processes. The provisions
of this subpart are not applicable, however, to facilities that
include the processes specified in Subparts C and E of this part.
The general definitions, abbreviations and methods of analysis

control t&ehnology currently available (BPT):
~PT ettluent 11m1tat1ons
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BOD 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 50 • 6 25 • 8
TSS • . . • • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.6 22.7
COD ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 36 0 • 18 7 •
Oil and grease........................ 16.2 8.5
Phenolic compounds.................... 0.38 0.184
A.mmonia as N..... .. . . . . . . . . . . .• . . . . . . . 23.4 10.6
Sulfide............................... 0.33 0.150
Total chromium........................ 0.77 0.45
Hexavalent chromium................... 0.068 0~030
pH •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• (2) (2)
~--~~----~----~~------
90
BODS ••••
TSS •••• ...... ..... .......................... ......
COD (1) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
17.9
12.5
127.
9. 1
8.0
66.0
••••••••
Oil and grease.
Phenolic compounds ••
.............. 5.7
0.133
3.0
0.065
Ammonia as N • • • • • ••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••• 8.3 3.8
Sulfide ••••••••
Total chromium ••
........ ... .. ..... 0.118
0.273
0.053
0.160
Hexavalent chromium. .... .. a.• 024 0.011
pH. • ............. .. ..... . ...
•• ( 2) ( 2)
1 See footnote following table in 419.13(d)
consecutive days.
( 1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 49.9

50.0 to 74.9 •••••
............................................. . .................. 0.71
0.74
75.0 to 99.9 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0.81
100.0 to 124.9 •••••••• 0.88
...
............ ......
125.0 to 149.9. 0.97
150.0 to 17 4 • 9 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1.05
175.0 to 199.9 ••• •. 1 • 14
200.0 or greater. 1.19
(2) Process factor.
Process
Less than 6. 49.

6.5 to 7. 49 •••••••
7.5 to 7 . 9 9 •••.••..••.
...... .... ...... .......... 0.81
0.88
1 • 00
8.0 to 8.49. . ... 1.09
8.5 to 8.99 •• 1.19
9.0 to 9. 49 •• 1 • 29
9.5 to 9. 99 •• 1. 41
10.0 to 10.49 ••••••••• 1. 53
10.5 to 1 0. 99 •. 1. 67
11.0 to 1 1 • 49 •••••••••
11.5 to 11.99 ••
.... .. ...... .... ... .. 1.82
. . ... ..... 1.98
12.0 to 1 2. 49 •• 2.15
12.5 to 12.99 •••• .... • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. ......
. 2.34
13.0 or greater ••• 2.44
91
(3) Example of the application of the above factors. Example -
Lube refine~y 125,000 bbl per stream day throughput.
CALCULATION OF THE PROCESS
CONFIGURATION
Weighting
Process category Process included factor
Crude ••••••••••••••••••••••• Atm crude distillation.... 1
Vacuum crude distillation
Desalting •••••••••••••••••
Cracking and coking ••••••••• Fluid cat. cracking •••• :.. 6
Visbreaking ••.••..••••••..
Thermal cracking •••••••••.
Moving bed cat. cracking ••
Hydrocracking ••••.•••••••.
Fluid coking •••••• ~ •••••••
Delayed coking ••••.••.•...
Lube. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • Further defined in the de- 13
velopment document.
Asphalt ••••••••••••••••••••• Asphalt production........ 12
Asphalt oxidation •.•••••••
Asphalt emulsifying •••••••
Capac1ty Capac1ty Weight-
Process ( 1 1000 bbl relative to ing Process
per stream through- Factor configu-
day) put ration
Crude:
Atm • ••••••••• 125.0 1.0
Vacuum ••••••• 60.0 0.48
Desalting •••• 125.0 1.0
Total •••••••
Cracking:
...... ... .. . . 2.48 X1 =2.48
FCC • ••••••••• 41.0 0.328

Hydro-
cracking •••••
Total •••••••
Lube: •••••••.•
. .....20.0
.5.3
.. . . . . 0.160
0.488
0.042
X6 =2.93
4.0 0.032
4.9 0.039
Total •••••.•
Asphalt: ••.••.
... ....4.0
.. ... . 0. 11 3
0.032
X13 =1. 4 7
Total ••.••.• . . .. .. . .. . .. . 0.032 X12 =0.38
Refinery process configuration=7.26
92
Notes:
See Table 419.42(b)(2) for process factor. Process factor= 0.88.
See Table 419.42(b){1) for size factor for 125,000 bbl per stream
day lube refinery. Size factor = 0.97.
To calculate the limits for each parameter, multiply the limit
given in 419.42(a) by both the process factor and size factor.
BOOS limit (maximum for any 1 day) = 17.9 x 0.88 x 0.97 = 15.3 lb.
per 1,000 bbl of feedstock.
exceed 5 mg/1.
subpart.
93
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BODS • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • •• • •• 48. 26.

TS S ••••••••••••••• ~· ••••• • •• • • • • • • • • • • • 33. 21 .
coo ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 360. 180.
Oil and grease •••••••.••••••••••.••••• 15. a.
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) •••••••.••.•• 0.35 0.17
Total ch rom i urn •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.73 0.43
pH. . • . • • . . • . . • . • . . . • . . • • • . . • • . . . . . . . . . ( 2) ( 2)
----~~----~----~~------
1,000 gal of flow)
BODS • •••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • 0.40 0.22

TSS • •..•••••.•....••.•..•.......•..... 0.28 0.18
COD ( 1 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0. 1.5
Oil and Grease ••••••.••.••••..••..••.• 0.13 0.067
Phenolic Compounds (4AAP) •••.••••.•.. ~ 0.0029 0.0014
Total Chromium •••••••••••....•.•.••.•• 0.0060 0.0035
Hexavalent Chromium •.••••••••••••••••• 0.00052 0.00023
pB. . . . . • . . . • . • . • . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . ( 2) ( 2)

------------~--------------

94
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••• o•••• o••••• oo• oo••••• o 36 0 • 18 7 •
Ammonia as N • • • oo• • • o• • o• • • • •• o. • • • • • • 23 • 4 10 • 6
Sulfide............................... 0.33 0.150
------~------._--------~---
COD ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 12 7 • 66 • 0
Amino n i a as N • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • 8•3 3•8
sulfide ...•••••.. ·····················~____o_.._1_1~8___.______o_._o_5~3___

consecutive days.
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 49.9 ••••. o••oo••························· 0.71

5 0 • 0 to 7 4 • 9 • • • . • . . • • • • . • • • • • . . . . . . • • • • • . . • • • . . . • • . 0.74
7 5 • 0 to 9 9 • 9 . • • • • . . . . • . . . . . . . • . • • • • • • . . • . . . . • • . . • • • 0.81
1 0 0 to 1 2 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0.88
1 25 • 0 to 1 4 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0.97
1 50 • a to 17 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••• 1 •05
17 5 • 0 to 19 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 14
200.0 or greater . ................................. . 1 • 19
(2) Process factor.

Process
Less than 6. 49 • •••..••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.81
6 • 5 to 7 . 4 9 • • • . . • • . . . . . . . . . . • . • • . . . . . . . . • . . • • • . . . . . 0.88
7 • 5 to 7 . 9 9 ••••.••••.•.•••••.•••••••..••.••.•....•• 1 • 00
8 • 0 to 8 • 4 9 . • . • • • • . . . . • • . . • . . • • • . • . . . . • . . • . . • • . . • • . 1.09
8 • 5 to 8 . 9 9 • . • • • . • . . . • • . . . . . • . . • . • • . . • . . . . . . • • . . . . • 1 • 19
95
9 • 0 to 9 • 4 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • 29
9 . 5 to 9 . 9 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 41
10.0 to , 0. 49...................................... 1. 53
10.5 to 10.99...................................... 1.67
11 • 0 to 11.49...................................... 1.82
11.5 to 1 1 • 99 •• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ' • • • • • 1 • 98
12.0 to 1 2. 49. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2. 1 5
12.5 to 1 2. 99.. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • 2. 34
13.0 or greater.................................... 2.44

to coo, ammonia and sulfide, any existing point source subject to
achievable (BAT):
reader. They can be cross-referenced in the Develooment Document
Standards, and Pretreatment Standards for the Petroleum Refining
Point Source Category (EPA 440/1-82/014), Table III-7, pp. 49-54.
, BAT effluent limitation
factor
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
Crude •.•••••••••••.••••.•..••.••••.•. 0.037 0.009
Crac_king and coking ..••••••.•.••..••• 0.419 0. 10 2
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.226 0.055
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 • 0 55 0.257
96
Total chromium:
Crude • ••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••• 0.030 0.011
Cracking and coking •••••••••••••••••• 0.340 0. 1 18'
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.183 0.064
Lube • ••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••.• 0.855 0.297
Crude • ••.••.•••••••••••.••••••.•••••• 0.0019 0.0009
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0117 0.0053
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.0549 0.0248

Crude •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• : • 0.013 0.003
Cracking and coking •.•••••.•••••••••• 0.147 0.036
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.079 0.019
Lube • •••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.369 0.090
Total chromium:
Crude •••••••••••••••••..••••.•••••••• 0.011 0.004
Cracking and coking •••••••••••••••••• 0. 119 0.041
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.064 0.022
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••• 0.299 0.104
Reforming and alkylation ••••••••••••• 0.107 o.a 37
Hexavalent chromi~m:
'
Crude •.•••..••.••••••••••...•.••••••. 0.0007 0.0003
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0041 0.0019
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.0192 0.0087
Reforming and alkylation •.••••••••••• 0.0069 0.0031
~-------------------------
(2) Example Application of Effluent Limitations Guidelines as
Applicable to Phenolic Compounds, Hexavalent Chromium, and Total
Chromium.
The following example presents the derivation of a BAT phenolic
compounds (4AAP) effluent limitation (30 day average) for a
petroleum refinery permit. This methodology is also applicable
to hexavalent chromium and total chromium.
97
Process Feedstock Rate
Refinery Process ( 1 , OQQ. bbl/day)
1. Atmospheric Crude Distillation 100
2. Crude Desalting 50
3. Vacuum Crude Distillation 75
Total Crude Processes (C) 225
6. Fluid Catalytic Cracking 25
10. Hydrocracking 20
Total Cracking and Coking Processes (K) 45
18. Asphalt Production 5
Total Asphalt Processes (A) 5
21. Hydrofining 3
Total Lube Processes (L) 3
8. Catalytic Reforming 10
·Total Reforming and Alkylation
Processes (R) 10
Note: 30 day average effluent limitation for phenolic compounds
(4AAP), lb/day = (0.003)(225) + {0.036)(45) + (0.019)(5) +
(0.090)(3) + (0.032)(10) = 2.98 lb/day.
part.
sample.
98
table:
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
Phenolic compounds (4AAP)............. 0.35 0.17
Total chromium........................ 0.60 0.21
Hexavalent chromium................... 0.062 0.028
COD 1 I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 360 • , 80 •
~----------~----~~-----
1,000 gal of flow)

Total chromium........................ 0.0050 0.0018
COD (1) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~____3_._o____~----~1~·~5_____


Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BODS.................................. 50.6 25.8
TS S • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 35 • 6 22 • 7
Oil and grease........................ 16.2 8.5
pB • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
99
1,000 bbl of feedstock}
BODS •• • • ••• • • • • ............ ................. ......... 17.9

12.5
9.1
8.0
TSS • •••••••••.• • ·
Oil and grease. .......... ...... ....... 5.7 3.0
pH. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••• .____(__1_);_____......__...:.<_1...:,)_____
Within the range of 6.0 to 9.0
consecutive days.
{ 1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 49.9 ••• ..... . ..... . ..... ...........
50.0 to 74.9 •••••
75.0 to 99.9 •••
... ............................
..................................
0.71
0.74
0.81
100.0· to 124.9. .. .... .......
......... ............. ......... .........
....... .. 0.88
125.0 to 149.9. 0.97
150.0 to 174.9 .•.•.•.••....•..•.•.
17 5. 0 to 199.9 • •.•••••.••.....•• ........... . . ... 1.05
1.14
200.0 or greater •••••••••••••••••• ...... . . . ... 1.19
(2) Process factor.
Process
Less than 6.49. . .. ... .. .. . . ..... .. .. .. 0.81
6.5 to 7. 49 ••••
7.5 to 7.99 ••
....... .... .. . .......... ............ ..
. .... . . .... . . . . . . 0.88
1.00
8.0 to 8.49 ••••
8.5 to 8. 99 •••.
9.0 to 9 • 49 ••••.•
........ ..... . . ...........
.... ................................ .........
... . .. . .... ..
1.09
1.19
9.5 to 9. 99 •••• . ... ............. ..... ...... ... . 1. 29
10.0 to 10.49 ••
10.5 to 10.99 ••
...................... ... ....... . .... .......
.....
1. 41
1.53
1. 67
11.0 to 11.49 ••
11.5 to 11 • 99 ••
.................... ...... .......... .. .. .... .. 1•82
.. ........... ................
12.0 to 12.49 •• . .. ...... ........ . .. . . . 1.98
2.15
12.5 to 12.99 •• .... . .. ... 2.34
13.0 or greater •• . ... .. .. .. 2.44

{d) The quantity and quality of pollutants or pollutant proper-
100
part.
table:
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BOD 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 48 • 26 •
TSS • . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33. 21.
Oil and grease........................ 15. 8.
pB. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
------~------~------------
1,000 gal of flow)
BODS.................................. 0.40 0.22
TSS. . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • • . . . . • . . . . . 0 • 28 0 . 18
Oil and grease........................ 0.13 0.067
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
1 Within the range of 6.0 to 9.0 --------------~------------

subject to this subpart which introduces pollutancs into a
101
Pretreatment
standards
sources -
maximum for
an 1 da
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Oil and Grease ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• L 100

Ammonia as N ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •'-~---.;1...;0;...;0;..__ __
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BODS • •••••••••••••••••••••••••• • •• • • • • 34.6 18.4
TSS • . . . . • • . . . • . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . . • • • . . . . . 23.4 14.9
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 245. 126.
Oil and grease . ............... ·....... . 10.5 5.6
Ammon i a as N • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 23.4 10.7
Sulfide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.220 0.10
Total chromium •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.52 0.31
Bexavalent chromium ••••••.•••••••••••• 0.046 0.021
pB. • . • . • . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . . . ( 2) ( 2)
--------------~------------
102
... ........ .......

'l'SS ••••••••••••••••••••••
COD ( 1) ••
.
BODS • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
. .
. .
. . ..
.
12.2
8.3
87.0
6.5
5.3
45.0
Oil and grease. 3.8 2.0
Phenolic compounds ••••••• 0.088 0.043
Ammonia as N ••••••••••••• 8.3 3.8
Sulfide ••••••••••••••••••••• 0.078 0.035
Total chromium •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.180 0.105
Hexavalent chromium ••••••••• 0.022 0.0072
pB • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 2) ( 2)
consecutive days.
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 49.9 •••
50.0 to 74.9 ••• ..................... . 0.71
0.74
75.0 to 99.9 ••••
100 to 124.9 ••••
. . . .
. .. . ...
. ..
...... 0.81
125.0 to 149.9 •• . . . .. . . 0.88
0.97
150.0 to 174.9 ••
175.0 to 199.9 ••
200.0 or greater ••
. ....................... .... ...................... 1.05
1.14
1 • 19
••
(2) Process factor.
Process
Less than 6.49 . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • . . . . . ............... 0.81
6.5 to 7. 49 ••
7. 5 to 7. 99 ••
8.0 to 8. 49 ••
..... .. .... ....
.. . ....
0.88
1.00
1.09
8.5 to 8. 99 ••
9.0 to 9. 49 ••
..... .. . .....
1.19
1. 29
9.5 to 9. 99 ••
10.0 to 1a . 4 9 •••••••••••••••••••••••
10.5 to 10.99. . ... . . .. .... .. .. .. ...... ............ 1. 41
1.53
1.67
11 • 0 to 11 • 49 •
11.5 to 11.99.
.. . . 1.82
12.0 to 12. 49.
12.5 to 12.99 •••
... .... ... 1.98
2.15
2.34
13.0 or greater. 2.44
----------------------------------------------------------------·--~---------------
103
(3) See the comprehensive example in Subpart D, 419.42(b)(3).
exceed 5 mg/1.
(e) Effluent Limitations for Runoff- (Reserved).
Pretreatment
standards
Pollutant or po~lutant property for new
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Ammonia as N ( 1 ) •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
·L
Oil and grease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
-------
100
(b.) The following standard is applied to the cooling tower
104
Pretreatment
standards
sources -
maximum for
an 1 da
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/l))
Total chromium ..............•...................... [.__ _ _~---
lOS
Subpart E - Integrated Subcategory
419.50 Applicability; description of the integrated subcategory.
topping, cracking, lube oil manufacturing processes, and
petrochemical operations, whether or not the facility includes
any process. in addition to topping, cracking, lube oil manufac-
turing processes, and petrochemical operations.
The general definitions, abbreviations and methods of analysis
practicable control technology currently available (BPT}.
(a} Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30-.32, any existing point
control_technology currently available (BPT}:
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
ESCli>S • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 54.4 28.9
TSS • ••••••••• I •••••••••••••••••••••••• 37.3 23.7
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 388. 198.
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••••• 17. 1 9•1
Phenolic compounds •••.•••••••••••••••• 0.40 0. 19 2
Ammonia as N • ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 23.4 10.6
Sulfide . ............................. . 0.35 0.158
Total chromium ••••.••••••••••••••••••• 0.82 0.48
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 2) ( 2)
---
106
BODS ••• .... ...... ...

TSS • ••••••••
...... 19.2
13.2
10.2
8.4
I
COD ( 1 ) •••••••••••••••••
•••••••••••••••••••••••••
.. . . ... . 136. 70.0

Oil and grease ••
Phenolic compounds.
... .....
_. ••••••••••
6.0
0.14
3.2
0.068
Ammonia as N ••••••••••••••••••••• 8.3 3.8
Sulfide .........................•..... 0. 124 0.056
Total ch romi urn. • • • • • • • • • • ••••.•••••• 0.29 0. 17
Hexavalent chromium ••••••••• 0.025 0.011
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ...... ... ( 2) ( 2)

2 Within the range of 6.• 0 to 9.0
consecutive days.
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 124.9 ••
125.0 to 149.9 ••
...... ... ..... . .. o;73
••• 0.76
150.0 to 174.9 ••• 0.83
175.0 to 199.9 ••
200.0 to 224.9 ••
. . ... ..... . .. . . . 0.91
0.99
225 or greater •• ..... . . ...... ...... 1 •04
( 2) Process factor.
Process
....... ... .. ................• .• • • ... ......

Less than 6.49 •• . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 0.75
6.5 to 7. 49 •• 0.82
7.5 to 7.99 ••
8.0 to 8. 49 •• . .... • • • ... ... ... 0.92
1.00
8.5 to 8.99 •• 1 • 10
. ..
9.0 to 9.49 ••
9.5 to 9.99 •• ..... ... ... .. ... 1. 20
1. 30
.. .... • • • • .• .• .• • • .• .• .• • •• 0 • • • 0
10.0 to 10.49. 0 • • 0 0 0 •• 0 0 0 • 0 •• 0 • 1 • 42
10.5 to 10.99. 1 54
. ... . . ..
• • 0 0
11.0 to 11.49. 1.68

..... .. ..........
11.5 to 11 • 99. 1 83
...........
0. • 0 • 0
12.0 to 12.49. 1 99
0
12.5 to 12.99 ••• 2.17

13.0 or greater. ..... ........ ...... 2.26
107
exceed 5 mg/1.
subpart.
100
BPT effluent l1m1tat1ons
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BOD 5 • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • ••• 48. 26.
TSS • ••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.. 33. 21 •
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 360. 180.
Oil and grease ••••••••.•••.•.••••.•••• 15. 8.
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) ••••••••••••. 0.35 0.17
Total chromium ••••••••••••.••••••••••• 0.73 0.43
Hexavalent chromium •••••.•...••••••••. 0.062 0.028
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 2) (2)
----~~----~----~~-----
1,000 gal of flow)
BODS • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.40 0.22

TSS • •••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. 0.28 0.18
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••• : ••••• 3.0 1.5
Oil and grease ••••••••••.•.••••••••••• 0.13 0.067
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) ••.•.•••••••. 0.0029 0.0014
Total chromium ••••••••••..•.•.•••••••• 0.0060 0.0035
Hexavalent chromium •••• o o o o • • • • • o o . o . o 0.00052 0.00023
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 2) ( 2)

109
Average of
daily. values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
coo ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 38 8 • 19 8 •
Ammonia as N. ••• •• •• • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • 23.4 1G.6
s u 1 f ide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -.,___0;;..;;•..;3;;.;;5~--"'----•0;...;..._1;. .5; . . ;8;. . ___
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••
Ammonia as N •••
....................................... . 136.
8.3
70.0
3.8
Sulfide •••••••• ......•.......•..... 0.124 0.056
------~------~-------------
(b) The limits set for~h in paragraph (a) of this section are to
consecutive days.
( 1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 124.9 •••••••••••••••••
125.0 to 149.9 ...• .•••.••..•....
......... . ...... .....
... 0.73
0.76
150.0 to 174.9 •••••••••••••••••
17 5. 0 to 199.9..... ... . . . . . . . . . . . .
...
. ......... .
..... 0.83
0.91
200.0 to 224.9 . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.99
225 or greater •••••••••••••••••• ............ 1.04
(2) Process factor.

Process
Less than 6.49 ••••••••••
6 • 5 to 7 • 4 9 •••••••••••••
.............. ..................... ... 0.75
0.82
7.5 to 7 • 9 9 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••
8.0 to 8.49 •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
..... ....... 0.92
1.00
8. 5 to 8. 99 •••• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . ............ 1.10
9.0 to 9.49 ••••
... ................ ........ ..... ...
. . . . .. . . 1.20
'
9.5 to 9. 99 •••• 1. 30
110
10 • 0 to 10 • 4 9 • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • 1• 42
1 a. 5 to 10 • 9 9 • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • 1 • 54
11• 0 to 1 1 • 49 • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • ; • • 1 • 68
11• 5 to 1 1 • 99 • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • 1•83
12.0 to 12.49...................................... 1.99
1 2 • 5 to 12 • 9 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2 • 17
13.0 or greater.................................... 2.26

achievable (BAT):
Standards, and Pretreatment Standards for the Petroleum Refinin1
Po1nt source category (EPA 44o/1-82/o14), Table lii-7, pp. 49-5 .
BAT effluent limitation
factor
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
Crude • ••••.•••.••...•••••....••.•...• 0.037 0.009
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.226 0.055
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1. 055 0.257
Reforming and alkylation ••••••••••••• 0.377 0.09 2
Total chromium:
Crude ••••.••..•••••••••.•.••..••.•••• 0.030 0. 0 11
Cracking and coking ••••••••••.••••••• 0.340 0. 118
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.183 0.064
Lube • •••••.••••••••••••••.••.••••...• 0.855 0. 297
Reforming and alkylation •••••.••••••• 0.305 0. 106
111
Crude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0019 0.0009
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0117 0.0053
Lube • ••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••• 0.0549 0.0248
Reforming and alkylation............. 0.0196 0.0088
----~--~~~----~~~~--

Crude ••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••• 0.013 0.003
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.079 0.019
Lube • •••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.369 0.090
Reforming and alkylation ••.••.••••••• 0.132 0.032
Total chromium:
Crude • ••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••• 0.011 0.004
Cracking and coking ••••••.••••.•••.•• 0. 119 0.041
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.064 0.022
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.299 0. 10 4
Reforming and alkylation ••.••..•••••• 0.107 0.037
Crude •••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.0007 0.0003
Asphalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0041 0.0019
Lube • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Reforming and alkylation •.••.••••.••.
. 0.0192 0.0087
0.0031
0.0069
(2) See the comprehensive example in Subpart o, 419.43(c)(2).

ties controlled by this parag~aph, attributable to once-through
part.

sample.
112
table:

Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed

Total chromium........................ 0. 60 0. 21
coo ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 360 • 18 0 •
~----~------~----~------
1,000 gal of flow)
Phenolic compounds (4AAP) ••••••••.•••• 0. 00 29 0.0014

Total chromium .••.••••.••••.••••..•••• 0.0050 0.0018
coo <1 > • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3 • ·o 1•5
--------------~------------
113
BCT effluent limftafions-
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BODS • ••••••••••••
TSS • .•••..•...• ...................................... .... 54.4
37.3
28.9
23.7
Oil and grease ••••••••• ~·········· 17.1 9.1
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •. • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
~--~~--------~----------------
BODS • •••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • •
TSS • ••••••••..••••.••.•••.••.••
Oil and grease.
...... .
............... ......
19.2
13.2
6.0
10.2
8.4
3.2
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
----------------~------------·--
consecutive days.
(1) Size factor.
size__ _
Less than 124.9 .•
. . . . . . . .. . . . .
. . .. . ... . . . . . . . .
0.73
125.0 to 149.9 •••
150.0 to 174.9 •••
175.0 to 199.9 •••••
.......................... .................. ... 0.76
0.83
0.91
200.0 to 224.9 •••
225.0 or greater •.••••••.•.•••••••.
..................................... 0.99
1.04
(2) Process factor.

Process
6.5 to 7.49 •• ...... . ..... ...

Less than 6.49 ••••••••••••••• ... . 0.75
0.82
7.5 to 7.99 •• . ....... ... ... .................... 0.92
8.0 to 8.49 •• . ....................... ....... ... 1.00
8 • 5 to 8 • 9 9 ••••.•••••••••.•••••.••••.••••••.••••. 1.10
114
9 • 0 to 9 • 4 9 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1. 20
9 • 5 to 9 • 9 9 ••...•....•.•••.••..••..•••....•.••.•..• 1.30
10.0 to , 0. 49. ~ . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1•42
10.5 to , 0. 99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.54
11 • 0 to 1 1 • 49 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 • 68
11 • 5 to , , . 99 . .....•.•..•....•.•..........•........ 1.83
12.0 to 1 2. 49 • . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . 1.99
12.5 to , 2. 99 . ....••.•..•................••........ 2. 17
13.0 or greater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.26
------------------------------------------------------ -·------------
discharged after the application oJ the best conventional pollu-
part.
table:
115
--------------------------------------~rnB~CT effluent frmitations-
Average of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
BOD 5 • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 48. 26.
TSS • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33. 21.
Oil and grease........................ 15. 8.
pH. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
----~~----~----~~------
1,000 gal of flow)
BOD 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • 40 0 • 22
TSS................................... 0.28 0.18
Oil and grease........................ 0.13 0.067
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ( 1) ( 1)
----~~----~----~~~--
source~ (PSES). The following standards apply to the total refi-
Pretreatment
standards
sources -
maximum for
any 1 d~
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Oil and Grease • ••.••.••.•••.•••••••.••..••••.••••.

Ammonia as N ( 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
·L 10 0
10 0
......__~..;;.._ ___
1 Where· the discharge to the POTW consists solely of sour
116
Average.of
daily values
days shall
not exceed
Metric units.(kilograms per
1,000 cubic meters
of feedstock)
BODS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 41.6 22. 1
TSS • .••••••..••.••••••••••.•.....•••.• 28. 1 17.9
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 295. 152.
Oil and grease •••••••••••••••••••••••• 12.6 6.7
Ammonia as N •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 23.4 10.7
Sulfide ....................•.......... 0.26 0.12
Total chromium •••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.64 0.37
Bexavalent chromium ••••••••••••••••••• 0.052 0.024
pf1 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ( 2) ( 2)
BOD 5 ••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••• 14.7 7.8
TSS • •.••.••.•.••••..••.•.•••••.•....•• 9.9 6.3
COD ( 1 ) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 104. 54.0
Oil and grease ••••.••••.•••••••.•.•••• 4.5 2.4
Phenolic compounds •••••••••••••.•••••. 0.105 0.051
Ammo n i a ( as N ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 8.3 3.8
Sulfide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.093 0.042
Total chromi urn ••••.•••.••••••••.•••••• 0.220 0.13
Hexavalent chromium ••.•••••••••.•••••. 0.019 0.0084
pH • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . . . • • • • ( 2) ( 2)
----~~----~----~~-----
consecutive days.
117
(1) Size factor.
Size
Less than 124.9 •••••••••••••••••••••••..••••••••••• 0.73
1 2 5 • a to 1 4 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••• 0.76
1 5 0 • 0 to 1 7 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••• 0.83
1 7 5 • 0 to 1 9 9 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0.91
2 0 0 • 0 to 2 2 4 • 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0.99
225 or greater . ................................... . 1.04
(2) Process factor.
Process
Less than 6.49 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0.75
6 • 5 to 7 • 4 9 ••••....••.•••.•••.•••••.•..•.•••••••••. 0.82
7 • 5 to 7 • 9 9 ••••••••••••.•••••••••••.••.•.•••••••••• 0.92
8 • 0 to 8 • 4 9 ••.••••.•.•••••••••••••..••.•.•••••••••• 1.00
8 • 5 to 8 • 9 9 .•••...•...••••..•.••.•..•..•..•.•••.••• 1.10
9 • 0 to 9 • 4 9 •.••.•••.•••••••.•.••••••••.•••••••••••• 1. 20
9 • 5 to 9 • 9 9 •.••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••.••••••• 1.30
10 • 0 to 1 0 • 4 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••• 1.42
10 • 5 to 1 0 • 9 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••• 1. 54
11•0 to 1 1 • 49 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1. 68
11• 5 to 1 1 • 9 9 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 83
I
12 • 0 to 1 2 • 4 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••• 1.99
12 • 5 to 12 • 9 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2.17
13.0 or greater ................................... . 2.26
(3) See the comprehensive example in Subpart o, 419.42(b){3).

exceed 5 mg/1.
(e) Effluent Limitations for Runoff- (Reserved).
following pretreatment 'standards for new sources ( PSNS) .
118
Pretreatment
standards
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Oil and grease .................................... ·L 100

Ammonia as N { 1 ) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
1 Where the discharge to the POTW·consists solely of sour
--------
10 0

multiplying: (1) The standard; {2) by the total refinery flow to
Pretreatment
standards
(Milligrams
per liter
(mg/1))
Total chromium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [_______:_:
119
REGULATION APPENDIX A
PROCESSES INCLUDED IN THE
DETERMINATION OF BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR
TOTAL CHROMIUM, HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM,
AND PHENOLIC COMPOUNDS (4AAP)
Crude Processes:
1. Atmospheric Crude Distillation
2. Crude Desalting
3. Vacuum Crude Distillation
Cracking and Coking Processes:
4. Visbreaking
5. Thermal Cracking
6. Fluid Catalytic Cracking
7. Moving Bed Catalytic Cracking
10. Bydrocrackinq
15. Delayed Coking
16. Fluid Coking
54. Bydrotreating
Asphalt Processes:
18. Asphalt Production
32. 2oo•F Softening Point Unfluxed Asphalt
43. Asphalt Oxidizing
89. Asphalt Emulsifying
Lube Processes:
21. Bydrofininq, Bydrofinishing, Lube Bydrofining
22. White Oil Manufacture
23. Propane Oewaxinq, Propane Oeasphaltinq, Propane Fractioninq,
Propane Oeresining .
24. Duo Sol, Solvent Treating, Solvent Extraction, Duotreacing,
Solvent Cewaxing, Solvent Ceasphalting
25. Lube Vac TWr, Oil Fractionation, Batch Still (Naptha Strip),
Bright Stock Treating
26. Centrifuge & Chilling
27. MEK Oewaxing, Ketone Cewaxinq, MEK-Toluene Oewaxing
28. Deoiling (wax)
29. Naphthenic tubes Production
30. S02 Extraction
34. Wax Pressing
35. Wax Plant (with Neutral Separation)
36. FUrfural Extraction
37. Clay Contacting - Percolation
38. Wax Sweating
~9. Acid T~eating
40. Phenol Extraction
Reforming and Alkylation Processes:
8. B2S04 Alkylation
12. Catalytic Reforming
120
APPENDIX A
PRODUCTION-CASED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Memorandum from J. William Jordan, Chief, NPDES Technical

Support Branch, u.s. EPA to Regional Permits Branch
Chiefs, re: Calculation of Production-Based Effluent
L~its, December 18, 1984.
40 CFR 122.45(b)
121
UNITEO STATeS ENVIRONMENTAL.PROTECTI~.~ AGENCY
WASHINGTON. C.C. 20460
DEC 18 1984
QFFICE QF
WATER
MEMO RANDOM
SUBJECT: Calculation of Production-Based E::luent Limits
FROM: J. William Jordan, Chief IJj~ ~
NPDES Technical Support Bra~~ (EN-336}
~= Regional Permits Branch Chiefs
~he purpose of ~his memorandum is to cla~i:y the procedure

for calculating production-based effluent limita~ions and to ?ro-
vide guidance on the use of alternate limitations. Many effluent
guidelines are expressed in terms of allowable ?Ollutant dis-
charge rate per unit of production. To dete~ine permit limits,
these standards are multiplied by an estima~e of the facility's
actual average production.
~~c~ion 122.45(~} of the N?DES permit program regulations
sets forth the requirements for calculating ?rodu~~ion-based
effluent limitations. The central feature of this seccion is the
requirecent that limitations be based upon a "reasonable measure
of the actual production o: the facility", rac~e= than upon design
capacity. Interpretation of this requirement has proven confusing
in the past. This memorandum provides recommendations for devel-
oping production-based limitations and alternate limitations. ~he
Agency is also planning to revise this ?Ortion of t~e regula~ions,
and has rP-vised Part III of Aoclication :o~ 2C, in order to clari:v
language which might lead to the use of inappropriace production- ·
based limitations.
Background
The proper application of produc~ion-based effluent limita-·
tion guidelines is dependent upon the mechodology tha~ is used to
develop the guidelines. When most guidelines are developed, a
single long term average daily produc~ion value and its relacion-
ship to flow are determined. This is combined with effluent
concentration data collected from plants to form the basis of
the guideline standards. Variability factors are developed on
concentration data obtained from samples taken du=ing periods
of varying production. The variability :actors and performance
data are then userl to derive the guideline standards.
Caleulation of Limitations
To apply ~~ese guidelines, permic writers should de~ermine
122
a single estimate of the expected production over the life of
the permit using the long term average production from the plant's
historical records. Usually, a five year production history
would be used to derive this· value. This single pronuction value
is then multiplied by both the daily maximum and monthly average
guidelines limitations to obtain permit limits. In determinina
this single estima~e, the permit writer should take into account
the distribution of pronuction b~ analyzing data taken as fre-
quently as possible. For most cases, monthly data compiled from
daily data would be sufficient.
The permit writer should avoid the use of a limited amount
of production data in estimating the production for a specific
facility. For example, the data from a particular month may
be unusually high and thus lead to the derivation of effluent
limitations which are not actually reflective of normal plant
operations. As previously explained, effluent limi~ations
guidelines already accoun~ for some of the variations which
occur within long term production rates. ~here:ore, the use of
too short a time frame in the calculation of produc~ion based
limitations for a specific industrial facility may lead to
•double accounting" of the variability factors.
In some cases, the historical data may show large random
or cyclic fluctuations in pr9duction rates, of either a short
or long term natur~. In those situations, it may be appropria~e
to have alternate limits which are applicable a~ some increased
production rate (see discussion of Alternate Limits) or se~~in;
the limit based upon a level of production higher than ~he
average (e.g. 10-20 percent or higher).
However, the primary objective is to dete~ine a production
estimate -for a facility which approximates the long term aver-
age production rate (in terms of mass of product per day) which
can reasonably be expected to prevail during the next term of
the permit. The following example illustrates the proper appli-
cation of guidelines:
Example: Company A has produced 331,500 tops, 292,000
tens, 304,000 tons, 284,000 tons, and 312,oon tons per year
for the previous five years. The use of the highest year of
production (331,500 tons per year) might be an appropriate
and reasonable measure of expected production. ~ne check
on this couln be to determine if maximum yearly values are
within a certain percent of the average, such as 20 percent.
Dne of several methods may be appropriate to convert
from the annual production rate to average daily production.
One method takes the annual production rate and divides it
by the number of production days per year. To determine the
number of production days, the total number of normally sche-
duled non-production days are subtracted from the to~al days
in a year.
This me~hoc is appropr:ate in cases w~ere the pla~~
123
discharges intermittently as a direct result of production
flows. In eases where the plant discharges continuously,
even on days when there are no production activities, other
methods may be appropriate.
If Company A normally has 255 production days per year,

which are approximately equal to the number of discharge days,
the annual production rate of 331,500 tons per year would
yield an average daily rate o~ 1,30~ tons per day. If pollu-
tant X has an effluent limitation guideline of 0.10 lbs./1000
lbs. for the monthly average and o·.lS lbs ./1000 1bs. for the
maximum daily average, the effluent limitations would be
calculated as follows:
Monthly Average Limit (Pollutant X)
1,300 tons x 2000 lbs. x 0.10 lbs. = 260 lbs./day

day ton 1000 l::s.
Daily Maximum Limit (Pollutant X)
1,300 tons x 2000 lbs. x 0.15 lbs. = 390 lbs./day

day ton 1000 lbs.
In the example above, the production durin; the highest
year of the last five years was used as the estimate of pro-
duction. This estimate is app~opriate when production is not
expected to change significantly durlng th~ permit term. How-
ever, if historical trends, marKet forces, or com~any plans
indicate that a different level of production will prevall dur-
ing the permit term, a different basis for estimating produc-
tion should be used.
Alternate Limits
If production rates are expected to change sicnificantlv

during the life of the permit, the permit can include alterna~e
limits. These alternate limits would become effective when
production exceeds a threshold value, such as during seasonal
production variations. Definitive guidance is not available
with respect to the threshold value which should "t:igger"
alternate limits. However, it is generally agreed that a 10
to 20 percent fluctuation in production is within the range
of normal va:-iability, while changes in production substanti-ally
higher than this range (such as SO percent) could warrant con-
sideration of alternate limitations. The major characterlstics
of alternate limits are best described by illust=ation and example:
Examole: Plant B has produced 486,000 tons, 260,400 tons,
220,000 tons, 240,800 tons, and 206,500 tons per year for
the previous five years. The high year lS signiflcantly
higher than the rest and the pe~ittee has made a plausl:le
argument that production is expected to retu=n to that level
The guideline for pollutant X is 0.8 lbs/1000 lbs for the
monthly average and 0.14 lbs/1000 lbs for the daily maxi-
124
mum. The alternate effluent limitations could be calculated
as follows:
Primary Limits:
o Basis of calculation: 260,400 tons/yr.= 1,050 tons/day

(248 production days per year)
o Applicable level of production: less than 1,050 tons

per day average production rate for the month
Monthly Average Limit
1 ,050 tons X 2000 l bs. X 0 .08 ! bs. = 168 lbs ./day

day ton 1000 lbs.
Daily Maximum Limit
1 ,050 tons X 2000 1 bs. X 0 .14 lbs. = 294 lbs./day

day ton 1000 los.
Alternate ~imits:
o Applicable threshold level of production= more t~ar. 1,260

tons/day average production rate for the month (20 percent
above normal ·production levels)
o Basis of calculation: 486,000 tons/vr. = !,350 tons/dav

(based upon historical data and to be ap~licable beyond·
a 20 percent increase in productlon)
Mont~ly Average Limit= 216 lbs./dav
Daily Maximum Limit= 378 lbs./day
Alternate limits should be used only after careful conslcer-

ation and only when a substantial inc~ease or dec~ease in produc-
tion is likely to occur. In the'example above, the primary llmits
would be in ef:ect when produetion was at normal levels. During
periods of significancly higher production, the.alternate limits
would be in ef:ect. w'hen production reverted to nor:nal levels, the
primary limits would have to be met. The thresholds, measures of
production, and special reporting requira~encs must be detailed ln
the permit.
If you have any questions concerning the calculation of pro-

duction-based limitations or the use of alternate limitations,
please call me or have your staff contact James Taft at (202/FTS-
426-7010).
125
40 CFR Part 122 - EPA Administered Permit Programs:
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Subpart C - Permit Conditions
§ 122.45 Calculating NPOES permit (B) If the Director establi!oht:s perrn1t

conditions (applicable to State NPOES r.onchtions under p;rragraph (b){Z)(ll!(A)
programs, see § 123.25). or this section:
(a) Outfal/s and disr.harge points. AJl (l) The perm1t E:hall require thr.
permit effluent l.imitation:J, standards perm1ttee to not:iy the 01~ector u t least
and proh1b1tions shaU be established for two business da~s prior to a month 1n
each outfall or discharge point cf the wh1ch the permittee expPcts to cp!!rate
pennmed facility, except as ,!'therw1se at a le ..·el h1gher lhar. the lowest
provided under § 122.44()](~) (BMPs product;on level idenllfu~d m the perm1t.
where lim1tc1ttons are infP.:tsiiJic) and The not1ce st:all spec1!y the ant1c1pated
paragraph (1) oC thiS section (limatahons le .. el and the period dunng wh1ch the
on internal wute streamsj. permittee expects to opera:e at the
(b) ProductJCin-based limJtatiolls. (1) alternate level. lf the nollce covers more
In the case of POT\oVs, permit than one month, the no:.ce shall spec1fy
limitat~ons, standards, or proh1b1tions the reasons fer the ~nt1c1patecl
shall bu calcdated based on design productiCJD :evclm··reo:~:.c. New not1ce of
flow. dl:~char~.: dl al:ernat~ le,·cls IS required
( 122.45(b)(2) rcv1s~d by ~9 FR 38046, to cover a pdrlod or production le\'t:l not
September 26, 1984) covered by pnor no:1ce or, 1f durmg two
(2)(a) Except m the c.1:.e of POTWs or consca:ut1vc mon:hs otht>rw1se c.ove:·td
:15 pro.,·adctl 1n p:uo~graph (b)(l)(1i) of tho)
by a r:otice. the production lev!!l dl the
pe:-m1tted fac•lity does nut1n fac.t meet
section, calcul.won of any permit linnt:t- lhl' hr~her level d~:,;:gnated in the notrce.
uons. standards, or proh1b1tions wh1ch arc
b:ucd on productiOn (br other mea)urc of l2) The pemullee shnll comply wt:tl
opcrauon) shall be based not upon the tlte hm1t3t1ons. stanaatds. or
dcs1gncd production capacny but rather prohibitions that correspond to the
upon a reasonable measure of actual pro- loweSt level of prodt:C:tlon specified IR
duction of the fac1hty. For new sources or the pern~il, unless the perm11tee has
new dischargers, actual producuon shall not1fied \he D1rector under par:1graph
be csumarcd usmg prOJeCted producuon. (b)(2)(u)(B)(1) of thas section. in wh1ch
The ume period of the measure of produc- case the pennittec shall comply wuh the
lower of the actual level of production
tion shall correspond to the ume pe~iod of
dunng each month or the level sp~c1faed
the calculated permit limnauons: for ex-
in the notice.
ample, monthly producuon shall be used
(3) The perm1ttee shall subm1t wllh
to calculate aver.1ge monthly d1scharge
the DMR the leve! of production that
limitations.
actu;;.lly occurred dunng each month
(ii)(A)(/) The Director may include a and the hmitataons. standards, or
condition establishmg alternate perm1t prohibitions applicable to 1hat level of
limuauons, standards, or prohabmons product1on.
based upon anticipated increase (not to [ 122.45(c) rev1sed by 49 FR 38046. Sep-
e'tcced max1mum rroducuon capab1hty) tember 26. 1984)
or decreased producut-n levels.
(1) For the automouve manufar:turmg
mdusrry only, the Reg1onal Adm1n1strator
shall, and the State Duector May c~tablish
a condiuon under paragraph
(b)(2)(Ji)(A)(/) of th1s secuon 1f the ap-
phcant sausfactonly demonlitraie) to the
D1rector at the time the 3pphcauon 1s
submitted that ItS actual productiOn, as
indtcatcd 1n pardgraph (b)(2)(i) of th1s
secuon, is substanually below n1ax1mum
production capab1hty and that there IS a
reasonable potenual for an mcrease above
actual producuon dunng the durauon of
the permit.
126
APPENDIX B
EXk~LE NPDES PERMIT LIMITATIONS
FOR
127
a::•'FLU£NT LIMITATIONS ANP MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
nunn 11 UuqM:riod berinnlnl effective date and lulln1lhrou&h expiration date.

lhe l~&:rmaUce laaulhorbed to d&achar~ro from outfall(•) aerial numbcr(a) 001, refinery wastewater treatment facility effluent
Sau:h dll.&.hu.:c• &hall be limited and monitored by tho 1~rmiU.oe u 11~cllled balow:
t:fRuent Ouuactcrbtlc Dlsc:h~o UmiLatlona Monl&orin1 Re~ulrcmenta

k1Jday (lba/day) Other Unlta (Specify)
Meuurement Sample
Dally AVI Daily Mu D11lly Ava Daily Mu Frt:QUency Tnu~
BODs 441 ~971) 867 (1,900) NA NA 3/week 24 hr. composite
TSS
Oil and Grease
Ammonia as U
Sulfide
388 854)
184 !3201
145 405
2.6 5.7
606 (1.330)
276
402 886
5.7 12.6)
tel tiA
~A
NA
NA
NA
~~A
NA
"lA
3/week
3/week
3/week
3/week
24 hr composite
Grab
24 hr. composite
24 hr. composite
__, coo J. 200 (7 ,040) 6,150 (13.600) NA NA 3/week 24 hr. composite
N Phenolic Compounds 2.04 ~4.48) 6.44 (14.19) NA NA 3/week 24 hr. composite
00 Tota 1 Chromium 2.41 5.31) 689 ( 15. 18) NA NA 3/week 24 hr. composite
llexavalen~ Chromium 0.20 (0.43) 0.44 (0.97) NA NA 3/week 24 hr. CQmposite
Flow - m /day (MGD) NA NA NA NA Continuous tteasurement
'llac 1111 ahllllnot be leu than 6. 0 atandanl unl&a nur 1rca1A:r than 9 · 0 alaudud unlla and ahall be monllored
continuously and recorded. ..... ...
~ ii
)II
'llu:n: ahAII be no dasc:husc ul nuiltlRIIOIIdJ or vlaiblo foam In oUu:r than t,.co amuunta.
..c. .....
...
lJ
flJ
S.uuJIIcs taken In comt•Uancc wllh tho moniturinar rec1ulrcmcnta lfM:dficd above •hAll be taken at u,e followin11lucallon(s): mit,
)(
Dl,&:o
At Out fa 11 001. 3
.....
"0
f1)
~·'FLUENT LIMI'fATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
nunng th~ 1~e:riod berannlns effective date and lulln1lhrou&h expiration date,
the 1N:rm1Uce Ia authorized to d11c:harso from oullall(a) aerial numbcr(a) 001, refinery wastewater treatment fac11i ty effluent.
Such dl:.&.harceaahall be llmllcd and monitored by tho ttermiUeo u ltteclllcd below:
t:lftucnl Cluuaclcrbllc Dlacharvo UmUaUona Monllorln1 Rcqulrcmcnta

kl/day (lbl/day) Other Unlta (Specify)
kg/ 1000 m'3 (1 bs/1 000 ga 1) Mcuurcmcnt
Dally Mu Dully Av1 Daily Mu Frequency·
of storm water flow
During wet weather conditions, the following waste load allocations are authorized for contaminated storm water
runoff passing through the wastewater treatment facility in addition to the dry weather effluent limitations
and monitoring requirements for Out fa 11 001 shown on Page 1:
BODs NA NA NA t~A NA
TSS NA 48 t40)
NA NA 33 0.28) ~lA :lA
N
Oil and Grease NA NA NA 15 0.13) .!A NA
"" COD NA NA NA 360 r-0) NA IIA
Phenolic Compounds NA NA NA 0.35 0.0029) NA NA
Total Chromium NA "lA NA 0.60 0.005) ~II\ NA
Hexavalent Chromium NA tiA NA 0.062 0.00052) NA ~A
"lllll rll duall not be leu than

con inuously and recorded.
6. 0 lliUidud uniu nur ICRIWI Ul.&n 9. 0 ataudud unlla and ahllll a.c monitored
There ihllll be no d1:1c:horcc uf noatln; aolida or vbiblo foam In oUu:r lhan trace amounll.
S.un 111cs taken tn com1•llanc:a with tho monllunnJ rectuircmcnb apt.-c:Uic:d above •hlllll.M: lakc:n al U•e lollowtnu luutlon(a):
m:!.
)(
At Out fa 11 001. llJ.,:O.
3
·o
The storm water flow through the wastewater treatment facility is that portion of flow greater than the ro
dry weather flow. The dry weather flow 1s considered to be the average flow through the wast~water
treatment facility for the last three consecutive zero precipitation aays. cxcludin9 any prev1ously
collected storm water runoff.
EFFI.UENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
nurlnG the a..:riod be1innin1 effective date and laalln1lhrou&h expiration date.
the a..:rmaUce Ia authorized to dbd•••a:• from outlall(•• aerial number(•• Otl2. once-through. non-contact cooling water.
Such dl~oa.hargc:a shall be limited and monitored b11h•atermUIAUI aa aaM:cified below;
t.:fnucnl Ouuactcrblic Dbch•!J• Umilationa Monltorinl Requirement.

k1/day (lba/dari Olhcl' Unlla (Specify•
Meaauremenl Sample
DaUy Av1 Daily Mu D11Uy Avs Daily Mu Frequency . Trau~
Total Organic Carbon NA NA NA 5 mg/1 (net) 3/week 24 hr. composite

Flow - m3/day (r4GO) NA ~lA NA NA 1/day
__.
Estimate
w
0
"Z".1 ...
)II>
1lu:n: shall he no dlac.harsc uf fioalln1 aolicb or vlaibla foam In other than lncc amounts. ~ :1 ll
-t
.,( w
~
SiuUJIIcs t.akcn In c:umJ•IIance wath lhc monilurinac n:caulremenu apc:cifted above ahall lM: lalu:n at the followlnglucalion(a):
m:!,
At Outfa 11 002. )(
Ill
3-'=-
"0
......
f1)
l:FFLU£NT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORfNO REQUIREM£N18
HurinG the IN:riod be1innln1 effect1 ve date and lulln1 throu&h expt rat ton date.
lhe t~ermillec Ia aulhodzed to dauh••ll• from oullall(a) aerial numbcr(a) 003, storm water runoff from tank farm.
Such dl~ha~.:ta ahllll balhnlted and monitored br tho aacrmiUaa u aa~ecllicd below:
t:fflucnl Ouuadcrbllc DbchaJMo Umllallona t.tonltorln1 Requlremcnu

Ill/dar (lba/dar) Other Unll.a (Specify)
tdeuurcmcn&. &ample
DaUr Av1 DaJiy Maa Dully Av1 Dally Mu •'rtquenc:y · Typ~
Total Organic Carbon NA NA NA 110 mg/1 1/day * Grab

Oil and· Grease NA tiA tiA 35 mg/1 1/day * Grab
__, Flow - ml/day (MGD) NA tiA NA NA 1/day * Estimate
w
__,
* W~en flowing. A grab sample shall be collected immediately following the start of
d1scharge and analyzed. Discharge shall be Mon~tored once each day for the
duration of flow.
'llu: 1•ll shadl not be leu Uaan 6. 0 al;uulanl unlb nor IRaler dailft 9. 0 alandud unlla and alualllJC monitored
1/day when flowing. 'Z:f
,.
)I>
~
I
'llu:n: dallll be: no dasc.laucc uf noatlncaoll&b or vliiblo foam In otlacr than llaca amuunll.
..( ~
...
ll
~
!i;un1•IL'S lakcn In c:om1•llancu walb lhc monitorins re•aulrcmcnb apt.:cUicd above •hall be taken aL Uae followlnulocallon(a): ITI;:,
)< ...
At Outfall 003. "'
3~
"'C
_.
f1)
APPENDIX C
FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES
30 FR 16560, May 9, 1974, Final BPT

40 FR 21939, May 20, 1975, BPT. Amendments
44 FR 75926, December 21, 1979, Proposed BAT, NSPS,
PSEg, PSNS
47 FR 46434, October 18, 1982, Final BAT, BSPS,
PSES, PSNS
49 FR 34152, August 28, 1984, P.roposed BAT Amendments,
BCT, Storm Water Runoff Limitations
50 FR 28516, July 12, 1985, Final BAT Amendments,
BCT, Storm Water Runoff Limitations
132
THURSDAY, MAY 9, 1974
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Volume 39 I Number 91
PART II
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
•
PETROLEUM REFINING
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
EJJiucnt Guidelines and Standards
133
tr,:.r.n RULES AND REGULATIONS
ttme of publlcatloa of the noUce of pro- esslnr required Ia taken into account 'by
Title 40 Protection of the Emriranment posed rulema!Wll. the blgher process Ca.ctor the rednerJ
CHAPnR I-£NVIRONMENTAL Iateres&ed penons were Ulvtted to par- wW receive. csee "Development Docu-
PROTECTION AGENCY Uclpale Ia tbe rulem&ldzlsr b7 submttUDI ment," Section IX>.
su!ICHAI"D ......cJ1"\.UENT GUIDI!UNIS AND wntten comments wttb.tn 30 daJ's from
<3> once-throurh coollnr water should
STANDARDS tbe date o1 publtcatlon. Prtor publtc par- not be lacluded Ia a production based Al-
tlclpatlon In the form of soUClted cora- locaUon. The reasons !or tbJs statement
PART 419-PETROLEUM REFINING
POINT SOURC£ CATEGORY menta mel respames !rom the States, and altemace approaches iJiven are as
Federal arencles. md oeber mterested follows:
On December a, 19'r3 notice was pub• parties were descnbed Ia the preamble <a> ne March 7. 1913 ruldan.ce ex-
ll.ahed 111 Ule FZD&BAL Rzazsna 138 PR co Ule proposed replat1on. 'nle EPA bas cluded once·tbro~h water from con-
3454.21. chat Cbe ED'IU'Onmenta.l Pratec· considered carefull7 a.1l of the commenta sideration: lbl t.he low concentrations
uoo A;enc1 <EPA or Agenc1l was pro- received and a dlscusaioa of these com- contained have no environmental Im-
pua&nl ellluent UmJtattom guidelines for menu wtth the Agenc7's res~onse thereto pact: <cl a.nalytlca.l tec!mJques do not
eXISttnc sources anc:t ar.ancia.rds ot per- Collows. The re(u1attoa as promull'ated allow !or accurate results ac low co!lcen-
fonuaace uc:t pretreatment stanc:ta.rds contains some siii'D.11!cant departures trattona: and cc:t> a separate Um1t of 5
for 118w sources wltl:wl the toDD~ sub• tram the ~roposecl reruJauoa. The fol- mr/1 of TOC lnetl should be used.
ca.cesazT. cra.cll.lDc subcateaol"7. petro- lowtnl' dlscussloa oucuaes the reasona An evaluaUoa of water :aow data from
chemical subcaterol"7. lube subcaterol"7. wh1 these cb.anres were made aad wh7 over one buadred refineries. boCb wttb
a.nc:1 ancesracecl subcaterol"7 ot t.he pecro- oUter sunested chanreil were ooc made. recJ'Cle ud oace-,broulh cooiJDI water
leum re1111iDI catelr01"7 of polDt sources. 1al Summczrv of ma7or com menta. The SJ'Stems, showed tbat oD11 25 perceac ol
Tlle purpose of tbJs noUce Ia co estab• followlnlr respaaded co the requ~ for the total dow from rec7cle rednertes re-
Ush 1!nal em.ueac 1Jmlta.t1ons iUfdeltnes comments wftlcb. waa made In tbe ~Jre sults from coollag tower blowdowu. ID
for em=s sources uc:t standa.nls of per- amble to Cbe proposed relulatlon: Iater· addtt.toa. the once-t.hrowrh rednerles
formance aad pretreatment standArds state Saaltatton Commisaloa: Shell OU showed higher process wasli1 floW'S than
for new sources Ia tbe copptnr subcate- Com~&.nJ': Ph1Wps Petroleum Company: the r!CJ'cle redaenes. Therefore. oace-
1'01"7· crac.lr.J.D.Ir subcatetrol"7. pecrocbeml· Ciett7 OU Compan1: Onion OU Company throurh coollnl' water Ia betnsr excluded
cal subcatetrorJ, lube subcatei(OI"7. and of Cal!Comia: Elaon Company, USA: from the production based a.llotment and
tncetrrated subcatetrol"7 of tbe petroleum LarrT D. Klll1on: American Petroleum a separate 11mlt of 5 mc/1 of TOC 1-' being
rednml catetrol"7 of palDt sources. 'b7 Indus&r7: Standard OU CompfUU' ot sec to prevent rrou contamJ.DaUon of
amendlnl 40 CFK Ch. L Subchap~ N, Ohio: OOP Process Division: Oulf Oll: these waters. csee "Development Docu-
co add a new Pan 419. Tbis !lDa.l rule- C1t7 of Butralo: MobU OU Cof1)0radoa: ment": secUoa IX: Supplement B. "Re•
au.ldnc Ia promul~rated ;Jursuant co sec- ~a.carto Independent RetlnU7: Texaco tln!1"7 Water O.se'' I ·
Uoaa 301. 304 lbl md lcl. 3118 lbl and Incorporated: Standa1·d Oll Compa.EU" of C4l LlmJ.ta sbould be based on a
rcJ and 30'7Ccl ol tbe Federal Water IndJaaa: National Wlldllte Federation: monthl3 average rather thaD 30 day
PoUuttoa Concrol Act. as amended. <the State of Callforaia; Counc,. of Erie. NY: r'UDD1DI averace. CRwmiDI averare--IUU'
Act>: 33 tr.s.c. 1251. 1311. 1314 sad State of Alaska: Loa ADreles Couacy: t.b1rC')' consecutive daJ'Sl.
(Cl, 1:J18 (bl aDd (C) aDc:i 131'7CCJ: 88 BWfalo IN.Y.l Area Chamber of Com- The 11m1ts are set In terms ot a run-
stac. 818 et seq.: Pub. I.. 92-aoo. Resula- merce: State of Colorado: Stale of niDI averace to prevent slackenlnr olr
ctons renrdlnl coollns water IDtake Mlchlraa: U.S. Water Resources Coun- ac tbe end of &D.J' tlxed period a.ru1 t.here-
nruccures for all <:a'elor1ea of poiDt al: Sua OU Comgany: Department of •Core IWU'IU1t.ee optimum performance at
sources under sectloa 3181'bl ot the Act t.tle Iaterlor: The Honorable S:enr7 P. aU times.
wLll be promulrated ID 40 CFR Part 402. Smith, m: State of North Carolln&. <5> Ttlere Lsn't enougl1 varlabWty al-
In add1C1oa. ttle EPA Is samultaneousl7 Eadl ot the comments received waa lowed between Cbe da.ll7 and monthly
PI'OfJCIS&DI a sepa.zate provlalon. wb1cl1 careful11 reviewed and analned. The Umlts. Arruments ldvea to Justl!7 hlrher
appears In the proposed rules secUoa of following Ls a summa1"7 ol the siiDiftcant values were aa follo~~o"S:
the PIIIERAL 'REalS'fU. statinlr the &I)Pll• comments and EP.,'s response to thoae <a> Data were not random or normally
cattaa of tbe UmltaUaas md standards comments. dlstrUNted.: cbl vartablllty 11oc ber.nr met
set forcb below co users o1 publlcl7 owued c11 Clean ra1Dfall Um1C.S should be set 'b7 some reflaertes uslnsr BPCTCA end-
treatment worts wtltch are sWIJect co at Ule same level as treatment plant ef- of-pipe; and Ccl h.ilh analytical errors.
pretreatment standards under section tluent to avoid havtnr co treat marrtaally The vartabWt7 factors can noc be com-
301Cbl of the Ace. The basis of that pro- contam1Dated. ruaolr. pared as a ratio ol daily and monthly
posed reculattoa Is sec tortb 111 the aaso- Ttle haadll.a8' of storm runolr was re- t30 da7 a.ver&«el values. Bocl1 the dal17
c~&ted noUce of proposed rulemak1Dr. evaluated md ttle run-o« from a redner1 and 30 da,y averare 'larlabWtles were
111e len.l baals, methodalou anc:t fac- was broken dowa. furcber llo coastder baaed oa the aanual averace. ne dailY
tual coacluslons which support promul- ta.nkfteld nmolr. process area nmotf aad varlabWty predicts tbe maximum da7
rauoa of this resul&Uon were sec !ortb oeber noncontaml.Dated runolr. Tb1s re- over a penod of a rear and the 30 daY
1D sW.tantial detaU 1D t.he a.ouce o1 eva.luat.ton also considered the treatment averare vartabWty predicts t.he miU1•
publlc review procedures publ.l.sbed of marrtna117 c:cmtamlaated nmalr. <Sea mum 30 day averare Ia a.EU" J'!ar.
AUIUIC a. 1913 138 PR 21202) and 1D "Development Document," SecC1oa VII>. These varlabWUes were computed !rom
the noctce of proposed rulemaldnsr As a result ot tbts evaluat.toa a Um1& of data takea !rom several plants Cone
tor the copplnsr subca&~1"7. craclW18' 35 lnl'/1 TOC and 15 lnl'/1 oll and srease 7ear"s or more data Ia ea.c.b case 1 • ne
subcatero1"7. pecrocbemlcal subca.teiOf1, Cbotb maximums I waa seC tor both tank- vartabWty Ca.ctors therefore l.Dclude all
lube subcatesrol"7. and IDterrated sub• tl.eld runolr and other uncontam!Dated ol tbe errors <resulting vanabWty) that
caceror1. ta addition. the rerulatlons as runolr. l'nlls Is chaDred from 15 IDI/1 of result trora sampltnsr and mal7tlcal tech-
propOHd were supported b7 ~wo other 'l'OC and no vtslble sheeal • 'nle l1mlts for nique and a.ccun.cy.
docuzzmnu: 11l The docwnenc eat1tled contamlnated. runolr I process area run- Tlle date !:rom. t.be plants analyzed
"DeYelopraenc Document tor Propoeed olr treated alone With other process were touad co be etcher nonnall7 or 101
Elllueac LJ.m.ltatlons Ouldellnes and New wastes> should remain Ute same. norma.111 distributed.
Source Performance Standards far the <2) Ttle cle4D1Uoa of feedstocb should The face that certalD reftnerles. which
Petroleum Retlntn1r Sesmeat of tbe include Imported catal}"tlc ~racker teed. alreadJ' have tbe end·ol-plpe treatment
Petroleum Reftnlnl' Point Source Cate- reformer feed and petrochem.tca.l feeds. aa deflaed. by BPCTCA. are s.trowtnll'
IJOr7" <December 1913) and <2) the doc· SIDCI:I these feeds do 110t receive full hlrber vanabWUes tha.n those ol the ex-
umeac enttUed "Economic Ana.inls of procesalnlr ac Ule re1laer1 and az-e free emplar7 plant.a on!7 palau ou1: tbat
Proposed EII!Uenc Ouldellnes, Pecroleum of some contamtnants Cremoved durtag BPCTCA as deftned should include fac-
Re11D1DIJ Iadwstl"7" <September 19T.U • prior procesa1n&'l , DO allocaUOD based OD tors other tban end-of-pipe treatment
Both of these documents were made
anllable co the publtc aDd c:i%culated CO tbzouablNt should be l'tven. Tbe a.ddt· Cle. JOOd water use practices. rood.
Interested ~enons ac appro:ama~ the t:loDal waate loada cauaec:t 'b7 tbe proc- bousekeeptnc, etc.> • <See "Development
FIDIIAL UGISTII, VOL ~9, NO. 91-THUISDAY, MAY 9, 1974
134
RULES AND REGULATIONS 1rt:ant
Coc:ameat.." section IX. "SI&dat.lcal van.:. Tbe dluent. llmltat1oas 1\\idellnes have Ia "available," Ia '"economically aehle·:-
abWt7 of a Prooerb' Designed aad. C~Mr reaerally been developed on a 11"011 or able." and C&D be brought on !me m time
a&ed Wute 'I'reatmeat. Plaat.": Supple- absolute ba.s1s. Bowever, t.be Aceney rec- to a.c.b1eve tuJl compUance by 1983, as
ment. B. "Varta.bWtr'> • al1l1z,es that In cena.tn l.a.staaees poUut- required by the Act.
The d.all7 maz1mum vana.bWt7 wu !11- auts wt1l be present In aavtpble waters <13) The flow balls, ba.sed on 97 per-
c:r-.aed to re.dect a 119 percent probabWt7 which suppb' a plaDt'a Intake water, In cent recycle flow, Ia too restr:lcttve to be
ol OCCUiftllce. ThJa wu done to reduce sipi.dcaat CODcelll:r'atlons. which may met b7 older re.flzleries with once-through
US. l:lUJD!Ier of techDk:al vtolatlODS. aoc be rewovecl to the Ieveii specified Ia eao11n1 water aud. does not comlder the
'1'0C Um1t sboWd be eltmmated. tlse IUid.ellDes b7 tbe appllcatlan of v&r)'tar process complexities withiD sub-
aad sec la~r u Its raUo to BOOS Ia de- t:'eatmenc teclmolou coa~molated by categories.
tenn!Ded ac each re.dzlen-. BPC'l'CA. Tbe .dow basla Ia aot a tlow restriction.
The llm1tl sec tar TOC are aecessUT AccordlDrU'. the Apacy Is carreat.l7 n ..... used to deterw1De the expected
becauae at tbe ID8oDJ' IDaC&Dces wbea d.eft.loplDI amead.Wenta to Ita NPDES po~mdal- trow a retmer'J' with good
BODI COD, or bo&b an not. practical J)VW1t rewulatlcms <40 CPR. Part 125> water uae aad the spec111ecl end-of-pipe
llm.tta cu a fti!Ul& of Ul.&l.nlcal em:rrs. wlllc:b wtll $«ifY tbe sttuad.oaa lD whlc:b treatment scheme. The re11Del'7 wtth
tame llm.ttattoaa. etc.>. caee "'Develop. US. Relional Adm1Z11sCrator way allow a oace-tbrourh coaunr •ater znu caa.-
m11111t. Dacameat.. • sect1cm IX: ''Proced.'ID"e crecUt tor such pollataDcs. Tbe rei'Ula- uaue to dlscharre that water.
tor Deftlopwmc of BPCl'C'A Elllum& uoas wtll be proposed tor publlc cow- The IUldeUne ~es IDto comlderatlon
Llmltattoaa•>. meat. 1D Cbe ae&r fucure. Ule cWrerence m expected ~ow caused
The ncaa of '1'0CIBOD. proposed at. 1.8 nu Some carnspoadenta eadoned by V&I"11DI process cowplexltles by the
, . . railed to 2.2. US. propoal made to tbe AdW1nlstrator use of a process factor tb.at vanes the
C'l> A sabeatetrartzatiOil should be by tbe Emuen& StaAdards and Water l1m1ta wtthln ese.b .NbcateiOl'7 based on
wade baaed OD tbe ap of tbe n11Dft7 QuaUtr Informats.on Advt.sai"J' Commit- process conllguractoa. !See "Develop-
becauae ol DOD•HCRiated H'WVII aDI1 tee. Tble propoaal Ia tor & si1!111kaady meat Document": SecttoD IX>.
t.lle Inequitable !1D.aaclal burden. dUrermt. a.ppraac:!l to tbe development of Clf) EPA taUed to adequately con-
Thoee re&series w1tll aan-selftlated e.Giueat.IUidellDa. elder factors such aa raw material used.
I8WU'I W1D probablJ' have to eltber 5e1r• The above-meat1oaecl proposals are products groduced. processes, and wute
"l&te uwr oace-tbrauah coo11D1 water ~mder evaluattcm u a concnbuUoa to- W'll.ter coaatttueacs.
or 10 to fti:Jcle cooUac. Thla baa al- ward future rednemeats oa IUidellDea The wse ot the process f'actora directly
!'IBQ beeD doDe '" J::II&D1 older reADertes tor some lnduatrtes. ne Committee ha.s conalders the processes used. n:e raw
aad wu eaaad.ered u pan of the eco- ladlcated tba&·CbtW" propoeecl methodol- ma~r1&1a used. products produced and
Dalllia eftJ.ua~ OG' could not be develoPed In su1!1cleat the wute W'll.ter coastttueata are covered
Cl) T!le Amertc:an Petroleum Ia.stS· Uwe to be a.....uable for the cun-ent pbue Indirectly because each deterw.lDes or Ia
tate hu PI'OC'OMCI a metbod to ttzrther ol IUideUDe promulpdoa. Ita present d.eterm.lDecl by tile process coa.tlguraUoa.
SU"Ceti&OrSze tile petroleum 1Ddu.str7. state ot development does not provfde of each re.f!Den-. <See "Development
ThJa aoproacb Is bued on a lll&&helllad- enourh evtdeace to wa.rran.t the Agency's Docuwent": Secttcn IV: Supplement B.
cal aaalnia of tbe 19'72 EPA/API Raw del&71DI lslruaDce Ot &117 ataadard lD "Re.flzlery Coa1iguraUoa AaaJ:ysls").
Wute J:.o-.cl 81Jrol'e7 Data. T!l1s ma.lrsLs hooea !.bat aa altematlve approach !15) No allowances have been made
cnot. 7et. completed> Pra&:IOMI to deter- 1D11ht. be preteral:lle. tor waJfuncUoas, breakdowt11, aud up-
WIDe t.lle rel&Uve ~ecc ol vvsows pracesa ll2> T!le BATEA llwlta were obJected seta of the treatment ;~laat. Slzl.ce It may
~ on tile to&al re&~en- ao.r. to bec:auae they are baled aa pUot plant. take several weeks to recover trow a
AD IDtenalve 1Dft:St1pt1an ol tb.l.l &P- dat&. severe U'Paet. a procedure tor reoport1n1
:pi'OKb hall been c:&rr:ed out. Aa a. re- The AreDC7 I"'I!COID1Zes tbat the tech- these circumacances aad obtalninl a
ault.. I& wu found tbat botb size Cfeed- aoloo spec:U!ed herem u best available ~mporar'l' variance 1.:1 necessary.
aau UU'ouch"PUC) &ad process C:OI11!cU• tec!molOO' ecaaamtcany ach!evable haa The I'Uldel1De 1.:1 based 011 normal op-
rattoD wl;b hea.vt!Y lD determ1D1D1 tlse no' been demoa.st:raced. IZ1 day-to-day OQ• eration. ADY coc.sidersuon ot other than
&1al .dawa. Tables have bet!D lzl.cluded ID erar.toas lD t.b18 lndustrta.l caterol'J'. normal operation W1ll be covered In the
the retW&t.toa to allow vartaUon wttbiD However. In determ1z11DC whetb.er tecb- NPDES permits.
eacb aubciL&eiUI"J' baaed OD bath size &ad noltlao baa beeD •demcm.strated" tor the c18) The COD IJmJta are too low be-
process contlaurat1oa. !See '"Deftlop. purposes of sC&Ddania wh1c:h must be cause of test tolerances. El:'A analYtical
meat. Document. • section lV: Supple- ac.b1eYecl by 1983, tbe AleDCJ' does DOt be- methods state wiD1mum re'I)Ortable con-
meat B. '"RdDerJ' conaaurattan AD.al- Ueve that tbe same b.lgb d.~ ot coa- centratton.s 200 mr/1 In water wtth 1.000
:nls">. 11dence tbat the t.eehaolor:r wtl1 work m1/l of chlonde.
The size aud process. taetors deter- muat. eDit aa Ia tile cue tor 1871 staad- Standard methods tolerance :1t 150
mined from the above lzl.vesttpt1oa were arda. ID waldnr Ule Jud.KZDent. as to m111 of COD :s :: 14 mr/1 at 1.000 mg I
uaecl to turther su.bc:ateaortze tile petro- wber.ber or nat the tedmolo17 Is "avaU- of chloride. There will s'W be easel'
lnm JDdust.I"J'. -"Ie,• tbe Al'ellc,.eDID1Ded a r.de raa1e where extremeLY hl1h chloride levels will
un Soeclal coaalderatton sbould be of lzl.torwattoa, 1Ddadi.D1 tb.e uae of the nerar.e the u.se of this test aud that ts
livm for re&lenes c:.b.ar'I1Dr CalltomJa tec.bllalo87 to tnM a1mUar 'llr'Utes In one of the rea.soc.s for limits beln1 set
c:rades becaWJe of the b18b mtroam. sui- Gt.her 1Dduat:r1al cat.eaones. pUot plaDt. tor three OXYgen demand1D1 parameters
tar aud aao.bt.hemc add ccmt.enc. aad demoa.st:ractoa praJecta, aad labora- CBOD.S, COD. and TOC>
T!le hBV7' ClG-ZO API ;nvtt:J') D&CDnl tar7 aad otber UDerimenw data on I1'7) Data tram gUot plant carbon
of U1e C&llforma crudes requires WOI"e m- vartoaa wut.e trestzae:Dt. processes. Baaed qstewa IDdlcate removal emctencles
teD.Sive Proc:ess1DI Ccrac.tml. etc.> tban on sucb daCa and ~Cloa. and tbe tpercent. removal> less than those used
Ucbtn IZ'Sdes of crude. Prow tbe data &DPllca~aa. of the Aci!DC7's best. Judi- tor BATEA l.lwits. !BOD, COD. all and
aftilable, tbe procese factor !based on went., tbe tec!ll1alou apecU!ed herein lft&Sel.
eeventr of ooeraUoas> adequatel7 ac- wu determ!Ded to coaac.lCUte the Tbe pUot plaa.t values used are refer-
COUDtl tar lobe b11hn- raw wute l.oada best avaU&ble tecbDalo87 economically enced In Table S5 of the Develogment
se11111 ID re.C.D.ertes nmn1n1 Calltom.la &eb.levable for the pecroleum re11De17 Document. CoacentraUoc.s, noc remo'lral
crudes. <See "'Development. Docuwent.,•• cateaorJ, emclencles were u.sed to set BOD and
Sect1oa lV: SUpplement B. "Calltorma n Ia recoiD!Zed tbat.. In some cues, oll aad sreaae UmJtl for BATEA.
crwses•.> tb.e 1Dd.ustr7 musc ltaelf pertorw aome na> The oll and ll'eB88 llm.tta should
UO> T!lere Is n.o alloW&Dee dftD !D the tJf t.he pOat plant and Clf.ber develop- be nl.laed because the retere.11ees 1z1 t.be
IU1dellnea tar the coa•am•n•nts pnseat men&al work wb1cb wU1 be neceas&l'J' to Development Docuweat ab.owed 10 m1/l
ID tbe IDC&U water <aet 911. 11"011), wb1c:b briDI tbe technolouiD..to tu.a utWzattoa. &~e h'uw blo·treatllleDt aad T
are 1&14 to be especJ.albr ~C&DC ID This does no& however. alter the Will tram acUvaWd carbon. 7et the
oace-tbroUI.b c:ool1DIW'II.ter. AlmcJ''I Judimmt. tba& t.lle t.ecbDolOD IUld.ellDe Ia baaecl on ~ WilL
IIIDILU IIGISTD. VOL 39, NO. tl-ntUISDA'f, MAY f, lt74
135
1656Z RULES AND REGULATIONS
The 1\WleiJ.De llmit CBPCTCAl Ia The z1Dc llm1' baa beeD deleted u a off were Paased throusb !.be treatment
baled ou Deiebel: bto-treatmem ~or ICU- result at ac aa.a.l1sil or U:le z1na raw pJaa.t.
'I'Bced. CU'boa. but oa. • poll•h 1ntr steo waste loads rrom over one b.und.red re- C3> A turther subcatesortzattou ot the
after blo-Ct'"tn"nt ILL. pollsl:lJnc pollda. 11Deries. On1J' • aaeJl percmtap of these lndustr7 wu made bued. on process coD•
Gltem. etc.) (See '"DeYelaomenc cacu- reGDeriell' raw wuce loada aceeded the i!.IUr&ClOG an.d .siZe.
men.t... secUaaa VII a.nd. IX> . IQ1de11De zinc Umit. Col> Z1Dc waa ellm1Da.ted u a parameter
119~ ColqlderaUoa. should be liven.. A s1m.tla.r a.nab'aSa sb.owed almost 50 to be Um.lted IDduatn' wtde• .Purther eva.l·
to re&1enes ID .aartbem c!J.mace. be- percent of Ule re.!!ner1es <UIIDI cooiiDC uauoa. ot the AFI/EF.... Raw wu~ Load
cauae ot the etreet ot ~ture aa. bJ.o- towers, c:.l1r0m1um agpesn 1D re&1117 Survey showed oDIJ' a smaJ1 gercenta1e
10tr1cal creatm.ea.c sntema. wuces because of Ita use u a corrosion of the ln.dwtrJ' over the zmc 11m1ts sec.
Of the J:naAJ' rean.ertes c:urrentl7 meet- ln.hlb&tor ID reQcle cooliDC IJllteiDII> <D> The ammoma UmJts were c:baa.tred
la.tr EPA'• CU1del1Des for BODS. seYeral meeUDc the total chromium Umlta with baaecl on tb.e c:han.1es 1D U1e sullcatetror1·
are locaced. ln. northern cllmates ce.c. their raw waste. Since the solubWt7 of zatlaD.
B1WDp. Konc.aa: Alma. Klc:bJPD). C'rT 3 Ia le:sa Cl1aD 0.1 mall between pH c8) 'nle rauo ot TOC/8005 waa
!See SUP~~lement B. ~ d.aca>. s.o to 1.0, the remaiD111tr r~ ab.ould chuced tram 1.8 ta 2.2.
120> The·Eccmom.lc Impact AaalJ'Si,s mees tb.e trUideUDes 11m1ta bJ' removial' ('7) once·tbrouch cool1ac 'lrlloter wa.s
stace.. ""IC Sa a.oc ~ that m7 sic• the ln.aoluble cr+ 3 alone wttl3. o&her excluded t:rom the production based allo·
nUicazlt economic lmpiiCS would result suspended solids. cattou and a zna.zlmum conceutraUoa. of.
trom 1m~ tbe 1111 a.ad 11183 ~c The reducttou of Cr+4 to CZ'+3 oc:c:un 5 mc/J ot TOC wu .sec.
Umitattcma." 'l'h.lll Ia a.o& tnle. ~ naCUZ'a1.17 ill. a typical re&len> ......ce be- (8) 'nle da1l7 mazimum values were
1D tbellcht ot the cuznuc IUid tuau-e UD• cause of tb.e greseace of reducm~r apnts ln.creued to re..!!ect • 911 percea.G prob·
st.Ule limaUaa. of crude o.ll supply. such a.s aul1!des a.adml1Jtes. &bWtJ' of occurreuc:e. ThSa wu doae ta
AA ecaaom1c Impact IW1&1Jll1a of pollu· 'nle aboYe faccons w1ll meaA that ao Umi& tb.e number ot techDic:a.L vtolaLioaa
acm caa.tra'- ou the zdDer7 lnduatr'J' add.1UoDal ccat1 Cfor removal of chro- of the penDit.
completed Pebruar'J', 1914 states .. Aa • ID1um> sbould be 1Dvo1Yed. for the maJor- Cll> SecUoa 304(!)~ (1) CB> ot tb.e Act
reau.l' of recea.& worJd deveJopmea.ta ity of re1meries &bove U1oae requ1red to provtd.es for "lllideliDes" to lmplemeac
eben Ia • subataattal cWrermU&l be- meec tb.e ol.b.er parameter llmlt.s. CSee the uniform nat1onal stal1da~ of sec:Uou
tween world cane! pr1ces and u.s. clo- SllDPlemeDCal B, "Raw W&ste Load SUI'• 301Cb>C1HA>. 'nlw Coup-esa recoaniZed
mesClc oil pr1cea. If this caa.ClDueis, then 9117-Z!Ju: and Chroo:Uum"> • that some .!!albWt7 wu aecess&Z7 1.11
11 reucm o:o mnest t.ba1 • number ot C2lU 'nlere 18 • Deed to ID.OD.Itor and on1er to tau mco accoua.c tb.e com-
the DroJecieli IID&Il reaD.er7 cia.uru c:cmtrol all lc1ea.&l1led pollutants such u pluitJ' o1 the IDd.wt.rial world with re·
11118hC DO& occu:r. Cert&lalJ' the a.bWt7 ta TDS, C71UL1d.e &Dii vartow other s'C)I!C!J!c spect to t:l.e practtca11Wt7 oi J:101lllt10D
.Ct:ncC ~-term t!T!anclntr for poUUi1oD 1oDa. ln. add.1Uau to the elaven param- coa.t.rol tedmolOG'. ID coDformltJ' wtth
abatemeat Ia lftS&ly eahaaced. bJ' the eten aireacb' be!nc momtored and COD• the Coa.cresatOD&11DteD& ant! 1D recoll%11·
prtce dUrereaClal tba& estsca." CSee sup. trolled. Uon of the pouible failure of these l"'!IU•
Dlemeac B. "lmpacc oa. Re&leries of 'nle garameten Umited 1D tb.e ruide- la&ioDI co account for aJ1 faccors beartnc
PalliiCloD CoAV'ol ReplaUoDI". Pe!D'U· l1De.s are those wb1c.b. are tairl.J' CODIDIGil on the practlca!IWt7 of control techaol-
1.17.11'1'4). co the IDclUitrJ' and for which there Is 0117, l& was concluded thac aome grovtsioa.
121> 011 ud IP'eull Umits should be eld.stmc tecba.olaa' ID use ln. tbll 1Dd.u· wu needed to author1ze tlex1bWt7 ID the
bued oa. • mu.lmum emuea.c caQCeuczoa- t1'7 for tb.elr removal. The ccmtrol lolld str1cc appllcaUoD of t.be Um1tat1on.s con-
ucm of 1 m.cll and. mouJd be Um.lted by mODitoriac ot l.a.J' adc:l.ltloa.alparameters ta!Ded 1D tbe resrulattcm wbere reqUired
coacentraelou and ~oc on pouncSa-pro- milb,S be called for OD u 1Dd.171cl.ual buSa by specl&l c1rcu!Ditanc:es agpllcable to ln·
d.ucUoD values. to meec water quallCJ' 1~d.s. d.lvtdual d.1SCharlren. Accordla;l.J', a pro·
There Ia neither a cl.emoDStrated treat- (28) PromulptiOD Ia coaaid.ered CO be vta1oD allOWIDlr tleldbWt.y 1D the appi.l•
mmc tea!ulaloo to cuarmtee 1 mc/1 of apgragrtate proftded 11 Ia lllbJect co cattaa. of the UmltaUoa.s reoresmc1Dg
oil ud ~feMe eaiUeac conceul:nUOD. nor reallatlc revtstoa. u Dew data becomes besC pnct1cable control tec.!molou cur-
an accepted. aualJ'Ucal procedure to available. nmCb' s.vallable bas beea added :o eacb
meuurelt. The Act provtcles for pedocUc re91eW' subp&re,· to account tor specla.l Cll'Cum-
c:n Elllueac UmJ.ta sbould be sec u aad nmsiODSu apgroprtaee. se&Qees til&& mQ aoc bave been ade·
lbl/1000 pis of wute water 4ow bued C!)> 'RevUicm of tb.e proposed recu1a- quatel:r accoua.Ced for when these reeula·
OD a spec:Uieci ea.d-ot-plpe treatment a.ad Uoa. prior to grom.Ulpttoa. t1ana 'IIIIZ'I deYeloped.
a d.Gc11meated .!!ow for each Individual As a result ot gubllc comment and Cc> rccmomac ampact. 'nle ch~ges
re.!!D~. cont1Du1D~r revtew and na.laat1CD ot tbe that. were made ta the proposed reaula·
nu. approach does llOC adequately proposed reiUlaUOD b7 EPA. the follow• t10DI Cor the petroleum re11nlntr cate-
coaalder the lmportuce ot the ln.-plane La.c c:baaces bave beeD Clade lD the rec· 1017 do not substaaUa.IIJ' a.1fecc the irutlal
requirl!mentll of BPCTCA ( 1004 water wacloa. ec:oa.om!c anab's15. 'nle cha.alt!S detailed
wse. b.ouaekeeplDtr, etc.> !See "Develop. • subcateror1zat1oa. now ana hJ.&b crack· CIIDCJ' ot va.rtoua treatmeDC .llyStema and
(23) ,Ammonia level5 based 011 80 per- IDtr comblDeci to torm the new cracldnc furtb.er subcatetror.zaClo~: of the ln.d.w·
cent removal tram U:le mediaD raw subcateS01'7 and the toppla& n&bcate- try to IDOre equltablJ' d.13tnbute the eco•
the .BPCTCA removal .s•

wute load <API separator duentl and 101"7 be1Dtr d.e.CDed u ~bose reaneries
ror ammODLa wltbout cncldn8> a reevaluation of the
Ia 1D•s:Wm& 1D the !ona of a .l!Cz':lpper. meGJ&D dows wlthlD eacb. iiWic:at.ecol7
nomic ~urd.en. 'lbese nrtslon., bowever,
do not effect the coacluaioa. of the eco-
nomic impact study.
ZftD thau1h the Primar7 removal of waa !DIIde. The c:b&Dces made are u fol· ld> Coat-bmellt cnalv.N. 'nle decn-
ammon•• 1D a re&~e17 sb.ou1d be daae lows: toPDIDI from 12 ra.llbbl to 20 mental e1Z'ecta ot the coDSt1tuea.ca of
cl.unnc sour -eer scrtuplnc m&D7 reGn.· p.Vbbl; c:nw:ldz:l8 !10m now I 11 p.l/bbl, wute -cers aow d.lac:ba.rged by "POlnt
er1es bave DOC oDUm!zed tawvd ua.• <b.tc.b> 21 gal/bbl to 25 raVlml: petro- sourcea wtt.hiD the Petroleum Re&li.Dg
mDDia remonl hmlta d.~iDed for sui• chemlc&l trom 25 l&ilbbl to 30 1&1/bbl: poJDC so~Uee cateco17 are dlscll5Sed In
.!!de l"'llllOYN) . 'nle opttmizaUOD 41 sCrip.- lube from 31 sal/bbl ta 41 p.i/bbl; lolld :!'cctt.aa Vl of tb.e report eaUUed "0eve1·
Pia.C for amm.DD.Ia removal or the ln.· La.tecrated tram 40 pl/bbl to 48 p.l/bbL oomm& Ooc:umen& tor E.llluenc Llmlta·
stallaUcm of t'III'O stap .lltrippen Ia con· 'nle parameter Umita whldl. are dow tiona OuidellDes for the Petroleum Re·
~end BPCTCA. Izl a.cld.ltloa., &mmODLa baaed were adJuaCed accorcilD;ly. aa.Jn1 Po&nt Source Cate10r7"
wtJJ. be removed 1D the treatment plan&: (2> The Um.lta oD storm water nmo1r n Ia not. feaelble to quanuty In eco-
u it 18 Deeded to prov1d.e nutrient aitro- from taDIUJelcb and non-process areaa nomic tenas, particularlJ' on a aatloaa1
rm to~ the bJolo81cal Q3tem. CSee '"De· were ch&Dged from 15 mg/1 of TOC aad buSa. the coats reswtlDa' !rom the d1s·
veloom.eut Documea.s•, secuoa. VII> . na sb..em ta 3D =-11 of TOC lolld 15 mill charce ot these poUutan.ts to our Nation's
<2t) The ecouom14 lml!ac& !or the re- ot oil md ll'eU8 <both mul.mumsl. · -cerw.,-s. Nevertheless. a.a IDc:l.lcated ln.
!DOval of cJirom1um a.ad z1Dc waa DOC "nlese Um1Cs are set ac tb.oae same mazi· SecUoa. VI. the pollutants dl.scbarged
c:oDI1clered.. mum CGDc:eutrattoua ezpecCecilf tb.e nm· bave subeCIIDUa.l and damatrmtr Impacts
FIDIIAL IIGISTU, VOL. ~9, NO. 91-ntUISOAl', MAl' 9, 1974
136
RULES- AND REGULATIONS
avaJJable !or purchaae from the Govern- s~c.
on Ule quallty of water aad therefore oil 411t 33 muea.c llm.lta&lan• ruldellnn rei'·
Ita capadCJ to suppor\ heaJUuo popula- ment PrtDttns omce, Washinrtoa, D.C. nuac&a.c Ule dewree ot •llluenc
Uoaa of wUdlUe. ftsll md other aquaUc 20401 for a aomiDal !ee. reducctoa aUai.Dable bf Ule APPII•
wtldlUe md Oil Ita suitabUty for IDdu.s- <r> Fi114l ~uag. ID coaaldera- c:a&laa. or Ule lleec avaUallle cedi·
crtaJ, recreael.anal a.ad clrmldDI water tton of the fareroiDg, 40 CFR Ch. L Sub- aoiOIJ eeoaomlc:a&IJ llil:blevaiJie.
SUPP~ uses. . chapter N I! hereby amended by ac1dlDr· 410 34 ('Reserved(
The total cost of lmplement.lDr the a Dew Part 419, Petroleum Rei1ning 411t.311 Standazda of performance tor aew
-
ellluent l.lm1tael.oaa rwdellnes !Deludes PoiDt Source Caterory, to read as aet 111urcn.
410.38 Prec:reacznea.\ na.adarda tor new
the d11'ect capital md operatinr costa of forth below. An order of t.he Federal Ota-
-'he poUut1on concrol technoiOSY em- t.rtct Court tor the Dtstrtct of Columbia
ployed to achieve compUance a.ad the ln- entered ID "NRDC v. TraiA" <Clv. No. S ullloart ~1M Sulllcatacory
cllrect economlc a.ad environmeneal costa 1609-73) an November 28, 19'13, re- 411t.t0 Appllc:abUltJ: descrtp&1oa. of tile lnbe
ldmW!ed ID secuan vm a.ad m t.he suP- qwred thnt the Ac1mimstratar strn •ubcaceror.,.
plemen&an report emtUled "'EcODDm1C dna~ eal.uent 1Jm1ta.ctoaa guSdeliD.es tor 4&1 41 8pecl&.ll:ed defilale&oaa.
til 42 l!:llluea.C IIIIIStaCiaDS l\lldellu.. Nl'•
ADa1Jal,s of Proposed Uuent Guidd!Des thJ41DcSustJT catetrorr 'b7 March 15. 1914. reaea.&&a.c Ule degne at ellluenc
Petraleum ReftDIDr IDdu.stlT'' <December That order wae subsequeatly mod11ied ledUCCIIIa. actala.aale bf Ule a~Jpll•
19r.l). ImplemenCI.Dr t.he eal.umt Um1&a- on Marc.b 15, 1974, and the date for strn- cauaa. or tile ben pnctlc:allle eon•
tloaa ruldeliDes W\11 subllta.Dt1&11J redw:e IDI extended unW APril 15, 1974. On the tral tec!UlOIOSJ' curreOCIJ .VAll•
the ennraamental harm which would same date tbe DtaU1ct Court ordered able.
othenrtse be att.nbu&Ule to the COA- that the e.!fecttve date for elllueat 11mita- 411t t3 Zlllueat l&m.ltaClou I'Jidellllee ntp•
UDued cllsc.barle of polluted wute waters Uoaa ruldeliDes estal)llshecS b7 Ita No- resea.t:lq f.be d-.ree ot elllueac re-
frlxD emtlnl md :a.ewl7 c:aaatnz.cted ducCioa. a&t&la.able bf ~· eppllca·
vemller 28 order rem.a.LD appUcable and c1aa. or Ule ben av..Uable tKll•
plaDt.s ID tbe· petzoaleum re1!D.LJ:I.c lzl.du.s- not be a.!fected by the ext.enaloa ID the O.OlOIJ' IOOilOIIIica.LIJ ldllaftble.
tz7, 'nle Aa'enCJ' believes that the 'beDe- publication date. The e.!fectlve date tor 4llt M (R..erveciJ
ata of Uws redUCIDI' the poUuC&Dta cUs- ellluenc llm1tattoaa IUidellDes for thla 411t 411 St&ll.d.arcla or pertormaa.c:e tor new
c:haz'Wed Juautr the UIOClaCed costa 1Ddustr7 establlahed by the Court'a 10\UCel.
which, thourh sublltallt:1al 111. absolute •Uit.~ Pntnacmea.c ltaA4al'da tor ae•
November 28 order I! May 12. 19'74. Ar.c-
terms. represent a retaUve~ small per- carcii..Dr17. rood cause 1.1 tound !or the
cencap of the total cap&tali.Dvestment iD CDal reaulat1on promulrated u .set tortb .....,.,. 1:-ln...,.Ced Sutlcatepry
the 1Ddu.s&JT. below to be e.!fecttve on May 12, 19'74. ult.50 AppUC&bU&tr, claecnp\klll or the
le) Solid UJG.Ste ctmtrol. Solid waste mcewraceca aullesC8!0fT.
concrol mUd be considered. The water- DaCecS: Ar.Drtl 30, 19'74. 411t.Jl SpM:Iall:lec& di!Sla.IClODII.
bome wastes tram the petroleum reAa- JOIDf Qv.aaus. 411t 12 l!:lllualc ILIII.Ica&kla.a rvJdel&a.e.s r811•
..-a.~ f.be derree of ellluea.c re-
IDI IDdUICJT m&J' conca.an a considerable Ac"tiCF AlirrutUitrator. ducuoa. act.&Uaab&e b7 Ule appllca-
Yalume of metall ID vanoua tonna u a S..llloa~t~r.....,. Sueun..., Cioa. of Ule best pracclc:able eoa.trol
part ot the suapenaed soUds poUutaDc. CKI:Laolop currea.c17 al'a&lable.
Sec.
Bes& practlcable caatrol techDelou md 411.10 Appllcai!Uitr. deacrt.ptklll of Ule top• Ul.58 Zalueac JJ.mlcac&OAI rvJdellll• repn.
best anilable coatrol ted:malal7 as they pt:qiUbcateiOI'Y· MII\&DI uaa cSIIT" of ela~;enc re•
are lmG'II'tl toda7 reqUire dl.lposal of the 411U1 Speclai.Lz8d dei!AltiOAI. d\ICUOa. ac\a&a.aOie bf Ule appllca•
pollutauta removed from wute waters ue.12 U:Suea.c ll.la.itatklaa rvJdella.es rep• tlOD o1 Ule lleiR al'allable teOtl•
ID tbia IDdustJT ID the form of IGlld re•a.tllll czw diiS"" of elllueac 1101011 ecoa..omlcallf Ktlle•able.
l'llduc:aoa. att&lllable by \lae appll• 411t54 (RIIMnedJ
wutes and liQUid concentrates. I:D some c:aclma ot \lae Ilea& pracaca.tlle coa.- 410 65 Staa.da.rda or pertormaunt tur n~,..
cues these are noah.u&n1oua aubst&Dces cro& CKtulaiO!r7 c'llrfta.t.ly ai'.Uable. 10urcn.
recrWI'iD8 oal7 miDlmal cuaeodlal care. 411.13 Ellluea.l IJI:alta&kiU rvJdeiUS. rti!J- 4llt 58 Pncr.tmea.c nacdudl tnr new
BoWirftr', ~me coasr.l&uent.s IDAJ' be baa- ,...a.t.la.c Ule depee of elllluea.t re- 110.-
anlaua md ID&7 require •IMdal caaaid- ducaaa. aa.a&a.allle by \lae •11PI1Ca- A'tl'nlollft"'': Seal. 301. 304 ('bl and ICI,
eraesoa. ID. order to enaure lcmc term UaD or \lae bee& available tee.~!.• SOS ('bl usd (cl aDd lO'J(c 1 ot Ule l"'dersl
protecUoa of the enVU'omneDI from llOICJC7 ecoa.alll1ca&l7 ac.A.lenllle. Water PolluWia. Coacral AC\. u ameadr.s ( \II•
these hazardous or u.rmtul CODSU&uenta. Ul.14 (Reserftdl AcCI: U tJ.SC. 12111. 1311, f314 (bl loll4 (cl.
apeclal coasldenUoa ot cUspoaal lites 4111.111 Staa.dard.l ot pertormaa.ce tor a.• 1S18 (lit loll4 (c1 aa.d 131T(cl: as scac. 8&8
muse be made. All la.Dd&l sites whare 10~ ec .eq.: Pub. I.. 8:1-600.
411.18 Pncreacmaa.c ecaa.danla tor a-
such bazardCIWI wastes are cli.IPoeed 10- !kllllpart A-Toppins Subcatesory
should be aelected ao as to preYeD& hon-
z:oat&l md verUcal mi8r&r.lon of these Sldl!lllrt .....C..CIIIn1 Sullace....,. § 419.10 ApplicabiUty1 desC'riphun o(
Ul..20 A1JpllcabW'J: deiiCI'Spcto.a. ol Ule the lappons eubeatecnry.
c:ontam~Dant.s to l!rOW1d or surface
n~. ID caaes wb.era reolortc coadl-
cnc&.&a.1 subcacecor.,. The proviatoaa ot tb.J.s subpart are ap-
411.21 Spec&.U.CS defilmtkla.s.
ttcma m&J' Do& reuonabl7 ensure \hSa. pUcal)le to diXharies from &a7 !a.c11lty
ldeciU&te precaUUoaa !e.-~ lmpentaus
llDe:rs) ahould be CU:en to eaaun Ions
411.22
-=--
Emuea.C 11mlt&CIOGII f\lldelllln ~
1M dewr- o1 ellllue.al
nd~ aRalllallle liT Ule appjl•
wlllch produces petroleum procluct.s by
the u.se of tapp~ and catal)'t1c retorm-
term protecUOD to the envtranmenc from ca&IOD elf ta. bed practicable oaa.- IDI whether or llOt the tadUty lzl.cludes
hazardOUs materUJa. Where &POroorta&e wo& ~kin' CUiftDCIJ al'llilable. 1117 other procesa ID ac1d1Uoa to toppmr
the locar.loll of salld hazardous maceriiJI 411t.2:1 :allwua& Ulllitactaaa iWda&l.a. ret~re md catalyUc re.tonDU~.~r. The pronaloaa
d1spaeal aces abauld be l)ei'III.&Dmt17 re- •acta.c Ule decne or eatuea.t of tllla subpan a.re 110t aopUcal)le to ra-
l'llduaaoa. actala.able liT Ule appu-
ccmled ID tile aoproonar.e oalce at the ca&IOa. or Ule bftC aftUallle ceoA• cillr.les which Include thermaJ. proces.,es
leaal JurtacUCCScm ID wb.lch t.he ate 1.1 1101017 -IIOmJCIIU7 .allMY.OI• <cok.ID1, vlltlrealdDr, etc.> or cacalytlc
located.
<n PubllcaCl.on ot lDtormattan em
processes. procedures. or ooerael.Dc
methods wlllcll results ID tb.e eUmJ.Da.-
UGD or reducuoa of the dSachara'e at
poUutants.
411.26
411~
411..21
411.30
--
1~1
Staa.duda of pertora:aaAOe tor ae•
Pretrucmeac
10urcu.
•taadal'da
....... ~ ..... s..ca.....,

tor
AppUcaiiW'J: deecrl11CIOII. ot U\e

u•
c:ract1Da'.
I 419.11 Speci..Jlzed delinilion,.,
Por the :;NrPOse of th1s subpart:
laJ Ezcept as provided below, the gen-
eral deftnl.ttons. abbrevtauoaa anc1 zner.b·
ocSa ot malJSia set torch ID Pan ~1 ot
Ia. ccmtormance With the requirements t.bia chapter ahaU apply to t.h1a subpar'-
of sect.toa 304(cJ ot the Act. a manual pecracllemlca& sut~cscecor.,.
Ul.31 Specla&.lmd de4a.ICiaa.a. (b) The term '"nmo11" abaJl mean the
enUtled. •Oeftloommt Document for 411.32 Elllluea.c Ulllit&CioDII guldell.aee r~ aow of seorm water.
Ellluent IJm1tat1oaa Oulc1ellnes and New reseat&a.c use cse~ ot ellluea.c lcl The term "~ast" shall mem the
SOUrce Performance Standarcla tor the reducctoa. a&ea&.aallle bf Ule appll•
Petroleum Reall1Dr Poi.Dt Source Cate- c:actoll ot Ule bell& pnct.lcable eoll- aow ot waters, tram a ablp, which 11
1'11'7,n 1.1 lleiDC pub111bed md wW be ""' teei:Laal017 c:unea.CIJ avaU&ble. treated at cbe reanery,
FIDIIAL IEGISTII, VOL 39, NO. 91-fMUISDAT, MAY 9, 1974
137
16564 lULlS AND REGULATIONS
<cU Tbe term "feedatoclr." shall mean

the crude oll aad natural IU Uqwda fed
to U'.e toPPiDC UDlta. Zlllaeal A.nnc-oldallr
<e> 'nle term ••o.ace-throuch cool1Ds ~lllr cllarlalallaiH lliallmam 111r n~ ... rorJO
MIJ'ldQ uar 1 dar ODftOCIQQftd&yo
water'" abaU meaD tboae waten elSa· lllellllll& uceocl-
charled til&& U'l Ulecl for the pW1)0M
ot b.ea& removal aud that do noc come llll&lta 11111111 ~ocnms I * eubla
lDto dl.reGI coacact wttb ~ raw mate- !DeWolllowl
riaL tDcermecllate or anLsl1ed product. 8001••••••• _ ..... :z.r 12.0 8001.............. G.CMI 0.0211
(f> The toUowmc abbrevtacsona sba1l TSS •••••••••• __ ,
coo· .. ········-··
mac: <U Meal meaaa ona thouaand Olluad-•••••
pllcma; !2) !l&bbl mea~~.~ oae tbouaand Pbllllllla
ll.t
u: .•- I 2
1101
1.7
T!IS••••• -.........
COD"..............
ou aad ..........
pJL...... ...••.••••
• 0211
'Z1
015 IJll
WI &.bill Ule nap 6.0 Ill t.O.
017
,lg
OCIIIIpaiUidL..-••
bane.ll <one barrel Ia eqwvalmt to t2 ..t..m.mllllla .IIIII
pllauJ.
M N .... .
8al44e............ .
Z II
1411 EIICIIIII IIIII~ =~ I*
!.COO
I 419.12 Eftla-1 l.imi&ali- pidellnee

Tcnu~
Beunlell&
•• .- 8001,_.......... Q.tO Q.2!.
11'1!11,__1iar tbe de_.- ol efRaenl - -- · · · 'llrhllla 11M,......
oan T!IS .•• -······-··· 26 14
redaedoa adaiaalale by the appllca- IJB•••••• -···-·· e. a 111 t.a.Clllll coo·········-···· :1.1 1..1
ou aad
lloa Gl tbe b..c pnelicable evnb'ol
tedlaoloiJ' ~dy a•.U..bie.
.,...._.,
ll!llllllllllllll (_.,... !*I..OIIIIblll aa. - - -___
•.••••••••• -· 131 ...,..• e.o 111 • a.061
WI&IIIA ~~~e
rza eaQbll•htn1 e12e Umitatiaaa sec 8001..............

TSS•••••• -........
1.0
t.t
t..ZII
1.1
!2) Bdul. The aUocatloa allowed
forch Ill Ulia aeccaaa. EPA took !Dto ac- COD"-··········· tl.2 D.J
for b&llul water 11ow, as ll:c/cu m <lb/
coUDI aD IDtormaCSDA 1& wu able to col- OUuad-····- 2-S I.J Mral> , .sh&ll be bued em those balla.a&
p~
lecC. dllftloP aad IOlldC with respect to -IIOQIUIL ••..:.. .01111 .1111 watera tna&ed. at the reADer,-.
faccor.s !.IW:h u ace aad size ot plane. ..t.aulloaleM N..... 1111 .tl
nw matertala. maautaccurmr pracesM~~, 81114de.. •••• ....... IIIII CD6
practucca pra.Suced. treatmmc tecbllalov Tocelallraiiii&IIIL....
Bua-1
·= an
available. eaei"U' reqwremmta &Dd --......... 111111 .11111
pB.............-.. 'lrl&llla 11M ,...,. e.a 111 • a. Mulmama.
costa> wbicb caa a.crecc U2.e IDdUitll' sub- ua71 dar
ca&etortz&Uon aDd dum& leYew estab-
Ualled. IC Ia, however, poul!)le tbat data rb) Tbe 11m1t.l sec forth lD ~h
wbicb wauld ..erect tbelle Um1taC1oua <aJ of tbia section are to be mwc.lplled
ban aa& bee aftlJ&ble aad, u a result b:r the followtnr factors to calculate Clle
Cbeee Jlmitaescma should be aclluated tor maz1mum for &IU' oae d.A7 a.nd maz1mum 8001.............. O.IMII Q.O'.III
avenre of dall7 values for Wrt:F con- T!l8................ ll'olll 017
c:erca&D glaut.l ID U2.ls 1Ddustr7. AD IDdl• coo•.............. .11 26
vtdual cUacharrer or other IDterested aecuc.IYedays. 011 ..... - - · · · · · 016 IJll
penoa m&F SIIAmlt e't'idem:e to the Re- <1> Size factor. pH ........ - ••- ... Wl&blll &ae nap I 0 10 t 0.
110D&l Ad.m!D1stntor <or to t.b.e State. lf z.aoo llarr•'- J•.UIOI:II Sf.- llftlil,lll IIIIIU ( - c b I * 1,01111
Clle State b.U the authority to Llllue rwr ,,.,...,. dafl /Kior ""oC
llo•l
NPtlES :germ! tel thac 'facton relaCJ.Dc to 0 CG 411.11.·-----------··--·-·- 1.112 8001.............. G. 40 0. ~I
tbe eQWDIDeDI or fac111t1ea Involved. the T!l&................ 2t It
50 co 111111 ••• --------------------- 1.21 coo• ............. :a.e z.o
proceu aPI)Ued, or oeber such !acton 100 CO 1411.8--··--·-------· 1.M
relaced to IUCb. d.l.scbar1rer are tuadamm-
tallF cSWerenc from c.t1e !acton canai..
lft•C.U--------------·-·····
1110 or 1..5'1'
011 and-...... 1.:11 061
pH ................. Wl&hln Lllll..a1110 LO 00.
!2) Procesafaccar
d.ered ID Clle establlahme.at ol the ruide-
llDes. OD Ulll bu&a of aucb. ev1deace or
- .
JJronu c:GII/IfUNifiDII
,._.
/Kior
(dJ 'nle qu&Dttt:r aDd quality ot pol-
luta.at.l or I)Olluca.ac pro~:~ertles coD-
oUler available 1Dtormat1an. the Re- 1.0 co :s.ee ••·------------------- o.eo trolled bF tbia parqraph. attrtbutable
ctoaal AdmiDist.rator <or tbe State) W1l1 4.0 co '·"------------------- 1.00 to o.ace-Cllrouc.l:l. cooUDc water. are ex-
mate a wnccen l!Ddlar that such !acton T.O CO 1.1111 ••- - · · · - - - - - - - · · - - · 1.111 cluded from the d1sdl.&rlre allowed bJ'
are or are aoc tuad.amen~ cSWerenc
for that f8Cll1ty comgarect to those spec-
IJI.ed ID Clle DevelO'PIDIDC OocWDeDC. U
13.0 co 111.0 « 11"---------------
10.0 co 12.811---····-----····--· 2.'1"7
!3) See the compreb.enstve uazDllle

4.08
J:l8oZ'BCl"&Pb ( b 1 of t..1:1.1s sec Clem. ODce-
t.brourll cool!Dr water IZI.&J' be c11s·
~ed with a total orranlc carbon
such fUDdamentaU:r cWferi!Eit factors are Subpart D I 419.42<bJ (3). conceatrac.lon no-. to exceed 5 11:11/l.
found to e::a:iac. the Rer1oD&l Ac1m!Distra- rc> The foUowtnc aUocationa coaau-
tor or t.b.e State sball establish for the tute the q11&11c.lt:F aad qu&Uty ot pollut- § 419.13 Eiftuenl limitauona gwdelines
dlscharrer emuent Um1tatlon.s ID the aata or poUucaat properties concrol!ed repreeentins lhe decree ol eiftuent
NPDES permit either more or lesa str1D- b:r tbls paracraph aad attributable to reducrion -.aacnable by the epplica-
renc U2.aD the Umitac.lona establ1shed runocr aad ballaaC. wb1c.l:l. may be elSa· laon ol &he beet •••Liable &echnolo.,.
here!D. to the esten& dictated by such charged after Cbe api)Ucatlon of best -noaaically achie...hle.
fi&Dd.alnent&ll:r cWferenc !acton. Such practicable control tecbnolog cUZTenUJ' !a) 'nle foUowtnr UmitaUans estab-
Umi&ac.loaa must be approved bF the Ad· avallable, b:r a poiD&. aource lllbJect to Uall Clle quantity or qualltJ' of polluc-
mJ.DJacrator of the EDvtranmeatal Pra- the Drovtsfoaa ot tbia subpart, .ID addltlo.a
&ect!lm AceD.cJ'. 'nle Adm1Di~U'ator m&J' to the d1scharre allowed b:r pararra;h ·~ uar,.~~4Y.~.-a .. aa.
approft ar cUaapprove such Um1tac.loa.a, !bJ of U2.ls aectloD: 1 ·en- 'brt \l:le 'IDIDI'Ida hJtus eoawa,.
sPKI!7 o&ber UmitaCSOD.&, or lnlttate pro- (1) lluMt. 'nle &llocatloD allowed for 2''!nn,,. 5'Wn em••n•n. 1-'00Pr...,.
ac=t Be·'on·•
ceed~Da to re91ae t.b.ese reruJaCioa.s.
laJ 'nle foUowiDr Um1tatlona estab-
Uall tlle quaac.lt:F or quallt:J' of I)Olluta.nca
storm nmo.cr aow. u ~cu m Ubtm ral>,
s.baU be baeecl sole17 oa thac storm 11ow
( procesa ara nmo.cr> wbicb l.s treated
UO'Yl
~ -='G-1:CC..-.. .r=·
at. CCDr a:mu•ac lllllltaelou tor TOC 1lla&1
td·' ,
~· ial' ~
1M liMed oa eCilueac data aum c.lle p1aac i:or-
01t poUucaac properties, controlled by tb.Ja ID Clle maiD treac.men& nacem. All addl:. &"MaclDI TOO co BODS.
paracra~b. wb.lc.h. m&F be dlscharred b7 tlo.aal storm runo.cr !from tank 11eld.a U lza c.lle JUdiJIIIIDC ot the Rai1DDa.l Ad•
a polu& source IU!)Jec& to the pro't'isioaa aad non-~:~rocesa areuJ • that b.aa beea ID1alacrator, adequate corn1ac10a daca .....
serrerated from t.b.e maiD Wlllte stream aoc afttJ.Iab1e, the eCilueac lllllltactou for
of tiU •uDo&rt after appllcaUoa of the for dlscharre. shall aat exceed a coacen- TOe a1la&1 1M •cabU&IIed ac • rac&o ot 2.2
best pncctcable conl:rol tecbnolog c:ur- traUon of 35 IDC/1 of TOC or 15 ml/1 co 1 co c.lle ~p&lcall1e eCilueac 1llllltaCSoaa CIA
reuU,. available: ot oll aad rreaae wbm dlsc.barred.. BODI.
PIDDA&. UGISTU, VOL 39, NO. 91-l'MUISDAY, MAY 9, 1974
138
RULES AND REGULATIONS
anta or -pollutant. propert.les. controlled !process u-es nma.l!'> which Is treat.ed 111 f -'19.15 Standard. ol perlonnanre tur
by uus pancft'Pb. wb1cb may be cU.s· t.he =am treatment mtem. All lddl•
charled b7 a -po!Dt source subJect to the t1oasJ sr.arm runoff crrom ~elds aDd ca> Tbe taUowiDI st.aoda.rd.s of per·
proV1sloDS of this subpart after appU· Zloa-omcess areas). t.hat has been ~ fanaance esc.a!Jlllh t.be qua.atSey or quaL-
cacton of the best. available techDolaa' rated from t.he maiD waate stream tor ltv ot POUuta.nts or POllutant properties.
econom1e&Jl7 achievable: c11sc:bane. shall noc exceed a. con.centr&• coatroUed by t.hJs p&.rai%'S;Ih. whJch may
Uoa of 35 IDI/1 ot TOC or 15 IDI/1 ot be ~ed by a new source subJect
o111U1d sreue when dlschB.I'Ied.. to t.he proYU~oas at t.h1a subpart:
Hutmam rar lUIIIWII UmiiAIInn•
..., 1dar
A.Y•racn ft( obul f
.,.,.a... &•a•
........,aUYodArs
lbaiiiiDio~-
BOD'---· 11.111111 11.11111& RODI--- u.a

TIL-- .0111 CIU 7 ~
coo··-··-·--
Oil All4 , _ _ _
.u
.!1031
~--·--- WIIIIID U l l l - Ule I.CL.
.crz.
1'011
TSS••- - - · -
COD·-·····--··-
OU&adcr-.--
PIIIIIUIIICIOO-
11
.. ,
.CI!II
-da.
~cx:=.:.:n:r '* A.auaollla u H ••:::
Blli.Dde ••••••••••• _
z.a
.ora
l.l
.1.0:1
BO D_I_-- Tocal ciii'CIIIIIIIIIL..- .18 • IU'I
Tllll •••••• _-_
- CLOBI
• OM ILG:n
• an BeuyoJ•u .CXII'I' .11117
coc··-······-
OIIIDd---·
.21
.011
111
014
=--
pB-............... WI IIIla llle na.p & 0 lo ~ 0.
110D1--·-·- G. a l.l'l D L - - - · - - - 'IJ1tllla. Ul8 na.p U &o I o.
T:I8•• - •• - - - - .II .:a
COD"-······-·- ~.~ :LI
Oilud,__ __ .ll .1t 12) BGDGit. "nl.e allac&t.loa allowed !or BODI-............ t.2 :.2
--......•:...
l'lllaallo- ba!laiC water 4av, U q/cu m (1])/lolp.U, TSS •••••••••••••••• 2.1 1.6
.liii-•M-
,IIIMI
,Jt
....
.ann
,,.,
.ll &b.l.l1 be bued. oa thole b&U.u& watera coc· ..·······-- :n. T 11.2
----- ·- ·-
I'liiAde ••••••••••••• •1111 Oillllld ~--- Ll .iD
U'e&ted && ~ rei1Dery. PIItlllllla- .au .1/Ja
uTa..a.-........
,OM
........, IIIMIDda.
........,
~ollla u H ••••• _ 1.11
"'
--
PH-------- WlllllaUW- &.0 1.0 t.a. Blll&lo•••••• - ••••• .art .81!
Tacal cllnlllll....._. .111M .ilr.'
6--..arunr .OIJJJ .ID~
lbJ "nle Um1ta let fard:l ID DU'IICI'SPb - .. rora

Cal OC t!IJa aeeUaa are Co be 1Dult1p11ed
-a••cl•'l'l
IIIMIMI aeftld-
OB---····-·····- 'III'II.IIID lila rup 1.0 .. I 0.
by \be followtac factors to c:alcUlat.e the lb) The llm1ta set !ortb lD para;nph
IDUWIIID for ~ oae U.,IUIG III.AZ1mWD M.uta 'QIIItol Clll"""mJ I*' nsMe Ca> of thla &eeUon are 1:0 be multiplied by
aYerace of ~ vloluea lor Ul.1n7 coaaec• -!IIIIo••
the follawiDs facr.ars 1:0 ca..lculate the
uun d&Js. BODI-······-·-- CLCIIGII II.~ .IDali:UII.um lor any oae day and maximum
cu Bl.ze taceor ~~~DW:::-.=::: ::: l:\ avel'ale of ~ values far thlny con-
I AtiO I».,..Ia ot /IIN6UM:Ic ,.r on .u4 - - - · · · 01t.» mn sec:uuve days.
IICaftl MW , ... fKttiP ~--··-···-· 'lrll.llla.lllei'UI(t'II.IIO'II. cu Size factor
0 to ~··------------------------ 1. 02 aniC:
10 to ··------------------------- 1. 21
EaiCIWI ~n::r PM 1.!10 1,000 ""'at tee!Uioclc
PflT uream doll .S• :~ /tlr'IOr
100 to 1tlll ••••• ------------------- 1."'
110 or creac.r........................ 1.17 80 Dl-·-····-··•• II. Dill IL a:" I 0 to 41111............................ I. G:l
121 Procesll factor ro~:::::::::: ~ ~ so to H11----·------···-·------·· 1.44
1. n
1.0 to
~.a to
s.e•------·-----------·-- o
u•---·-····----------·---- a. 10
1.
Ollud ...-...... ~18
p.IL..-···-·--··· 'ILL.IIIa lbo Nlloll LO 10 I 0.
01\ 100
110
to 1411.8-------------------------
or srear.er.......................
c21 Process !actor
I 5T
7.0 to '·"-------------------- 1. 6111

10.0 to 12.111----------------------- :a. 7'f
:+ra lollY - Ia •llle.ll lllo lollllileMI csn clftoaNLr:lla
111&&-dlo clllaruleloa oallftiiU'&Cioala rllo odluo'" euft<JO Proc~s• l'"rOt"ell
13.0 to 15.0 or 1rwar.u..... _ _ _ t. 01 1.111111 m!Ul U.IIIIIIIPDII. Clle a..tanal A.dnURIJfftlar mop COta/lguraUcm /Dt:lor
IUDOalale TOC M ·----~~~~ ... at COO E.lllu..,l
13> See the comprehellaift u:ample UIDILIIlCIIIIIIar 'T'OC ella.ll lie bOMd OD oGIUIII& da~ 111111& 1.0 to3.111.................... .•.... 0, GO
Subpan D I411U2Cb> 13>.
Sbo pl.onl_._ TU C 1.0 80 04.
II Ia Ule Jaclp-nl at ell• Ro~c~aaol AdiiUNI......,, ill----------------··--·-·-· I 118
• a to 11
70 to 111111.......................... 1. oo
lc> The folloW'tDC aUocattoaa coaau-
tute the quanctt7 and qua.Ut7 oJ: POiluc-
ldfQaa~e -I&CIOII clllla.,.. - an.lllllll•. 1.11o1 •lila."'
UIIIIIMIOGI lllr TOC IILall lie ootabllalled II a r:1rla al
:U .. 1 le 11M IDIIilcaiiiA lllluooD& llmlWialll 011 8U Ul.
10.0 to
13.0 to 15.0
12.81---------------------
or ~r.er................
2. 7'7
~- 011
aacs ar POllutant prooerUa controlled
by l.bia para~b. a.&.Crtbu&able to tun• ldl 'nle quaotaty mel qua.llty of pol- C3> See the caml)rehezwve example
a~ &Dd baauc, 'll'b1cb IDa7 be ~ lut.&Dta or polluta~As properues con"oUed Subpart D I 4l9."2CbJC3).
alter tbe aopUcauoa of best. availaDle by Ul1a ;:IIIU'al'r'apb. aUnbutable 1:0 oace- Ccl The foUawiDI aUocatlona consU-
tec.b.Qoloa' eccmom.lca!lJo acbievaale b1 a t.nrou.;h c:oollaiwater,IU"e escluded tram tut.e t.be quaatltl' &ad qua.l.lty of P<ll·
POIDC saun:e subJect to the l)roYiaiaaa oJ: the dlsdlarp allowed by paracraph lbl lutants or POUUtant properties caatroUed
uua subpart. 'n1ese allacacsoas are Ia ad· ot uu. secu.oa.. Once-Uuoush ccollDI by thls P&ra.II'BPb, actnbutBble to runoft'
dlt!oa to the dlaehane aUowect bJ' ~:~ara· aDd ballaac, whJcb ma.y be dbc:h&rlec1 by
poapb lb} of Ul1a MCtlan: ~ter 111&1' be dls:haqed With a. to&61
a new source subJect to the pravt.uoaa ot
cu .Runal1. 'n1e allocactoa allowed far ol"'r&DJQ carllaa con.centratton nat. to ex• t.hla .subpart:. 'n1ese allocat.1ona are In ad-
storm nmaa' dow, u Q/CU 1D Ub/KpU. ceed 5 IDC/1. cUttaa to the dtscbarae allowed by para.
sb&ll be bued aolely on t.bac storm aow 1419.1-i [Rea."edl ;np.b lbl ot thts section:
IIDIIAI. IEGISTU, VOL. l9, NO. 91-fHUUDAT, MAT 9, 1974
139
16&61 RULES AND UGULATIONS
m llaM#. '1118 alloca.t11m r.llowed tor Ulrauab cooi1Ds ...ter, are excluded !rom
Ule d1ac:haz'le aUowed bJ' pancraph !b)
dlrect contact ..Sth 8oD7 raw material. 1n•
termecUate or tlDishecl product.
danlt r=alr 11GW, u tc/C:U m UbiKPl>. m 'nle toDowtD8 a.bbrevta.Uo:aa abaU
lbaD be bued .olelJ' on tba& atorm &lw
of UW aecUon. Once-Cbrauab. cooUDc wa-
ter ZD&J' be ~ 'll'!.th a total or- mean: U> Hp.l mea.as one UloU5t.Dcl
<proc~a Ana nmo~) wbich 11 trest.ecl JD ramc cartlon CODCeDtraUoD Dot to U:• p.llaaa; <2> Mbbl meaaa one thousand
tbe maiD trea&mm& 87stezD. AD addltiDD• ceed5mc/L barrela (ODe barrel 1.1 equlva.leDC CO •:z
al ltonD nm~ <from ~elda &Del § 419.16 Pl'etreabDenl llaadarcb for aew
pJlODS).
DGD-pracea arua) , UJa& baa beeD sew- ~ § 419..22 EIRaenl limiaauona guidelines
rep&ed C'aJD Ule maiD waste s&resm. tor The pretZ'eati:DeDC staadarda under fe11l"fteellln• the dep-ee of eftluenl
c1lac~ .sb&ll not ezceed a concmtra- reduclaon allainallle b,- the applica-
aecctoD 30'7!c) of Ule Act tor a source tion ol the beat praelacallle coali'OI
uaa el 35mcll ot TOC or 15 111811 ot o.ll ..Stb.ID Ule topplz18' subcatecol"J', whlc:b Ia ICCAnolo.,. curnnll,- a•adaltle..
and anue wbm dlachar'Zed. a user ot a publ1cl7 owned treatment
ID estabJJsb.IDc the Umltattoas set
woru <and wb.lch wauld be a new source tort.b ID UlJa section. EPA cook IDto ac-
IUJ)Ject to aecUOD 301 ot tbe Act. 1f I&
wen to cUich&rp poUutaDta to Ule :aavt- count aU IDtormaUon I& wu able to col·
.Uie watenl, .shall be tbe ataDdard set lect, develop mel aolld& wttb respect co
tort.b ID Pan 128 ot UW c.bagcer, ucept tacton Csw:b aa ace and mze ot plal:!.t.
tbaC.. tor tbe ~ of tbJI .seccton. raw macerta.la. ZD&Dutaccurmc processes.
I 128.13:1 ot UIJa cb&Citer .sba.l1 be ameaded products procluced. treacmm& tecb.Dol·
to read u foJlowa: "lD &dcUUoa to Ule ou ava.llable, meriJ" requ1re!Denta and
probibit.Sons ae& torcb ID I 128.131 of UlJa coata) wb.Jc.b ca.n al!ecc Ule 1Dduat17 sub·
o.cra cbagter, tbe pretna.tmeDt stazldard for cate1or1z&t.Son and emueuc levela eatab•
BODI••••- - · · ·
TilL.-·--··-·
G.IMI
0211 1117 IDcompaUble pollut&Dta IDtrocluced IDto U.Sbed. n Ia, however, posalble that data
coo·-··-----·
ou ... .,____ , .11 whlc.b. would atrect these Umltatton.s
.a.----- 1111 CDIJ
lrllllill 1.1111 rucw LO to a.A.
a publlcl7 owned treatment wora aba1l
be Ule st&Dclard ot performance for new have not been available and. aa a result.
these Um.ttattoas aboulcl be ac1Jua&ed for
....... . . . . (paaadll . . 1,111111 aource. sgecU!ed ID 1419.15; ~d• certalD Pl&Dta ID UlJa IDclUIUT. AD ID•
ploldArwl Tha.&. ~ Ule pubUcl::r owned treatment
'II'OrU wb.lc.ll recenes Ule po.llut&Dta Ia c11Ylclual dlacb.IU'1rer or otber IDtereated
BODI•••••- - . 1.111 G. 21
TS&.----··--·-
coo-.•..•••.
011 -
... .,_,___ 1.1:M LlIt
committed. ID Ita NPDES permit, to re-
move a apecU!ed percentace of aD7 ID•
person m&J" subiD1t evtdmce to the Re-
ltonal AclmiDiatrator <or to the State. Lf
pa________ ••wa131 -
c11e ...... e.o to I.A.
compaeible polluta.a.C.. the pret.ree.r.ment the State l1aa Ule auUlor1C7 to lasue
a&alldanl aggllc&ble to users of aucb NPDES permltal t.ba.t factors relat.1D8 to
creacmmt woru &ba1l be corres~ the eqUipment or facW&tes 1Dvolved. tbe
!2) Salllul. 'nle allocation r.llowed for recluced ID SC1'1Dp.DCJ' tor tba& po.llut&DC.'' process &~)plied. or oc.ber auc.b factors
ballan water a.ow, u ka/c:u ID lb/Kp.l) , re!at.ecl to sw:b dJac:barver are fUDda-
aball be build OD tZ1aM ballu& wacen Subclart a--c:ncldnl Subcat.pty meuta.Ulr cWrerent !rom t.be !actors con-
~a& &be rdzw7. I 419..20 AP1'Uc..llili17: dacriptioa of slclerecliD t.be eacabllabmmt of Ule IU1cle-
tfle cnciLin• Mbc:ateco..,-. • 11Des. OD tbe bul.t of such evtd&ace or
•
----
oc.ber avatlable IDtormauon. Ule Re·
'the praftaioDa ot this 3Ubpar& are ap- rional Adm!DJs&racor <or tbe State) wtll
•111111a1 pUca.ble to aU d1acbar1es from Ul7 ta- m.ake a wnttea dncl!Dg that aucll factors
lfald•--
-~ 1 c1ar
cWt7 wb.lc.b produces petroleum produces
bJ" the uae ot toppiDc and crac:.IUDc.
are or are DOt tuncla..m.entallr cWrermc tor
that fac.lllt7 compared to UICIMI specl.fted
wbec.ber or DO& the tac.ll1t7 IDcludes &DJ' 1n the Development Dooumenc. U such
proceae ID &dd1Uoa. to toppJ.Da and crack- tlmdamencau,. dlfferenc factors are
IDe. The prov1alo:aa of this subpart are found to ezlat. Ule Re1tonal AclmiDlatra-
no& applicable however. to fac111t1es cor or Ule State sbaU estabU.Sb for tbe
a.cra
TU-·····---
BODI---· --···
COD'·······--
00 . . . .,_____
G.IMI
0211
t7
011
017
2t
Dill
wb1cb !Delude t.be praceaaes specUled JD
SUbparts C. D. orE of tb1a pan. dlacbarwer emuent llmitactona ID t.be
NPDES permlt eJtber more or les~ str:.n-
..
pL.....;;________ Wllllla 1118 rucw e.o to oa. i 419..21 Speeialbed definilbu. sent than tbe Um.tcauoas eatabllshed
•ac~~~~~ - · =~ 1,01111 pi
Par Ule purpose of this subpart: 11ere1n to the ltll:teDt c1lctaced by such
!al Except aa provtclecl below. the lCD· !UDdamentaUy cWf&reut !actors. Such
ao 01-........... a.ta a. 21 era! de4D1ttoDa. a.bbrevtauona and meth-
11m.ltaUons must be approved b)' the Ad·
TBI••• ·••···-····· 2t It ods ot &D&lysb set forth ID Part •01 ot
ou...a.,____
OOD '·········-·· lO1211 2.0a. UUs cbapter abaJ1 appiJ' to thla subpart. IDIDSacrator ot the EDvtralllftental Pro-
DB----····-··· Wllllln &be nap e.o to 1 a. <bl The cerm '"'nmo!f"' sbal1 mean Ule teccton Alency. 'nle AclmlnJatrator m.av
!Sow of storm water. approve or disapprove such llm.itatlons.
Ccl 'nle term "ba.llaat" sb&l1 ZDe&D Sl)eclf7 oCher 11m.ltatlona, or IDltlate pro-
Ule dow ot waters. tram a ab.lp, wblch b ceed!Dp to revt.se t.bese r-e8ulat1ona.
to be created a& Ule reanen-. <a) '1'2w !oUowiDc Um.ltatloas eatab-
!cl) 'nle term ..feedltoc.k" ahall ZDee.D Uab the quaut1t7 or quality of poUutanta
the crude o.ll and na&ural IU llqulda ted or pollutant properttee. controlled by
to Ule toppJ.Da UDI&I. UlJa ParacraDb. wb.Jc.b ID&J' be dlach&l'l'ed
!el 'nle term "ouce-throucb coollnc b)' a PGIDt source IWIJect co Ule provt-
(d) 'nle qU&DUC7 and qual1t7 ot pol- water" .sb&ll mean tboae waten d11- alo:aa ot UlJa subpart alter application of
lu&allla or pollu&an& prooertSa contl"'Ued cb&r8ed t.bat are uaec1 for Ule ~· of the best pracUcable control techDolon-
~ t.bia parqrapb, attributable to once- heat removal aDd Ulat do not come IDeo • cWTeDtiy ava..lla.ble:
PIDIIAL IIGISTII. VOL. J9, NO. 91-THUISDAY', MA'I 9, 1W4
140
IULES AND IEGULATlONS 16:i6i
........
~......,
[R-d]
ITa ..., . - I a W"IIJIII \llol IOOoiltMI

IIIM&IIIoclllaftdalaD--IDLIM•diUftl-
-,.__..C. BON
T!l!
ouuc~
••• _ _ _ _ _
___
coo•.. -····-- .•
l.t
12
11.2
u
1.7
~~..
---=- Staad.ud. ol periarmaare rnr
( al '!!se to.Dowmsr standards at ~~er-

tarma.ac:e es&a.bl.l.!b tbe qua.at2t7 or quai-
l~ at DOUUC&at.t or ~JG11UtaAi propefttes,
~'.f~~:~:-'-~'8T.:""m:~ l'!llulle-
-~
CCIIIcralled b7 tb1s pe.racrapb, wb1c:h·J:Day
Dlllil- tar TOC ""U lie e.-t Gaalllma d a l a - Gll
UIIIIIIU\ _...la&l ... TOC Ill BO 0&. -- ' ---·•- H·- --- 6.1Gil a. a be ~ b7 • Dew 10\U'I:II 5\&Dject
u Ia till )lldiiiMIII ., taa ILellalllll Adlai.._, llall!cllo ••••••••••- . m .IMI CO the praoNIQDII of this mbpart:
..seer- ean'PiadGII dUll on - a ..llallla, IIIII elllull'
Ulld-lllrTUC181wl .. -~ . . .
~ ca I Ill IIIII aogiiCiobla edlllllll& 111111- aa BOD~.
-oe Tacale:l!&sW •
B~t
.11
•
.It
dllamllaa.. · · - · IIIII Gila

1zl pwacraob.
lb) '111e Umitl aet. fartb pB--····•······· WIWn U. ...... t.O to I a.
Ia) of tb.1s seccs= ant ta be mulUplled ~
the tallawiz28 factors ta calculate the
maximam tar &DJ' oae ~ and aa'dmWII.
averqoe at 4al11 Talue fCJI' tb.lr'l7 c:aaaec•
1 0•••••••
TSB 0 & ._
coo• .••.•
01111114 __
-_
__
- -_
_
-_-
_
L2
L2
...
1.99
'II
l.t
!lfiY:Imamtlf
aar 1 day
..,..
.lo...,..eol<!aur
••Ill·~~
......,_
-~~""•"
~
ucancSaJS. ,. a
Ill SIZe facta. l'IIIMII<I-
paaeda ......- 1111111 ... BODI••••••••• - ••• I~3
J.o«< IIGPN" ot /II..S.&odl r-r Slzll A~~~~~~~~~~~aMN.-.
SIUIIM•••••••••••••
I 8
11211
1.~
niT TSB.--··--- 99
o311cocou.•------·------------------
l#ftBI -.Ylf /tll:ti!IP Ill
'Tt.a____________________ 1.- T ..... . - . . . . _ . ... .0.11 r:oo '··········-·
Ulluul--··· t..S
o. • Boaawl&l•l PlloTIAIIo
uo co Je».a••• - - - - - - - - - - - - -
;zs tiQ ld.l •••• ______________ J. ft
1. 1t pB..-·-·--· lfiUW. ua...,...
-··-·· alliS
eo ca La.aDIII --elL·-··
A-III&•H---
BIIlftde •••••••••••••
1111
liJI
IRS
n....
....
!I ft
liD Ql pwa'Cal..... _______ ... _____ 1. t1 Tac&lcll~ ~ It
12l Process factar

,.,_,. conllrunnon
}_.fl co :1.41------------------ 0.18
~>rau•• /Kfor =':
1 Ia ..., - Ia wblell Ule AOfllan& - dUDollllnCI
111M we cliiQrscllo laD - . . . - In I.Do olllaen& ,.,
=-~~EI;.':"~= .!~.."':i pa••••.•••_ •••••••
CO D. IC;.:n, UmiiMIDIII 111r TOC 1ball 1111 I I - oa
o i l - <1. . -
u
Ill• piMI -..lallnl TOC 10 11001.
aou ..lut
eflraauiiiiL.......... 00.'\01 ,_,..::
Wltbla 1.111 ,.,,,. e a to~ o.
:s.~ co a.te••---------
5.50 co 1.41------------------ 1. 13
o. '' l• ... fadllltdl <N Ule ~ &dm.IDUII':I&Or.
o$q..U aw!IIMIDD -
da~
on - BWIIllab.., l.h
iW TOC Jl\all 1111 ostai!Uallocl M 1 rsUD ol
e111118111 RODI.-.......... . ,. I I
'1.10
T.IIO coco 1.41 ..••• - .•····--··· 1. 80 ca. 1141f111a111A elllulll IIZIIICIII.Laa CIA BOD&. Tss ...... - •••••••• ! 0
--dL. - ••..
U Ill L ca 41I ..s'
1o.10 ar crwuer-------- 1. a coo•·········--
OIIoad-••- •• 1.1
.II.
:.IS
ClaJ 'l'be ~Smits sec. torti1LD paracrap.b. PllftiDiie
13) See tile CGIIlll~bmatn -amp!• ICI ~.:a
Cal ot t.tUa MCt.laD U"e to be m.ll.IUJ)Ued
Subou'l I) I 4li•.UU:U 13). AIUD-MN ••••• I n
IQ' LU /GU-m& IS.C~I"' to c:alc:U!Ate the u:n wr
ccJ na. ~ al 1 uuJ cc' m SCIU!rb. ••••••••••••
Te&Mdlftiiiiiii.III..-
azul. (2) awb' to c1.lsc.t!..u"' ~ ~
mazSmu= ..,.cace
uurcr COIIllleC'Ilt11"e c!Qs.
o! c1allr ftlua tor Boaawai4nl
CD.....,am..--- G:ll~ JnJol
"''
. . . . wa&el' poQQU.Il.&l ~YIIllt to p.........- - WI-* tZie ...... a o ca v 11.
at.orm. wacu nma.a: IIZUI. ~c. 'll'lo&er br
Ill Size tactar
• paiD& aaW'Ctl l'tlbJ ect. to !.be gl:'al18loaa l.QGG kmlll a1 fr.Utocla
pn lk'llllll 441' .Stu /rldGP'
of this ~puc.
Cd) ne qU&Dt.l~ &Dd quaUtr of paUut- 0coco ·r..a_______________________ o.1. Sl00
35 34..8..~------------------
&Dta or poUu&a.at. pro~es eoDCI"olled bJ'
uua parqraDb. attrtbutable co aace- 'Sco110101
ua or
1~
1-----········----
lte.a____________
creac.r_______________________
1. u.
1. Jl
l.tl
UU'oQflh coollDa' nter, an aclude<l .f1'oal.
PIDIIAL IIGISTU, VOL. l9, NO. 91-rHUISDA1', MAT 9, 1974

Mo. Ill-Pt. :a-a
141
16568 RULES AND REGULATIONS
<b) The Um1ta aet. forth ID paracraph chem.1cal operaUoD.s. whetller or not the tors are or are not CUDdamentaiiF dlf-
(&) of Cbla secCSoD an to be IDWCSpUed. Cac.Wtr lacluciee t.D7 proceaa Ia adcUUon Cereat: tor tba& tacWty compareci to thoae
~ uae fo.lknrtDir !acton to calculate t.he to toDDIDc. crac.ldDc' aDd pet:rocbem1ca1 spec11!.ed ID tb8 Development Docwaeat.
ID&ZimWD few aD7 ODII daF aDd ~um operaUoas. The pro'91.slons at c.b.la sub- U auch !lllldameat.allJ' cWfermt. factors
averace of da&17 Tfolues for t.h1rt7 COD- pan sha.ll Dot. be aooUC&I)Ie however. to are toUDd to em'- :.be Re1Jioaal Admtms-
secuun cSa.7L fac.Wtles wiW:b. lzJ.c.lucie the processes trator or t.h8 St.a.ce shall estabU.sh tor
( 1) SIZe factal' spec:U!ed!D Sub~ D or E of c.b.la part. t.b.e d.l.sc:b.aZ"'er ellluent Umit.a.Uona In the
NPDES permit etUler more or leas acrm-
J,tiOO llrlrNia O//UtUCodl SCM §419..31 SpeciaU.ecl deb.ilionao aen& t.haa tile Umlt.a.Uom est.abl..labed
,., - .... dar
3-L8------------
,.._111----------
t~~~~:cor
Por the Pun:IOM of UUs wbpan: b.erelll. to t.b.e exCeD C c11ct.a.tec1 bF such
11111..111------------· 1.1.1.u.
0 co Q. 88 (a) Ezcept u provtded below, tile aea- fUDdammtall1 cWferent factors. Such
:sa co oo en.l d~dolls. abOrevta.doD.S aad IDetb- UmltaUons muat be approved. bJ' the
11 co
uo co 1tt.lll- 31 oda of aaalnia .set fort.b In Pan 401 of Adm1D.Iac.rator of the ED.vl:ronmeatal
110•..-- -- Lt1 Chis c:haDter ab.a.ll ~, to Cbla subpart. Protecdon AceDC7. The Adm1D.Iatrator
<b) 'n1ll &enD •nmor ab.all mean tbe ID&J' a;~prove or cUsapprove such 11m1ta-
<2> Procellll factor
,.,_... !low at st.orm - • ·
<c) 'n1ll tam '"ballaat." sb.all mean tbe
dolls. sPitdf7 ot.her Um1tatlom. or IDIU-
ate Proc:eecllD.c:l to revtae tllese recuJa-
, _ _ -~~~ /Mfllr &nr at wa&en. f:rom a sb.ip, wb.icb .Ia to Uom.
1..1 • a.tt. - - - G. aa be t.zont.ed a& Ule ra!Del"J'. (&) The followtDr Umlt.a.tlom estab-
3..10 CO a . t t - - - - - - - - - . II
L10 tD 1.t8••- - - - - - - - - - - L 1S
<d> ne carm '"feeda&oc&" shaU lll.eaD l.lah the quanUtr or Qualll\7 ot pollut.a.Dta
tbe crucie all aad aacural p.s Uqutda or poUut.aat prope.ntes. coatrolled !JF th.l.s
1.10 co 10.10 • lfta&er----------
T..IO CO l . t t - - - - LeD
L tn
<3> See t.h.e compreheDSi'llt example
fed to tbe toppiDc Ulllta.
<e> The te:m. "oace-tl1:rouch cooliDc
Panacraclh. wtw:.b. may be d.lachanred bJ'
a poiDC .source subJect to t.b.e provtatoaa
water'" ab.al1 !DeaD t.h01111 -ten dl.l- at tb..la wbpan after a.ppUcatloD of the
Sub~ D 1419.42CbH3).
(C) The provtaiaaa at 1 411.15<c> <1>
cban'ed Chat an uaec1 for t.be ~ best. practicable coat.rol tec!:I.Dol017 cur-
&ad <2> a.ppi7 to dlacbanes at proceu of bn& rez:aoval aad tha& do no& come reacq ava.llable:
wu&e wa&er polluta.Dta attrilM&ta!)le to IDeo direct. caat.acc wtt.b any raw ma-
s&orm wa&c r"'IDoJr aDd b&llut wa&er ~ terial. IDCe.rmedlate or CD.labed product..
a poiDt. SCNZ"Ce subJect. to t.h8 provtaaDa m The &enD ''llecroc:helll1cal ooen.-
UoD.S" sball IDeSD Ule producUoD at sec- .t.-ofdall7
ot uua mboU1. ODd paeraUon petrochemlca.la U.e. alco-
!JCalliDIIIII a.
oar 1 dar
.Ua•a.lO
<oftiCIICiftdays
Cd) 1'218 quaaUII)' aDd QUalll\7 of pol- b.ola, ll:etoaes. cWDeDe. strrene. ecc..> or lllall--a-
IKt.aDC. 01' pollutaat. propenles CODU'Olled
" t.hSs pancrapb. attri!lut.able to ODCe-
tbrauch cooUDrwater. an u:clucied. f:rom
1lrst. PDera&iOD pec:rochemlca.la aDci lao-
IDeriladoll p:roctw:ca u.e. B'1'X. ole.aaa.
CJ'clobu:ane. ecc..> wb.ea 15 percm& or
x.ute -.:ol~l r:w 1.111111
t.he dlscbarle a11owed b1 paracrapb. !Dare of reGilen' producUoa .Ia u 1lrst. aoo.________ ,., • && •
at uu. aecdoD. ODce-t.brouch coallDc
- • IDA1 be dlachal'l'ed wUb a total
ameraUon pet:rocbemlca1a aDd laomert- gao•::::::::::-.:: n:O: • 1
110
o,..IUW: c:ari)oQ coacmtraUOD zso& to ex-

~ producca.. Ollua4 - - · - ·
Pll.nollo-
1&.1 0:.t
<c) The toUowtDc ~rntauona sball pounds ••••••••••• 1:111
ceed5mc/l.
-
IDeul: ( 1) Mp.l!De&lla ODe t.hausand pl. Aaun-oa:-1 ••• - 10.1
I 419.26 Pft.Uftl-lalandarda for a - loaa: <2> Mbbl~De&Da one t.hoUS&Dd bar- Sulftda ••••••••••••• c.
Tolaldlnlnuun&...- .:Ill
rel& lODe b&n'el Ia eqUSValent to t2 B•aa•....,arll-
T2le pn&reatmeDt. ataac1a.rc1s UDder sec- la.llODS). p~~~~::::=::::: WI Lilla :_u....... a"" tAt11141
doD 30'7<c> of t.be Act for a .source wt&b.ill I 419.32 EIRuenl limilaliona IIUideUnce
UW craddDs .nabc:MetrOI7. wbicb .Ia a uaer rep,...nllnc lhe depoee of eiRuent
at a publiclY owaed tzoeatmeDt worlm <&ad
wbJch would be a zsew source subJect to
aecUaa 301 of t.he Act. ll It were to d.la-
charae poUutaata to t.he navtpble
-&en> • sbal1 be tbe :C&ftdal'd aet !ort.b
redue1ioa auuna&le &,. lhe appliea-
lion of llle beal practica&le conii'OI
a..a-&o.,. -...nLIJI' ••••!able.
ID est.abl1abJDs the UmltaUOD.S set
~~~::::::::::::::
COD• •••••••••••••
Ill! Moll"'-·-•••
I'Denollc coouo
...I.S
t.:ZS
Ll
tort.b 1D t.h.la sectloD. EPA toolc IDto ac- poena •••..•••••• IJII
ID PvC 121 ot t.h.la cllapter. except t.hat. couac &11 Jatormaclon lt waa al:lle to col- Amraonla • N ••••• lo.:.'l
for the purpoae of t.h1a aecdozs. 1 121.133 Salftde ••••••••••••• lr.l
lect.. develop aDd .saUd& wtt.b respect to To&al cll"'mlnm •••• ,Ill
at tbJa cll&pter shall be amended. to read tactora lwch u ace aDd size ot plaa&. Bna-ach-
u followa: '"Ill &dcUUOD to t.he proh1bi-
uoa.e aet forth ID I 121.131 of t.h1a chap- raw ID&cerla.Ls. ID&Dufacturmc procesaes. 11~-~:::::::::::: Wllllln a~cee.o 1.o' o.aow
prociucta Drociuced. :re&tmeDt techDOIOP'
car. t.he precntatment staadard Cor ID- avalliWIIe. eaezv reqUirements aDd
coau~aUble polluca.ata lat:roduced. Into a
• rn anr - In •lllcfl lllo •DOIIcMC .... dOIDCiftl&nale
costs) wb.ich caa ~ect tile 1DdusCZ'7 sub- 111101 lllo chiDrtdolon concoaanlloft In lllo aaa-a , . _ .
pubUclJ' owned. treacmmt woru sba.ll be cacaaortzauoa aad ealuenc lltftll estab- I ,01111 ralll (1.01111 llllftll, lllo ~on-' Adaallllsl....,r
tb8 s&&Dda.rd C'f pertormaace for new mar su-CUia TOC M a pwun ..... In Uou o1 COil.
l.l.shed. I& Ia, bo1nl9er. poulble c.bac da&a Ellluenc UmiCaiiON row TOC anall bo b - on ollluM&
surca specU!ed ID 1 418.25: Prmtkd. wb.ich would ~ecc tbese 11m.ltaUODa have daua trom &bo Plan I cornlannc TOC 1G 80 01
'nla&. ll tile pubUcl:l' oWDed treatment. If Ia lllo IWII0-1 of lbo R..,UII-' Admlnlstraaor
not been ava!lable aad. u a resu&C. tllese adOQaa.. coonlauon da&a .,.. no& ••.. Lablo tho ollluani
woru wb.ich receives tile pollutaoca Ia Um!CaUAaa should be &dJuated for cer- UIDUMIOIOI lor TOC sllall Ill •uaDibhod a1 a ..ao of 2 2
cGIIUIUt.tecl. ID Ita NPDZS permit.. to re- tam Dl.aata 1D t.h.la IDdU.SCn'. AD IDcUvtd-
IG I IG Ula aoollalllo oiiiiMa& l!.aat&a&lon.o oa BOD•.
IDiml a soec:1Aed perceatace of 1oD7 ID- ual d.lacbanrer or qUler !Dceresced penon lb) Tbe Uzasta sec tort.b Ia panlsr&Dh.
compaUble poUutaat. t.h8 pretreatment. ID&J' submit. evidence to tile Retrtonal Ia) of t.h.la ~ecuaa an to be IDulttpUed
l&aad&rd aDD11cable to usera ot such AdraJa1strator <or to the State. lt the bJ' tile followtnr factora to catculace the
tzoeacment. wortu shall be correspond- St.a.ce baa tile authortty to tsaue NPDES
~ reduced ID s~eDcF for Chat
maximum lor aDJ' one d&J' aad maximum
permits) Chat taccara relaUnc to the aven11e ot dal.lJ' vatuea for UUrty con.sec-
pollut.aat..'" equlDIDeat or factUtleis lavolved. t.he uttve days.
Subpart ~leal Subc:ateaoty procesa agplled. or ot.ber such factora re- 1U Size factor
1419..30 A11plica&Wty1 deacri111aoa ol lated to such dlachaner are tundamen-
tallJ' cWferent trom tile !actors conald- 1.000 llan'ela at tee~coc/c
lhe peti'OCheiDical au&e.a&ei(OP7'• 'Ptrr •cea"' c~a, s~ tccor
'nle provblona of U11a subpart are ap. ft"ed Ill tile eatabll.sbment ot t.l:le 1\llde-
llnes. On !.be baala of sucb evidence or 0 1:0 •• • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - o. 13
pUcable to all d.lacbanee from aa,. tac:11Jt,. other ava.llable lnlormauan. the Re- so ~:.o ' ' •------------------------ • rr
which p:roduces petroleum products b,. gional Adm11llac.rator lor the State) wUl 100 ar
150 1:.0 1raocer ••• ____________________
141 '·····-····-····--·-·-·--· I. 0t
1. 13
tbe use of I:OPPIDc. crack1Dc aDd petro- malce a '.'1'11tten l1ncUDc Chat such !ac·
PIDIIAL IIGISnl. VOL l9, NO. 91-rNUISDA"f, MAY 9, 1974
142
RULES AND REGULATIONS 1G5G9
1:u Pracesa factor avera.re of d~ values tor thirty con- Cbl The l.lmit.s sea. fortb 1D parasrraph
secutive da,-s. !al of tbJa sect.1aa. are to be multiplied by
I'Pot:eR tbe foUowtnc tac&or3 to calculate the
(1) SSze la.ctor
-~ ~/lllllfOP ma.zimum for An::v oa.e day &DQ mazimum
J,QOit !Jill 0/ fudAeot:ll St.e
3.25 to t . T • - - - - - - - - - - L ft 71#1' J ,..alii ~ /=tor averace of dall7 values tor thirty con-
t.'TO to S . T L - - - - - ·
s 'TS
I.'TI to 10.21 ar sr------
eo a.'f•--------------
. ll
1.n
1. 1M
0 9---------·---------------
to ... o. 'TS
10 ta 88..8------------r·.c:~- . 8'T
secutive dQs.
cu Slzefac&or
100 to lU.II------------...tA.Iol~ ....
131 see t.be comvrehmstve aample 110 or cr-acar--------------·------
1.13 l,Qitlt barrd1 O//ntLitot:1c "ptW Size
SUbll&nD I U!U~Ibl 131. ~-~~~ UV /tii:Uif'
<c:> 'l'be pravta1aas at I 419.1~Cc:l <1> c2> Process factor 50eo
o 48,._.____________________________
~
•-----------·-------··-·-·-- o.T3 8'T

aDd 1~1 &&>Db' to cUsc:barlres of process Pl'or:e1a l"''aceu
waa&e 'li"'&Cer poUut&Dts ar.tr:lbutable to ClmiiPNrlltft
s.:11 ~ 4.1t----······--·-·••••••• 0 IT
/llllltlll'
too
UIO
eo crwac.r
or 14• •-·----··-------·------
.••••------------ 1.0.
1.13
storm water nmo.r IDri b&llu' water b~
a DOillC .source subJIC'C to Ltl.e ;p:aTia10118 4.'75 to II.'TL---·-·······------- Ill (~) Praeesa factor
S.'TI ~ 8.1t----···--····-----· 1. %7
ot this subpart. L71 eoUl~ or ......- - - - - - - - - I. M hOI:es:r
Cdl The qua~:~.t.l.t:J' a.Dd. qu&UtJ of liQLlUt-
UI.Q or pa.UutaDC prapen;1es cantroUecf , C3) See the comprehelllive esamole I"Pace:riCGO&/IpwrafiOn /III:Uif'
su~an D 1 ne.a lbl GU. 3.:11 1:0 4.'f4---------------------- 0.117

05' UL1I paracn.pb. a.&tzi.butaJiht ta ODCtt- 4.TI5 ~ 8.'T4 ••••••••••• -............. Ill
tbroUKA ceoUDa 'lll'&f.er, are a:c:lud.e'Cl Cc) T.be p:raN!ona at 141~.13(c) n} S.'TI 1111 & 'f4-........................ 1.2'f
trom Che d1lcbar'le allowed by pvqn.p.b and (~) appl7 to cll.scbarles of process L'715 to 10.28 or poea&er................ l.IM
lbl of UWI aect1aD. ODce-tb.rousb cao11D1 waar.e water ;paUut.&Dt.s attnbutable to
wa~r ma? be c11ac:harced with a toca.l scarm water nmotf az~d ballast water by C3J See the comprehensive ezample
arta111C cari)QD ccac:eDtraUoD noc to ex- a ;paint source subject to the proYUdou Subpart .0 I 419.42 !bl !3 1.
ceedSmc/1. at Ulilsubgart. !cJ The grovlatona of 1 UB.l5Ccl (1)
§ 419..33 EIRuent lillllicacla.. .,aidelia•
CdJ The quanttt7 and quallty of r;ICII· and (2) appQf to d1.scbanes ot process
Iu~r.a or r;~GilutaDI. properties cODc.raUed waste water r;ICIUuta.at.s attnbutabJe to
npre-&ial 1he depoee ol effluent by UUs paragragh, atc.ribur.able to oace- scarm water nmotf &Zid ballast water bJ'
Ndacdaa •Uainable b., tke •pplleao
t i - ol dae baa a't'eala.ble teehnolov throu;h cooi1Ds water, are ezclud.ed !rom a 'POint source subJect to the pro~toc.s
-.niaUy IChie,.ble.. the dJxhane aUowecl by paragraph lbl at tbJa aubllart.
1&1 "n2e toUOwfDir Umilat.tODI estab-
at UUa secUaD. Once-thraucb eaolin1 Cd) The quantity and quality of IICII-
W&ter ID&Y be cll.scbar;red Wltb a toca.l Iucaata or r;ICIJ.lutaDt properties controlled
Usb &be qu&Dt.tt:J' or qu.Uty ot r;~Gllutaata or;all.lc carbon coacentratlOD not to u:- by thJ.s P&r&lr&Pb. attributable to once-
or poUutaDC praperUes. COD~ b,. ceed 5 mc/L tbrouc.b caal1z1a' water. are excluded !ram
Ul1l parscregb., wbicb may be leci the cllacllarce aUawed by paragrag.b Cbl
bJ' a poln& aaun:e subjec& to Uul provt- I 419.34 [ReM"edl of thla section. Once-through caoUng wa-
staaa of tbla s\lbOIU't after appUcaUDD al § 419.35 Scanda..U ol perf'ormanee ror ter ED&Y be cUscharged IVttb a ectal or-
the besr. anUabte t.eclmolou ecoDaml- I I - !JOUPeeSo la.Dic carbon ccmcentrattoa nat to exceed.
caUr acb.leftble: lal The foUowlDI standards ot per- SmelL
formance e.st.abUsb tbe quanttt.7 or qual-
Ity of pollut.&Dta or poUutaat progertles. § 419.36 Pr~Cre•lmenl :tlandardro (or new
caacroUed by thJ.s paracra~~h. wb.1ch may aouree.
IUIIuont
-...ua. MUinrmallr 1M clJschar1ed by a a.ew source subJect The pretreatment standards uader sec-
IIIP I Cla7 to tbe provlaloas of this subpart: tion 307(c} ot the Act lor a source wtLhJn
the petracb.enucal subc:ate10r7. whicb 1s a
user ot a publicly owned treatment worlra
land wtuch would be a new source subject
..,,, ....
o\.._eohJoiiT
lluJ111ana 1tw •llu• rar JO to section 308 ot the Act. 1l It were ca dls-
~~~:::::.:::::::.
g.~~.~ n;u.::::::
J•tt.-.tala:: ca ....
a.:
~7
17
.n --··COld-
-Undara
liiRN aa,::0~/~CC::,- a,OOII

charge poJlutants to the aaVLgable \Va-
ters 1 • shall be the standard set forth In
Pa:rt 128 o! this cnapter. excepc that. :or
II"UIIdl........ .. Gil the purgose at tb1s secttoa. 1 128.l33 ot
A.IUftiCM\I.aMN •• •• t..2
BODI-.......... .. n s u.a thJ.s cbapter sba1l be amended to read as
~':!~~j,;;,;ftjiiift:::: .alii
. It T88 ................ 13.1 r7 fallows: "Il:J. adclJttan ca the prohibattons
Hooaft~Pm coo• ............. t:D Ill
set lortll ID t 128.1 :U ot thls chapter. !.he
rlln!mlum........ OIMII lXIII. Oiled,,.. ..... . ••• ~..5
pll. ... • ...... .... IVIWA elM ruce e.o to 9.4. PIIIDOIICIOOID• pretreatment staaclard for tncompa.ttble
_.............. ast m poUuu.nta l.ntroducecl Into a pubUc!y
Zatlllll aatu ,_,... IIWI,OIII bbol o\aunoalllu N'.. •• • :S ~ ID 7
Gllleodalooll) Swadl............. 140 IIIII owned treatmeut 111orlc.s shall be the
i::':.'l:~um.... ~ lY sta.lldard ot pedarmance for new source:.
~~...~-=::::::::::::
L7 LJ
1.a 1.1 eiUIIIaiWIL........ ODII 1111:11 Sllec:U!ecl In I 419.35 · Pr011Uled, '111at, 11'
the pubUcly owned treatment works
g::~ i;MM::::::
7.1 1.1 pB....... - ........ WI&Aia llloaroapi.OtoO 0.
lll .21 wDJCb receJves the poUtuan~ Is com-
l'llenofle- &r~fi'IWI.,"::: 1~1 1*'c.o»
""'"'dl... ........
~~-·-~-~====
i::~'i.~-
c!\ro!!Uam........
en
1::_
.a.
aat7
L~
11111
·-
Gall
llODI-.......... .
TS8 ............... .
COD• .............
OIIIIDd-...... . "
.
1 r
~
l.l
u
u
4.1
1.3
aUeted. Ia I~ NPDES permit, to remove
a specU!ec1 oereenr.age ol any lncam-
pa~e poUuuuu., the pret.rea.tment
stancla.rci appUcable to UHr:s of !Uch
treatment works shall be corre.gondlngJy
pH...... _ .......- WIWa U1io nac- 1.0 ~ t.a. l'bnolloaom-
IIDQ.IIdL .......... 1M m:r reduced 1n sU1Jiiency ror thee :pollutauu:·
1 In OftT . . . In wtalala &lao IIIIIUCODI caD dolaoaftnte
.U..moala 11 H ••••• I 3 38
Sallldo ........... .. NO 1122 Subpart D--l.ube Subcategory •
Lllal&llo cnlondolaa aaaeoAueaonln Lilodlaen 1 11.-a Too.alclal'lllllium.... Ill 011
I.CUI mf/1 II ODD JIIIIDI, Ulo Retlaaoi Admlalnn- a.....u.ns § 419.40 Applicabalhy; deser1p1ion oC
me~r •osuraae TOC M • peruaow Ia Uoa of COD
ltlllunc Uma&o&lone f!W't'OC SllaU be ~~- oa ollluai · .................
pS - - - - - - - - · - WI&AIDUIII&IIpiOIIIIIQ.
• OIJ'U oan lhe lube aubc:alego.,..·
da~a from &no pl&llc c:amtlaUac TOC to BODI.
IC In tO I 1..-moa& at till Retional Adlllllllslfttor The provt.saona of thiS subpart a~ ap-
Ill..,_ eornlaUOft daca - """ aftllabloa. &Ao ollluoac • In ..,,. . . . Ia wllleb clllo aopllcuu ..., domoasveae pllcable to 11.11 dl.scharges Cram any ra.cu-
llrlnt.WioNI I« TOC •DoU be l!ftablblalld 11 a ralla of IIIII& 1111 etllondoloaao"""alnUIDII aa &llooflluea& uceoda
=··
2.. liD I 10 lllo rppllcellle odh&onl Ulllllllll..,. aa 8001. I.OODnulllll OOIIIIPIDI.&no a...ono.l A.dnurwnn- 11111, lty which produces pecrolewn proclucra
IUIIall&uae TOC u • IIUS!IIIItrla llau of COD. Eflluonl by the use ol topping, cra.c:lung and lube
nu The Ilmita set forth lzl Par&llnllb
l&t o f&bia secttoD an to be mulUllllecl by
~':':.=~rc? ~t~~::: . omuenc ..... ,..,..,
II Ia IIIIo 1ad41111aa1 ol 11111 !\ootllln.a Adlnlal.llrocar
aU manulacturtng processes. whettler or
not the !acWty Includes any :process 1n.
tbe fallowtn~r ta.ccors to c:a.J.culate the ldiQUie camlallae. doLl an 1101 aftllallla. 1111 elllueni
lba.IIIGDas rar TOC snllll be enaouaalld 11 1 ru1o o12.2 addutan to tngplnll', cracldnc a.acilube oil
znazamum /or ~' oae day md .ID&Zimum ID I to 1111 eppllcolllo odiDIIII UnuLIIIaaa aa B 0 D.S. manutactw1n1 prace55es. The proY1sloas
,..,DAL IIGJStll, VOL l9, NO. 91-rMUIISDAY, MAf 9, 1974
143
16570 RULES AND liGULA TICNS
fJI UUa mbp&n are no' applicable bow- ZD&J' a;prave 01' dSaapproYe auch llmita• Cb) The llm1u ~ !orUl ID ga.rarraph
..... Co facWUe:s whJc:ll !Delude U!.e UOa.s, speclt7 ot.bor llm1aUaaa. lDl• = Ca) ot U1la 11ecU.Oa are CO be ZDultlplJed
praces~• apec:U!ed ID Bubpana c &D.cl E U&&e proceec1lna to I"89Ue ~ recuJa.o by Ule followtns factors to calcW&&.e the
ottadapen. uoaa. maaimum 101' aa:r oae day md m.u;imwn
I 419.41 Spcocialia.d defini&Jo-. <a> fte tollowmc 11mlt.aUom estab- aYerace of da.ll7 ftlu.es tor t.blny con-
Par t.be P'III1'0M of UUa subp&n: Ual:l Ule quaatity or quaUI;J' of poQu• eec:uuve ~ ..
ca> ZXcep' u pr'091c1ed below, tl:le sen- t.aat.s or pollutanc pral)ei'Ues. caatzoalled
en& cleaDiUGaa. - al)brevtauaaa a.ad b7 t.bia P&nenPh. Ybic.b may be dia- cu Slzefactol'
IIUIU!oda of a~~al7siS se' forUl ID part 401 ch&l'led b7 a PGJzl& soun:e 1ubJec& to the
of \lila Qa5JCU' aDaU appq ~ CALl PI'Ovtalona of t.bJa ~ aftu appJJca- z.aoo kmr&. ot
t••utocJa ,.. su•
.u..n. CkiD ot the beat PI'&Ctlcable coa~ tec.b·
DaloiJ' c:urn:a~ a.ftil&Ole:
,,..,. "-• /fii:Cor
Ut> T!le term "nmor shall meaD abe
• to • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - o.- ll
n
...... 11t to 101.8
pwaaar______
-
Acnr
Co)of'De
ICanD -·
eeraa ·
·~·shall m.n.a. tbe
a.. fJI wa&en. t:rom a ~p, wb1cbo Ia ~ 110 to 1 t 8 1 - - .IS
lie tna&ecl a& Ule re&lef7, 110 •to
:aao 1n.a • --- 1.
1. oe
11
cc~> ~ cum ·reect~coc:&• &ball =eu
tba crude oU aad na&unl pa UqWd.a ted
• &be toDDIZic UD1&L <2) Procea factor
Ce) "1'22oe tum "=-Uaroulb caaUDc
water- lb&U' maD U1CIM ....cen dis· Jl'raeae I'Ngr•u
~ t.bat ant used for tbe Pun!OM
ot 11-.& nmonl md tba& do ao& COIIUI
Jzlto c11r11ct COD&ac& wttb aay raw mate-
rial. JDtermedi&Ce or ~ed product.
BOD1---·-·
TU.:~---
Oti...S
,_..._
_ __
-
COD ' · · · · - · - ·
-- -·
••a
a.
11.2
a. a
...
I&. I
111
......••
cellllfiiNCfOII
1.0 or._
LO to .... ______________
/fllltor
C O L O - - - · · · - · · · · · 0.18
1. Zl
--- ...
-clll......._ .. -1.11 10.0 to U.ft ----···- 1. 1 ..
en De toU~ a.btlrn1a*Sazu aba11 ~-H- Sl 12.0 to 1U 01' sr-._--···-·····
Knl ~DaD~~ oae U1Gaaaad --. .......
2. M
• .Ill
mall: CU
..u.oaa:. 12) W!lbl IDeUill oae UlOIII&Dd T-·--~
buftla caae bu're1 II eqaSftlmt to d
...___
pR
.,
,';7
_...,.
Wllllla ........ u lolA.
(3) J::lamDie ot the apDUCatloD of tho
lllollau). above tacton.
l41t.G Ella-a llai&adolu Cllic&eu-
....... __ ......
••PE •••• IJae liepee ol elBa- BODL._,_,_ ., &I
~~~·-~·-
-
..... . _ .......We lly IJae •1'P~
...-·· ...-
TIS••••• _ . ILl
" - el. dle a-. ~lcable _...I
........,.,. _ . . . , IYaai.Uie.
COD'-····--
Otlaad--·
m
1.1 • • ..ell .....
--.......
---
ta wteNI•hln• Ultl llmi&a&laaa ae&
flinla "Ia UUa aec:tiaD. EPA tcoll: Into a.c• ~-"-
coaD& all IDtonaa&aaa I& wu able to =--····-···- :~
.au
,JG
eoiJ.ec&, d8ftloD IDd lOUd& wttb respect
to taccan lauch u an &Dd sJze of Dlaat.
raw ID&&eriala. ZD.allutactu:ma proc-.
IlK-----
'* m• ·-·- 'llllllla- -
tala-Uta lA.flflll
~ Jai'OdU,cecL ~am& tec:bDAIOV

a....u.tlle. Ulei'U' l'IIQWZ"aaeaca aad
coeD) wblcla caD ~ecs tbe ladua&JY IUI»-
II
cn'IPI"M.C'na aad dUIIDS J.rrela -
tabl 1el!ect I& Ill. boftYer, PQIIIo&ble \ba.&
c1a&a WbScb 'lt'CNld ~-~ t t l - 1Jm1&a-
U,aaa !Ia" aos baeD aV'&ilaDle aad. u a
~ \.bre 1Jm1a&Soaa a.bould be ad-
J111ted tor certam ~UAra 111 U1la 1Dd111&JY.
AG 1Dd1't1dua& ~8U' or oUler ID•
&era&ld pencm mu IWialis mdeace ~
tale Becloa•l Acl.mlziJa&rator lor ~ Ultl P-..lnc
- Sta&e, II \he 8&ate baa &be aut.boi1C,. to OOGAcun&l....
s-a. NPDES permita) tbaS fac~na re-
JMmc to ~ equJpmeaS or facWUcn lD• Crude!
'ftll"Nd. t.be proceu aopUer:L or oehel' .w:b
facW. rela&ed to IUCb ~ an
fvnr!emeat&UJ' cWrerea& troaa the fa.cton o-l
V-
.........______ -
.
1:11
Cl
l
1
.II
caua.deNd Ill t.be e:sca.bll.samea& ot t.be

r"del'"• OD t.b8 buY ot IUC.b et1.dt!Dce ~rca.
01' o&ber •~• lDfanaac.laa. t.be
T.........
.,....._ ...
T~----------·-::·:-::::::::- ---:f;·
"4i-
a
S.ll
...
..Ill
.J..
)(
)(
I
••
• S.ll
--
'fteC'=c! Actmtnl"*ntol' (QI' Use St&&e) .oa
wtll IIUioU & 'ft1C&eA ~ Ula& such ~----·-·-•-
...
40
-···-====----=-····"'"'-----
faccan an or are aac tlmdamaUall7
dUranD& fOI' tb&& facW&y COIDDancl CO .Ill )( 1.n
Toea&.-----····-..
----,_.-
11
U2c.e IDeCU!ed lD tbe .Dnelopment Coc:u· ~-----··-····-·-
)( 12 ••
meat. U 1udl tuDd&ZDental.l7 lil.lrermt JldDor7 ~ _ , ........
tiiCton are foiiDd ~ emt. :.be Ret'ioaal
..Adm.lais&raCOI' 01' t.be State shall es-
taallsb fOI' t.be cUxbiU"'ft' elllueat llm1ta.- NO'I':II
uoaa lZa UUt MPDES permit etti:Jer !ZIOn ....".. 1'" dfblm 1 u --...... r -
S.IAII.. Ill 01111111 , _ - - . . I:IIIJDI
-·4.&
b i l l - ov.m <lay !abo rwltDol'y, 111M ...W•&a.
or leu a111D8mt thaD t.be llm1taU.Oaa Tocaleala&o liM IIIII .. , _ - _.W,IIIIIIUDI7 -1111111. ~~ Olal by lllloa Uloo -~~~~- oa4 - - -
BOIH 11111&1 ( - l o r IDFI IIArJ•AA,LXIUIXCI.A•t.l U1. PM I , I I I I I I I I I I M -
e:sC&ial.Libecl herela. ~ the esteat lilctatecl
b7 IUCb tuzldameataU.v dl.lrerenc tac~I'L
8uda UmitaU.Oas 111113& be 10PI'09ed tl7 lc> fte pro'lialou of I UU2(C) CU ltCJI'm wa&el' ~ aad ballad water b7 a
tbe Admiala&ra&or of tbe !:1:!.9tl'aameatal a.act 12) lOP~ CO cUioharna of PI'C)CeU paiD& _ , _ au!sject to \be PI"QYS&&oAA ol
~D AlmCJ, 'l'be AdmlDlacra&or waa&.e -ser poU'IIt&Dra a~bu&able t.o U1la aubpvt.
PIDIIAL IIOIS11L VOL. l9, NO. t1-tMUISDAY', MAY t, lt74
144
'n1e quaatt~ aad quaUtJ of poUui-
(cl) 121 Procese !actor maximWD tor azur one~ and maximum
mca or pallutaa& pro~~erues controlled P'r0eu11 coa}lgwoattooa l"rot:eu /tM:klr aversce of da.&l7 '1'8olues tor th1rtJ' con-
bF \b.ta pancrspb. attrsbut&ble to oqce- secuuve dara.
UUou.hooallnlwater. are ucluded from eo ar 1 - co '·"··--------------- o. 88
tbe cil8cbarP &Uowecl bJ' paracraph lb) 10.0 coco a.o m-"--------·--·-·····--····
n.H.-------·--------------
1. 2:1
1. '"
<U SIZe fac:tol'
I.DOO llamr&l Of /e.t..Coclc
of tbil aeal:1aa. Oace-throUIA COOUZI.I 12.0 to 14.0 Cll' pwacer---------------- 2. M ~ Iteam MJ .IC.. /GI:Car'
water mAJ' be dlacharied wtUl a total
orpaia carbaD conceatraUoa no& to ex- Subpart (31 See the oomgreheDsive ezample
D I 419.42(b) (3).
30 to 811.11.---------------------- o.'"
TO to 108 8 ••••••·-···-·····-····· . 11
ceed51Q/L 110 to 141.1------------------------
111.1 ••••••• ________________ .13
1.011
<c) The provtstcms of I 419.13Cc) Ill
1
~
0
1419.43 E.lllaenc lilniaa&iou pid~llnn mel <2) aoplJ' to ciUcbiU"'es of procea
......-aliac the d~poee ol eftlu~c wade 'IIJ'&&er poDutanta a=r1butable to aao or ~---------------------- 1. 111
......_.._ aclaiaaWe by lhe appUcao norm wacer nmo~ md ballut water by 12) Process factor
&illla of lhe !Me& .....a.ble a.duaoio.,. a po!D& murce subJees to the provtaaa.s P'reeu• con}lcruratflm l"rot:ea /uftlr"
aua•lce'l7 adli....We. ot thia subDU"L 1.0 or 1 - co T.118-----·········-·· o. 88
(&) "nle folknrml Um1t&Uana •&ab- (d) 1'2w CN&DUtJ' aDd quaUtJ of DOl• I 0 co 11.811 ••••- - - · · · · · - · · · - · - · • I. 23
liAtl me quaacu:r or qualltJ ot pallucaata hlt&Dta or poUutam ;:zropen.:e~~ cca-
or paUacaa& ~ ccatralled tiJ' t.hl.ll tzoolllcl bJ' UU. ~ r.ct~u~e to
~ whic.h maJ' be dJichar'l'ed bJ' once-~ coolJ.Da wa&er• . , ucluded
10.0
12.0 Cll' sr-cer-------------------
co u.n ••·-·------------
<3> See the coa1prebeaaive uample
1. Tt
2...
a J,'IQUl& 111un:e .ubJ ec& to tbe pra'Ytllcma from the d!scharve ..Uowed bJ' ~h Subpart D I U9.421bJ (3).
ot tbi1 ll!.bpart aner a~n~Ucat1cm ot Ule <b) ot tb1a eecdoa.. Oace-tbn!U&h coo11D• Cc) "n1e proNloas ot I 419.15<cl Cl>
- · a•Ula.ble t.ecbnni.PG' ecoi1GID1cal17 water mgJ' be cllxharred wtth a total aDd C21 &QP17 to d.1acha.z'ps of process
~= Ofi&Dic carboD CCX1Ce'DCn.C10D Do& to elt• wur.e war.er poD~ aetrtbutable to
ceed51Q/L norm wacer ruDO~ and b&Uaat vatu by
I 419.44 [R_.-.ed) a 1:10111& aouroe alii»Jec:t to Ule provialoa of
............
Balual
w.s-•
....,. 1 da7
·-ofdai!J'
--~~~
::::.•:
---
1419.45 ScaaduU ol performance lor
dar
(&) The toDGwia1 1taDdarda of per-
torm&Z~De estaOUsh f.be qU&DC1tJ' or quai-
lt1 ot po0~RADU or poUI.IC&Dt pi'QDCt1ea,
Uli.s su-.n.
ldl The quant1t7 aDd qual1tJ' of pol-
lucama or poUucaa' prooen;tee controlled
bJ' thJa parqraoh, attrlllatable to ODce-
throU&h cooliD1wacer. IU"'I ucluded rrom
the d.lac.bar'(e a.llowed by ~h tb)
... of thJa sec't1oa. Onc:e-Cbrolll'h coolin•
-
ooat:z'Dlled bJ' UUs ~ 'lll'b1dl may
BODI----·-·· 7.1 I .I
be ~ed bJ' a 111w aoun:e ~Ject water III&J' be d1ac:.b.ar1red 'llrttb a tot&l
Tla--······-··
coo•········--· tO '·' a to U. pnm.aGas ot U1J.s ~= oi'IIUI1c carbon co.acenU'IIodoa DOC to u-
ou...s.-.-.. 1.1 ceed 5 ID&'/1.
..._.._
-
1 •
..
.liM
§ 419.46 Pretrea&m~n& a&anda.rda lor n~w
"=·"·-·· ,. 1.2
..__
--·---
81MIIde-·-·····•·•• .11 10 AY-ofdaiiF
TDIAI...._,am.....
a..........
Ia&
-
.M
.111111
•.II
.aaa • .,.da,. ..Uaoa1Dr30
-a'"cJa"
The preue&tment standards under
sece1on 307Ccl of the Ace tor a source
pL•••••••••• ··-·· wtlllllil lila ......, 1.0 -.. t.0. wlth!D r.he lube subcatesorY. which Ls a
user of a pub11cl.7 oWDed treatmen'
---~~":::=.:.r-1·1111 works I &ad which wollll1 be a new source
8001_............ M.l subJect to sece1on 308 of the Ac'- If 1t
~~ 11.6
BODI ••••• ·······-
TS8 •••••••••••- . .
COD'·............
2.7
2.1 ~~
U.O
T88................
COD•..............
:11.1
Ml
IZ. I were to d!sch&r~e goUut&Dta to the nav·
Ll'.&
Oll.ad-...... 145
131
5.1
lpble waters) • shall be the standard set
011 lftd - · · · · · · lei tO PII_U._ Z1 .u forth ID Part 128 of this chapter. except
PIMnalla- ..al2 ~
A=•N..... U 1.5 ...=.H..... :11.1 1Q. 7

that. tor Ulil purpose of this section•
f 128.133 ot this chapter shall be
·-
SUIIIda............. Clll6 .IIIII Salllda............. ::.11 10
·-
Tac.i cllnlnlla&... 12 .11 T - lllnlaUa&-. ~ ll am.ended to read a.s follows: '"ID addition
Rua....,.,- aaa 11011 Bnaftlaal • 0115 OIIU to the prohJblUoa.s sec forth ID J 128.131
DB................. W'IIIIID lila ...... 1.0 ._ t Q. DB- ............... 'lriiDla lila nn1• 1.0 CoO I 0. of r.h1a chapter. t.he pretreatment sta.nl1·
ard. for IDcompa.Uble poUut.anta Intro-
--Ia
lll&llllllllll&a lr-ada -1.011011111
' Ia l A Y - Ia wllldl lila aooUcul cu d-••
llla&tDe clllaotda loa coana~nuaa Ia tDo oGiu.al o . - s
al,_ll duced Into a pub11c.IJ' oWDed tre&tment
works shall be the sr.a..o.dard of perforzn-
,
..
1,0110 mill 11.0110 0011111. IDo llectaaU l.cllllllll.nft-11111' BODI •••••••••••••• IZ. 2
aace for new sources specU!ed ID f 419 45:
..._.....H.....
lllDIIIUIIa TOC .. • lloa al COD. 11:111-1 TSS ............... . 7 2
UIIII&MICIUW TOC oDIIII 1111- aa IIII-I d a l a - COD'-············ Prov~~Ud. That, If the pub11clJ' owned
IIIII OIMI-iallal TOC ._ BOD•. Oil l A d - - · · · 1.1 treatment wortr.s which receives !.he pol-
II Ia IDa Jadpaooat al IDa &.panel AdmtalmMar, Pllonallo
odlll- - ' - dala- aao anUallla, Ill• olll11ft& lutaata Ls co11UZ11tt.ed. ID Ita NPDES per·
U l l l l - . r. TOO Jllllll 111 - o d 01 • NGa a1 U Amlllall&a • I. .I I. I aut. to remove a spec:U!ed percenta.ce of
c.o I c.o IDa apollaallle oma-1 IIIIU- aa BOO.. Suiad•···-······•·
·-
.1171 .IIIII UU' IDcompa&lble poDuta.nt. the pre-
Tallll clllllmmm_. 1811 • 1..
lba 'nle UmSta ..s tarth ID pazoacraph Bna-s-....... - 01111 treatment at&DI1ard BCID11cable to users of
Ia) ol UU8 leCUoD ant to bl Zlllii1:1D11ed pB ••••••••••••••••• WIIDla lila . _ . 6.0 sa t.G. such t.rntment wortr.s sh..U be corre-
bJ' Ule foUowtn1 f.ldors to calCW.C.. Ule spandJDc.IJ' reduced ID .strmreney tor that
ID&ZSDlWD for aG7 OIW ~ &Dd ~IUD pollutaa&.'"
avenn of d~ values tor \hin7 con- ~~~~:~~=~~.:::.':"&ra-::1':':~~=-===
1.01101111/1 (1.0110 DOIIII, tDa R.oclanal AllllllllllltiUGO' m•F Subp.rt E~nt..,ated Subcate1ory
secuuve ~ IIIDIII&uta TOC • • oonmotor ta llou af COD &IIIUIIn&
U) Size factor llaoltoaou lor TOC Jllallllol - aa oiiiUIIn& dalalntao § 419.50 Applicabil1&7; deiCI'Ipdon al
lila DLIAI-IMIDI TUC ta BOD•. ahe on&ecnaed aubcaacp.,..
I.QOO kr'Pa&l Ol f•IIMtoell U Ia IDa JUdnraon& a1 tllo R.ocsanol ~dml-,.car.
~ I&'NIIJft MW .IC.. /GIIklr ..._... ..nlaaan diUA.,. aac aYIILii>le. tbo ollluona The provtsloa.s of tl1la .subgan: are ap-
llaiiii&IGNI lor TOC slloll bo -U.IIICI •c • ..Ua af u Dllcable to all dlsch&r~es resllltlng tram
:soro n.a·----------------- o. n CoO Ita IDa IOOOilaallle olllaoalllaol&a&IDIII aa SOD•.
10 ro 1011.8----------~--- . 11 IUU' tacWtJ' which produces petroleWD
liO co 148.8····---··-······- . II lbl The Um1ta sec forth ID ~ph producta by r.he use of toDP~. crac~.
1ao ro 188.a·-·------------- 1. 011 (•• of thia sectton are to be mllltl D11ed lube oU III&DutacQirlua' processes. a.a.c1
aao .. ~---------------- 1. 18 bJ' r.he followtDlr r~rs to calcula.Ze the petrochemtca.l operattona, whether or noc
IIDIIAL IIGISTII. VOL 29, NO. 91-rMUISDAY'. MAT 9, 1974
145
16G72 RULES AND REGULATIONS
&be tacWtr Include. loD1 procesa LD lddl· 11o'r:lal Adm1D1strator or the St.ate sbaU !c) The pro'rtaions ot I U8.12Cc> Cl>
UoD to ~. ~. lUbe o111D&.DU• utabWb tor the d1.schuser dluea& 11m· &Dd C2) &IIPIJ' to c1lac.b&rpa ot process
facturms pracesaa &Dd pecrochemlcal ltaUoDI 1D UUI NPDES pe:rmi& either 'II'U&e -eer poUutaua a.c.tnl:lut.able to
opera&.aoa.s. more ar less I'C:Z'1D8mC U1azt the l.lmJta- acorm wa&er ~ aDd 'ballu& water by
UODI utabllsbed l:l.ere.ID. to U1e ati!DC & PQ!DS IOUI'Ce IWIJecS to U1e provtalous
I 4lt.51 Spedallaed clei.niu- d1ctated by aucb tuac:tameutall7 cWfenn& of t~ aubg&n.
Pol the J:IW'POM of t.h1s subpart: facton. Such Um.ltaUoua mua& be ao- Cd) The quauUty aDd quaU~ of POllUC•
caJ Bzcep& u provtded below. ~ reD• proYed b7 Ule AdmlDl.strator ot U2e ED· &Dta or poUutau& properties oouczolled
en& ddDSUGus. al)bre'ltactons aGd mec.b· 11roummtal Pra&ecUGD AaeDc:J'. The M- by t.b.b Paracr&'P.b.. &Ctnbutable CO ODCII•
oda ot Ul&l7sla aet forf.b ID Pan 401 ot m1D1atmtor may apgroYe or dll&ooroYe throudl cooUDr w&ter. are esc.luded from
uua cbapcer abaU ~o~~~~IT to uu. IW!gart. suc.b. llmltaUous. specify oc.bel' llmlta- the d1sc:bal'n a.llowed bJ' parqrap.b. !b)
cb) Tbe cerm "'nmor abaU IDftD c!ul uaa.s. or IDitlate proceed!Dp to renae of t.b.b •ecUou. ODce-tm'aulr.b. cooUns
i!lnr ot storm -eer. u.e ,..wauans. water m&J' be dSacb&rred wtt.b. a total
(C) Tbe c.rm M'tlaiJ.u&" abaD mesa the Cal Tbe followtDI llmJtaUCIDI estab- orr&Dla CODCeDtn.UoA DOS to uceed
I!GW of wa&ers. froiD • lb1p. wbicb ~ to Uab. U. quauUC7 or QU&I.lt:r ot poUuc.- s mc/L
be a.&ed a& Ule Z"!GDel7. au&a ar J:IQUZI.tau& properdes. crmcrolled
(d) Tbe tenD '"feedstock. ah&l1 =-a b7 tZIJI p~p.b.. wb.Sc.b. mar ~ dla-
I 419.53 Ema-• U.ia.U.... .,ud•line.o
Uut c:rw1e oU aDd aacwa& ru 11qu1da ted 1ep: dJic die -.... ol ealaen&
c:.b.anred b7 a paiD& 110~ IWIJec& to U. MacUoa allaia=W. It,. die epplia-
to tba toolliDC 1IDit&. ~ at th1a IIIUipart a.fter &0Pl1ca- &ioa olllle b.- a-a..ble lledl-'o17
CeJ 1'2w cerm •aace-tbzau&h cooiiDc UDD ot the bed prac:t:S.cable ccmtrat tec.b.• lla c•iniJy ~ule.
__.. ah&l1 mea&l Ulale wUift dJ.I-
c:barwwd ~ &re uaed for Ule ~ ualog CNn'I!D~ ·~= (a) ~ faDowtDI Umltactcma est.ab-
ot U.& I'I!IIIGftl llld tb&& do DOS came IJa.b. \he quautS&7 or quaUty ot PQU=aaca
m&o dine& eoucac& w1tb loG7 raw ma&e- or oollutaa& propertles, oou&rolled by t.b.1s
ftlll. SDtezmed1a&e or !!.D.Iabed prod'IIIC'- p~.b.. wbicb ZDa1' be dlsc.b&rred by
cnnw term -petrochemical open.. • polD& ICNJ'Ce IUbJed to &be prov1.slons
of t.b.b IDbP&ft a.fter appUcauau ot the
t:Saaa'" lballiii.I!SD &be prodacUGD ot aec-
aad IIISI8r'&l:laa ~ C1e.. baa &ftil&ble technnfau econom•c•'l7
acaa.. eameae. .en-me. liCe.)
...
U:obala. acl:I.Je9Ule:
,s--,._ -...
....
Gl' 8zd rmerat1aD petnx.bemicalll ami
t.alata"•ar prodw:ta c1e.• .B"1'X. oJeGm.
~aa.ae. etc.> wbm 15~ or mare ot
N1D11r7 ~w:a. wut!rd ~ Or~~~~
'1'94
,.......
COD
II
011_
I
II. I
l f.1
II. .I
Ill
u
~
--. ami l8olllerizaU.aa PJ'Dd•
fta faUowlac a.bbnrnattoaa IIWI llala.M..-
(f)
.;H'_=_:
••.JI
,SI
.......
.Ill
.1.51
mesA: (1) Kaal me&aa cma t.bple'r:ld a Tai.U-.m='n=
--
p,Dau: C:D JObl mea.aa cma LbouaaDd -- W'l\llilll.ur .at
__
buftla (aae ban"ee Ia equlft!eaa to 42 D B - - - · - &-.IUI•I.O Ia 1.& BODI--..:..,_. Ll 7.1
p.IJ.aaa). ..... •: :=::.r- l,alllllll&
TSS .....- -
,......,._
COD'
.......,_,__
---
Lt
0Lr
r. 1
aL•
1 "'..u Em-• tlm.la.tioaa ...Wniae
d•1 die .. ~ ol d a - IIODI-·--·:.. 11..1 142
ou
NP&
......... allaa..Jtle ~,. lbe appUc.. ,
TIL ILl U A -.-.--•-H -- - Ll00 ••
6.2
....
" - el die .._ ,.
·~~....a.w.
.... w.. -aa~
COD•.
OIIMd - · - ·
D"?Cd'
~-H-
.....:::1
Ia
Ll
II
I'D
1.2
-
llal4cle,_,.... _
............
TCICUdU-
::-~~-~==
I
.11
...
1M- 4.0 Ia LA.-

.12
-~
J:D estab"•b"'l &!ze llmJtaaoaa aet tort.b

.........
LJ 1.1 pR WIUiia .IDIJ
llllllldo. .....- · - ,13t .OM
- :..'llr: ==-.r-
Ill CbJa MICUGa. EPA toQ lDCO acccnm& all TCKelallr ,:a ,17
mton:aactaa. l& , . . &ble to coDect. daoftl·
op aad IDUcis wtua resoecs to taccon dim=-
pR
. = .
Clllll 1111&
WIIMDIM-UiaU, 1.2 :Z.I
..
RODI-..- - - ·
C.acb u AC1t aud lize ot Plaut. raw mate-
rJala. ma.Dat&eturmc proceaes. produc:ta
JII"'Cbbced., tracmms tec!molou &'t"aal·
•ta .., . _ ..
111M 1M------ .. -·-·-
_lllala_~_.....,_
___
...._
TBB.--..· - · -
,_...,_
COD• .. - ...- -
Ollaad-·-·
LO
ILl
••
11
.
~a,,
.a.--· ·-
...U I,GIIIIIIC/I U~ -~.1M S.O.SouiAdmllll.cn-
~~-:-.~M~:.:.......af:
able. eDera' requinmeuta &Dd ccst.IJ .011
10
.CliO
L.t
Wblc!l caA ~ec\ Uul tDdUatry IUbcate- A.........aa•H-
8alllde •• ____ _
deola- 1M plaal _ . , . TOC Ill BODI.
.oo:a
&WJDtSDD &Dd dlueD& leftla establlaUd. TCKel~ .a
IS 1&. l»tnrftl', paaible t.baS data wbich
waald ~ei:S theM ISmltaUGDS haYII DOC
U Ia 1M
~ .-..laaoa da&a--
Jadl-•"'
1M S.O.Soul
anlleltlo!, Ul! .c~-•
U m l - 1Dr TOO 111&11 1101 - - II a ..ao "'
U 10 & 101M___..-, Umllell- oa .80DI
.....
oo~ea.
· - - - - WI IIIIa .01111
pB_,
• .1.1
1M,_ 4.0 1a' •.a.Oll:l

bee &ftilal)le aDd. u • n=sult. ~ 1
Umitat:toaa lboa.ld be adJUsted for cer- !b) 11w Umlt. Ill& tort.h 1D ~h
am lllaDC. ID UzSa tDdumoy. AD 1Dd1't1d• CaJ ot t.b.b aecuau &re to be mwttplled l)r
ua& ~ or o&ber mterested per. \he follow1DI factors to c:alcula&e Ule
IGD m&J' ~n~bm!& mc:tasca to tbe ~ I:IIUSmum far loG7 oae da~ &'lid U. maz-
.AdlldiUstrator Cor to Uut State. It Uut lmum ·~ ot da&l.J' 'Nohltll for t.b.ln7
Stat. bu Ule &Uthor1C7 to Issue NPDES ~U're da,..,
permit.) Usa& fACU~n r'lll.aUDI co U1e
eqWpmeDS or facWU. lD't'OlYed. Uul
J::III'DCII!8 applled. or other luc:b factors
Niac.ed to IUCh ~ &nt !UD•
C1) -
..,._.,..
tlcCGr
l.POO INrYW ot ,...S.COIIII ,.r ,_ .11M
CbJ The llmJta set forth lD paracraph
dallu!Dtall7 cWfuen& from Ule rae- TO to IM.I---···-•••••••••••···-·· G. ft
1411 to : l l i U - - .Ill
Ca) of this aecUoa. are to be multlplled
by tbe tollowtDr !acton to calculate the
tan CDDISdend 1D the estabU..bmm& ot
:z:IG ar ----·-······=-==·-··- LCD ID&Z1miUD for 1.D7 one day &ad m.a.zlmum
the luldeJIDes. OD U2e buill ot sucb en-
deace or oc.ber anflable I.Dfarmaucm.
t~ Res1oaal Admi.DJ.stm&or <or Ule
Stat.> .W mate • wrU&m aDc:tlDa that
...,_.. __...,.....
C2) Praceall factar
,_,. •-.erac•
,.,..... of c1all7 Yalua for U\lny con-
aecuUve cla7'L
CU S1ze factor
aucb t&etora &re or a.re not tU'r:ldamea- e0 to T.tl·-·····--·······== o.
1- TS
toto'"··-------------
t:1 lJIQO DMN&. ot /e.dlfoell !In
cau,. cWrerm& tor th&& tacWty comgued 7..1 1.00 ,.r ''"'..,. .sow /Kr~~r
to Ulale spedJled lD the DeYelogmeac 1..0 10..1 or~-·-··---····· 1.SO
Dacumeuc.. U sucb fU'r:ldameutally dlf· (3) See Ule compreheD&ln aa.mple TO to IH 1-··=·=·--·=···-···-- O.ft
148 to 211.1------ ...u
fU'IID& f&ecora are toU'r:ld to e.Dn, the Re- Subo&nD I UIU2!1:1) (3), =o or l"•cer•••• _ _ _ I..G2
HDIIA&. aGiml, VOl. l9, NO. 91-ntUISDAY, MAY 9, 1974
146
RULES AND REGULATIONS 16573
<2> Proc:eu tactot "nle llmits set forth 1n paragraph
,._, I'Pocf!U (a) of this secUoa. &re to be mult1pUed
_,.,_.,.,. /tll:tar b7 the toUowtns factors to calculate the
a::a.azuD.um for IYlJ' one da:v and mazimum
~! : ~--=-~-?~~~:::::::::::::::=::: ~.: averace of daJlJ' values tor t.h1rt:v consec-
11.0 to 10.1 or ~-r----------------- 1.30 utive da:vs.
 <3>. l.DOO llar7'e&l O/ /UU&oclc
<o> ne pro~ ot 1 t1!1.13<c> U> fi~W •rream clAp SIN /t~~t:tar
ADd <2> &DIIb' to c11Kb&raes ot process

waate water poUutaDia atttnbut&ble to
10 "' 1+1 &-------------------------
1~ "' 2111.&------------------------- n
o. n
storm water nmajf md b&Uut -ter by zza or rraa"r------------------~------ 1.03
a paiD& source su.bJect to the provtaiam <2> Proc:esa factor
ot UUISabllart: .Proceu
(d) The quaaUt)' ADd quallty of poUu- C'DII/IVU"CIIIOn hoe. . /tll:tar
tulia ar pallucaac
'~ th1a Daracr&~~h.
prooerUes CODtroUed
attributable to oace- eo
T or ,_ "' T."------------------- '71
o.
.S to 1.011........................... 1. 00
tbralla.b c:aa11Da water. ant excluded from
uw clllcbarn allowed. b:r parac:rapb e.o "' 10.1 or srwac.r---------------
<3> Bee the comprehensive example
1. 30
ot thSa secuaa. Oa.ce-t.brou1h cooUDa Subpvt D I 4l!l.i2<bH3L
wa&er ma:r be d!ac:harpd. with a total or-
p.aic carboa caacentratioa aot to ezceed
<cJ The provUton ot I 419.l:l<cJ <1>
md <2> appb' to cUsc:harwes at process
5 mc/L wute wacer poUutacta attributable to
--
1419.54 [R-..edl scorm water ruaolr &Dd baUaac water b:v
I 4lt.5S StaaO..U of perl-ce lor a potnt SOW"Ce subJect to tile provtstoa.s
of this subpare.
<d) The quaatit7 md quality at pol-
(&) 'T2I8 toiJcnrSD8 staDdards of per- lutante or poUutact properties COD.·
tonaaace atablJah Ule qU&DUt:r ar qual- traDed bJ' this paracraph. attributable to
ib' ol DGilUSUlia ar IIOllUtaDC properets. oace-throuah coouac water. are excluded
c:aiiSrOUed ~ 'bJa P~h. wb1c.b ma:r from t:be d1sc:ha.r1re allowed bJ' paragnpb
be d28c.baned bJ' a DltW IOW'C8 NbJect to (b) ot UU. sect1oa.. Once·throUI.b coolJ.ac
UM pro't1a&oaa ol tbia .u.bparr.: water may be dlscbarged With a total
o1"81U11c cart)oa coa.centra.t1oa. a.oc to ex-
ceed 5 mc/1.
lllall--
.A.--ofdallp § 419.56 Pret.-.almenlolandard• (or n-
_
..ao.wm
. . . da,.
_ . f t_
Tbe pretreatment standards under sec-

t1aa 30'7<cJ ot the Act for a source wtt.twl
tbe tntecra.ted subcate1or:r. which Is a
BOO. ••••••••••••••
T88 ••••••••••••••••
COD'·············
Oil.ad---···
Pllenolle-
-~~~~ ...........
.A.Ialllanla • H •••••
llaladii ••••••••••• -
-...
4LI
%4.7
12.1
Zl.4
.II
:II .12
:&.1
16.5
LS2
..
UL7 "
,
user of a publ1cl7 owaed treatment worla
<&ad •bJch would be a new SOW"Ce sub-
Jeer. to secUaa. 308 of the Act. 1.t It were
to d1scharre poUutants to the navigable
wa.tenJ. sbaU be t.be standard sec forth
TIIIAI cllnmlaa..••
Beaw.lenl
clll'lnlllam.... ••••• OIJ 011118
·" 1D Pan 128 of th.Ls chapter. except that.
for the PW1'0H ol UUs section. 1 128.133
pJI-··•••••••••••• lrlt.IIID tae- IJIID I.Q. ot this c.bapcer s.baU be amended to read
,2.~~::::::::::::
COD '·······••••••
Olludcr----··
•t ~
1011
4.6
"'-··
.11:11111111 IIIIIU 1 - d l por 1.11110 bbl
I.~
~ t
•
u foUows: ""ID addition to the problbl-
ttol13 sec rona In 1 128.131 at this chap-
ter. the precrear.menc standard tor ln-
camgaUble poUut&Dts Introduced into a
pubUcl:r owaed tnatmeat works mall be
~-------· .11111 011
=
~-H •• - &.J &I the d&adard ol performance for aew
=~= :~
IOW"CI!SI specided 1n I ill.55: Pf"OfiUled.
That. It the pubUcb' owaed treatment
~--
pR
11117 01111.
lriLIIIa 1M na_. 1.0 1D I.A. woi'U wbicb receives the pollutaat3 Is
committed, In Its NPDES penatc. to re-
I Ill Ml? - • • wllldl lbe -opll....,l ..a ............... move a .soec!J!ed percentace of any In·
111M \be dLiaftdiiiDII-a.CIOG ID &lie ellla...a e - .
1.1111 =-A (l.llllppml. ca. ROIIIIIDIII AdiDIIIUinlllr mar comp..Uble poUutant. t.he pretrea.r.me.a.t
•I:IIIGNIII TOC M DIIUUI-111 U.a of COD. Z1Da.n1 staada.rd appUcable to users at such
lhiiiiiiGODI a.. TOC llloo4 be b..cl OD olllu.AI da&D II'ODl
ca. IIIDDI carnlalllll TOC Ill BOO.. creatmea& worla shaU be corTespoadJ.acb'
U ID 11M ~~ Ill CDe Recloa.a Admlnlscftcor.
ldaolulll - - o a da&a on 110& anal&ll•. uae olllaeO& reduced 1n strtncenc:r for that poUucanc. •
111111~ 111r TOC lllall be _ . . _ a& • ..Uo ol 2.2
111 1 1111 UID ~Ia olllaea& lllaii.DIIou oa BODI. [PR DocT... IOMB PU.ci ~Tt;8:61 amJ
AOIRAL UGISTU, VOt. ~9 1 NO. 91-ntUISDAT. 'I'IAT 9, 1974
147
RULES AND REGULATIONS %1'
The EDvtronmen&al Protection AgencY C-CatetOI"'J' B. wtttl ttle additiOn of peao-

chemtc~a.
hu carefullY evaluatecl aU comme.ata D-Ca&egcry B. wttb tbe addltton of lube ana.
wb.lcb were received. The dat.a baae and 1!:-C:UI!rOI"'J' B. wtUI. the addlUOil of boc.tl
methodolou have been reexa.mined. and. pecroc:llemlcala and lube oua.
In .some cases. new data have been rath·
ered a.Qd revsewed. Petrochemicals as used 'by the lcdwtr")'
Most commencers favored the chantres meant an,. amount of praduc·tlan In a
out11Ded In the mocllftcaUoas proposed JP"OUD o! compounda blstoncallJ' de1ined
on October 17th. However. m&DJ' more RS "!"letrachemlcals". These compounds
substantial changes were soucht bJ' com· Included same rraciuced through proc-
menters. The AgenCJ bas conclucied that esses normally IU!Ociated wtth reftneries.
promulpUon of tbe proposed modlftca· such as laamenzaUo.a or dlstWatlon, And
UODI Ia appropriate. However. Cbe record wilt be referred to as ftrst ~reneratlon
does DO& warrant. ezcepc In two In· petrochemlcala. The second 1raun of
s&&Dces. the additional mocWlcatioDI camnaunda canstdered pettacbemlc3l1
.soUibt. The bases tar tbe Acenc:Ts con· were those produced through mare com-
cliWODI are sec fortb In cietal.. below, plex chemical reacdoas. 'Ibese com•
wUb reapon.sa to all maJor comments re- paunda will be referred to as second rea·
ceind. eratlon petracbemlcals.
'!'be Arencv was nven the ta.sll: at rs-
BzlrroiT OP '!1m RI:GlJUTlOJIS tatllPbl.ac fllluent limitations for chis
Dn'KLCIPIUZC'r divene IP"OUP at rdlnertes. The first stfP
Bc.tcrrauftd. Wltb the enactment o! needed was a breall:dowa of the indu,trv
tbe 1972 Amendments to the Federal Into ~mailer rroups a! rel'lnl"ries. slrc:e
Water PoDuUoa Control Act <PWPCAI • the t!ow per unit of "roducttan wtthin
tbe Emue.nc OuJdellDes DIVIsion of tbe Cbe Industry was too diverse to be ftt by
Env1ronmental Pr:)tecUon Agen~ IEPAI a stnvJe set of limitations. Re11.neries
assumed respaa.siblllt,- for the prepara. were subcatecartzed based upon process
Uon of emuenc ruldellnes and UmltaUoas con1!;uratlan.s, I.e.. the process used on
u.ader sections 301 and 304 o! tbe Act. the feed•tock.
Tbe Petroleum Re1!nlntr Industr,. In Once the Industry WM subcaterort7~.
Cbe t7nited States and Ita temtories Ia It was necessar")' to cieterm.lne bow the
made up of 2.53 redneries. These re- Pllluent limitations woulci be denv~ anlt
CDertea produce a wtcie ranre o! petro- what limitations woulci be establlshPd
leum and peerocbernical prociucta and for each subcategar")'. Since reanery per-
T1tJe 40 Ptutactlan af tfte Envii'UIIment Intermediates !rom crude o1l and natural formance data <ellluent concentratlan.sl
CHAPT'ER 1-CNVIRONMEHTAL ps llQUid.s. seemed to be Independent o! subcater
PROTECTION AGENCY The siZe and type at hydrocarbon male· EPA conch1ded that a single ~et of et'
IU.c:MAI"Tat _!,LUII'fT GUIOIUNIS ANO
cules and Impurities contasnecl In crude can::rntrattans could be achieved l
ITANDAROS atls from around Cbe worlci vary JP"eau,., subcate~rortes. It was then necessar, 4
IPRL~21
a.s do the products s:raduced at each re· deftne a :low base and a metbod bJ' which
l!ner,-. The corUI~UraUon of a re.ftnery ls the amount of rraductlon at &nJ' g1ven
PART 419-PETROLEUM REFINING therefore a function ot the type o! feed· reftneM' could be takfn Into account.
POINT SOURCE CATEGORY stock used <crude osl and natural ras Slnre the lndu..crv produces man~ hun-
Ellluant Limitations. Gu1def'lnes and Uquida) and the producta which are to dreds af products and those pradu:ts
Pretratment Standards; Amendments be produced. There are several hundre:t rrociu~d are a function af l'roce~s c""·
On Ma~ 9, 19'l4, e!luen' lWuta.tlona. cWI'erenc processes used In this lndustr'7 l'lguration and teed~tocll:. It was decided
IUicleUDea. anclstancSarda ot performance becawe at these variations In teecistocks to base the limits on the quantity of teed·
mel pretreacmen' nanclarda for new and products. The general categories of stack consumed. The naws were there-
.sources were pubi.Lsbecl app.Ucable eo tba processes used are: U> OlstWatiaa. fore tased on a unit ot dow J;:"er unit of
CoPPlDI subcatqary, crac1W11 subcate- which separates hl'drocarbon molecules feedstoclc. consumed.
IOry, peCrachemscal subcatetrar'7. lube by cWI'erences In their PhJ'slcal prop- The resultinr limits were therefore dl"·
aubcateo,or")'. a.ncl lD&elrratecl subcacecory erties <baWng polntsl : <::1 cracll:lnc. lined as a quantity of pollutant per un!C
ot the petroleum reftniDr category ol wb.lc.b Ia tbe breali:Jnc dawa ol b.lrb mo- cf teed~tock <mass allocation). denved
point sources. PublJc partlcipaUon pro- lecular welrht hydrocarbons to lower by multlpiYUll a predicted now per unit
cedures for those reiUiatloa.s were de- wesght hJ'cirocarbon.s: 131 polymenza- ot production times an achievable can·
scnbed 1D the preamble thereto, aucl are tlon and alll:ylatlon, wb.lch rebuild the centratian.
tun.ber cllscusaed below. hJ'drocarbon molecules: (41 lsomertza· A more detaJled discussion Is set forth
PeUtloas for reVIew ol the reiUlatloaa Uon and relormma. which rearranse below of haw the subcategories, f!.aws.
were IUed b7 the American Petroleum In• molecular structures: <51 .solvenc re1in· achievable concentrations, and short·
sUtuce and otbers on AUIUS& 28. 1974. Ina. wb.lch Ia the separation of d11ferenc term limits were derived, be11nnlntr with
Alter the r!IUlaUoas were pubiJ.sbecl. hJ'clrocarbon molecules by differences In the contractor's re1)art and endi.atr wttb
comments were received cnt1c1z1D1 cer• salubllJty In atber compounds: 181 de· EPA's recon.slderatlaa.
taUI upects ot the reiUiatlona. As a re- salUnr and hJ'ciro&reatlllc. whlcb remove 1. Sub:atl"gori.zaUon. The earliest sub·
auu ot these comments. the Acen~ con• lmpurtUes occurr1ncln the feeds toe .II:: <7\ catetrortzaUon of the Petroleum Re1inlntr
cluclecl tbat the ranrea used In preparmtr Indu~try far pollution control purposes
the removal of Impurities from dnlshed was made bY the Otftce of Permit Pra-
the siZe &Dd proeesa faeton were too products by various tres~c ana flnJsh·
broad. AccordlnglJ, a notice waa pub• Jr&m" In the preparation of their Emu-
l.Lsbed 1D the hD~:a.u. R~:azsna IThurs· lnr operauona: ana 181 of.her processes. ent Ouldance for the Issuance al. ells·
d~. October 17. 1974. 39 PR 370891 ot the Several years ago, the lndwtry began charge pennlta under the 1899 Refuse
AcenCJ's Jacenuon to reduce tbe ranee clas.sUylnl reanenes Into dve caterories: Act. This lnlt.lal subcaterartzatlon, wblch
liZes. A. B. c. D. and E. Each catecary was de· . was made prior to the enactment o! the
In response to the October 17 notice. a .11.aed as follows: PWPCA, followed a classl.ftcauon at the
variety at deta.lled commenta were re-
ceived concerninc all aapecta of the rec• A-Rel!nenes 'WIIDI d1Sctll1moa and any octler Industry made bJ' the lnciustr,. Itself, as
procenes e1n:epc cncksnr. discussed. above.
ulatloas. The commencers .sourbt maJor B--Rel!nenes uasag dlscUiacton. cracktn,. aad
moddlcatlons of the recuJ&tlona u any octler procna. buc wsch no pecroctleaai· Roy P. Weston. Inc.. wb.lch had
pramullued. C&l or lube oU maautacc\ll'l.ng. vtouslJ' assisted EPA In prepannc E.t.
PIDIIAL II!GIUII. VOL 40, NO. 91-TUISDAY', MAY' 20, 1975
148
21NO lULlS AND REGULA nCNS
GuidaDc:. tor t.he Petroleum Re12D1nr ID· val!dltJ' of the aaabllis, part1culariJ' aa usable data. Pew re.c!Dertes eSther kept
dustn, wu reta!Ded to prepare a Dratt appUed to Chaae refta.er1s, Ia open to se- data aa theLr dlueac or ~rted lc If
I)eve!GS~znent Document ror Emueat Lim• noua quest1oas. 12) API adJusted the kepc. 'nle dar.a used a.ad re.Ued upon bJ
~Joas Gu1de11Des azul New Source Per- resulta of the mathematical &DalJals bJ' EPA reoreseacs a slcaJ,&:aac fracuaa of
formance Standanla for the Petroleum zaaklDr ·encmeertDr Judgments.· The all the pe.rUaeat dar.a esC&Dt.
KeAnlDr Point Source Ca~ry. After aD Agency cau1d ftad a.o defeasible basla The cl.rat& contractor's repo~ utWzed,
ldcUt2oaal sa-moath stucb' of tbe 1Ddus- for these Juc18meats. !3) The re:swta of !or Ita ftow data, la.fanaae1oa from 94
tz7. Weston subra1t&ed a clraft r~~~o~ lD the resre:sslaa oa raw waace load sbowed of the re.GDertes of thll' 1912 API/l:PA
JUDe. 111'73, which proposed a somewhat 11ttle ho~ for a turtbe.r subcaterariza- Raw Waste Load Su.rvey. The acblevable
cWrerenc subc:atetror&zation approacb tloa because of the poor corre!atloas cancentrat1oas Ia the repa~ for Best
Ulall had been used previously. These found. Tb1s mlrht. Ia pan, be espla.1Decl Practicable Tec:hnolau <8PT) !19771
lllOCWlcaeloas 1D I'Jbcat.etor&zatloa were bJ' the fact t!s&C the re!P'essloa dar.a base were based upon data from 12 re1iner1es,
ID reaiiiDitloa ot tbe wide ~e of la- Included oal7 a li.a81e d&J's sample for upaa reference znacenals. and upon pUot
dllltl7 comolultles found '\ltttbJa tbe eacb re1laU7 for each of the raw w~ plaats. "ntese 12 redaertes. IDisaamed
ortda&l ave 1Ubcatetor1es aad coasct- load parameters <BOD, COD. etc.>. "ezem~l&r7'' reftaer1es, were selected be·
tllted dh1sioa of the 8 subca.cerory Uato A maJor drawback to A.PI's proposal cause they llacl treatmenc ID place and
B-1 and s-:n bued on tbe amount of tha.c l!:PA. use f.bese a.aal7ses was tha& a data available: theJ' clld aoc aecessanly
~. &lid tbe oamblDlDr ot us. D aad sepa,rac.e ~a &ad set of c:ttena re~resenc Che besc or nea the betcer re-
E IUJicatetrartes. <acblevable removal ea!clencyl would be l!nertea. The achievable coaceatratlona
~ co~D~Deaca oa tbe draft regan required far eac:A parameter !BOD. COD, ID the coacractor'a repa~ for Sese AvaU-
IUbcatec"OriZaUaa &mJeCi t!s&C 11:'11CCIDC suspeaded sol1dl, oU and sreue, pheaal- able Technol017 !BAT> !19831 were
a taco s-1 aad s-2 wu a • • 1n tba lcs, aauaaala, !Ul1ldes, and chromium>. baaed upaa pUoc plant ud reference ma-
rtr:bC dlrectSoa. buc It ..U laap~~r1al.e Based OD API'I laltlal work, th1a ao- te.rtals. The vartabUIUes used Ia the :e-
to combtae D and E It ,.... also uwued (;m)acb did not appear to be warb.ble. pa~ were denved !rom those of the 12
UI&C a flll'tber bl"'!Udowa of tbe ladus- API expected to com~lete. by September "uempliUT" retlaer1es for wh.lcb loar-
tz7 wu wamm&ed because of the wtde 111'74. a report embodJ1Dc their recom- tenn clata were aVIUlabh•.
r"UII" of stzes aad CCIDPieldtaes '111tb1D mmded approacb: th1a report baa aeve.r The propoeed reculatlons were ls8ued
-=~1'7. been 1Ubm1C1ed to the Acency. uslDc the same data as thac ID the con-
Izl I"'!!I1))DDe to tbese earb' COIDIDeaCS. Mefti"Cbelew, IC appeared that tbe re- tractor's repan.
EPA, In Its proposed retu1&C1on pubUsbed cressioD aa.alr.d.s proposed bJ API mlrht The ftow basis of the ft al rqulatloas
December 14. 19T.I, 38 PR 34542. mocU- worlle well Ia predlctlnr cWrerences Ia was the same aa tbat of the cant.ractor's
fted Wertoa's Nbcatero:r1zatloa b? 1"1!de- ftaw ?alums from re.c!Denes !&sed oa repa~. The BPT achievaole concencra-
ftaizll the term petrocbemlc:als, once the coD11ruraC1oa ol eacb re1!nery, be- tloas used Ia the ftaal reruJaCloas were
aca1D sepantlar the D and E IUbcaCe- cause the dry weather !Iowa from reda• the same as those ID the caacractar's re-
lln'les. aad scabllsh1ar a aew Sl)edalty enes &re relatlvley coaft&Dt aad the s:o~. uce:Jt tbat three additional re-
lube IWicateiQr,.. 'nle 18 RledaiCF lube oae claTs data <tall:ea dUZ'lDr dry dner1es were used to calcwace u:ae chemi-
reGDer1a 1D the 17 S. were not COftred bJ' weather> nthered Ia the API/EPA sur- cal oldclatloa demaacl !COD> coaceacra-
the proposed rerulatloa. because of tbe .,.,. W'Ould therefore be represeacat1ve. A tloas. The BAT achievable co·centra-
lick of clata available ac the came. prvcedure for predlcaar l!OW3 based oa Uons for those relulaUons were the same
As Ia the caae of the drat& report, I21IUU' redaU7 c:haracter1&C1ca woauld aLso be as the contractor's. Par va..rlabllltles, data
commeaca on the proposed revulatlon usable Ia coDDectloa wtth tbe ap~roacb from ftve addltloaal M.c!Der1es were
llRd ID the proposed renJ&C1oas. slace added to those used. Ia Ule coatraccor's
uwued. that the proposed subc&tesuriZ:IL• the llmJC&Uoas were based oa ach.levable re~orc.
UoD cUd aot adequatelY c:anstder tbe wtde
ranp of plaats wtthlD each subca.te~QI7. coaceacra&lons for each parameter mu1- Par EPA's reconsideration of the rer-
U~I1ed bJ' a ftaw for each subc:atetror,.. ulaUoas. leadlar to promulntlaa of tbe
~reseacacaves ot the Amer1caa Petl"D·
leum Wtltute Envtroazneatal CoiDIDi&tee After leYeral IDODChl of work, EPA amendment.~ to the etlluenc l1mJtaClans
arrtved ac a &ec:!m1que, uCW&tac recra- ru1clellaes. Che ftow basis clld noc cnaa;e
llac!udlar bath API persoaael aad em- stoa ~Is. for predlctta.r ftows. The from thac ucWzed l·l tbe contractor's re-
:a:e:~f~er;! :!':!1r ;:::es&!• promu1...ced reculae1ans are based upoa
t.hll tecb.D1que. It waa fouacl thac size as
po~. ID reexaminlar the BPT ach.levable
coaceatraclons, b:lwever, additional re-
Janaar7. Pebrual'7. aad Man:h, 19'74. At weD aa complezSr;,. !type of processlDc
cbese meet1ap API pre:seated a new sub- AnU7 claca were used, aa well aa the data
catecar1Z:ltlcm t.ecbDScnze which had beea carried oa ID eac:A reCaer,.l bad u from the aoove-clted 12 rel!ner1es used
e~ec~ em the expected ftow ?Diume. O&lar for tbe ftnal reculatloas. ID reesamJ.a.ul;
cleftlOl*! b? oae of Its subc:oaunittees.
t.be :uu!ta of a r"eeftSSSoa aualnis wauld tl:le BAT achievable coacencraaons. ad-
AdcUt2oaal zneet:Sncs were held wttb API thea allow U1e llmJta to "IUT up or clown
t.brourh Apr11 for rurther dlsc:u:s31oa of clltlanal references and pUoc pia• t data
the API proposed subca.tetror1zaUoa tech- for e:KA redne17 based an the actual were used. Loac-t.enn dar.a for 7 addi-
DIQue and of EPA's re:spoase to their characten.Uca ol the ladlvtdual re.GDery. tional re.c!Der1es were used In tbe recoa-
propoeaL EPA oam~ared the medlaa ftoW3 used s1deratlon of the vanattlltles.
API proposed a method of pred1c:tlac Ia t.be ~ reculac.loas ud the ftoWll 3. Flow bcl.tu. Ia tbe draft coacractor's
precUded b? Ule. I"'!''P'eSSIGD, to Cbe actual report the flows trom the reftner1es were
rr.w wut.e loads tor escb redni!I'J' bued Z'e&lU7 fto._. Pftl1 ID the API/EPA
em a l'eii'I!SIIaa ana.!Tsls <best fttJ l'ft'- brotm dowa Into three cate10rtes: u
fOftlled on the data for vvtous waste SIU'VI!7. lit 1rU faaad tba& the recress10D process water, 2) storm nmolr. and 3>
panmeten drawn tram the 19'72 redael"7 pred!Cf.ed flows far the IDcll'l'ldual re- oace-th.rolll'h coollng water. The process
ft.a.enes more accursceiJ' U1&D clld tbe waten Included: waters which cozne lnco
sun"eF earned out Jotntl7 b? API aad
EPA. nus al!l'roacb trOuld pred1ct ez- m.edlaa for U1e approprtat.e subcatecor,.. dlrecc concacc wtth a product, la~e
pect.ed flows and rr.w W'ILSCe load Ienis for ID the ftaal resul&Uona. EPA's re!P'es- dlace.. or r-aw mate.rta1: coal&mlnated
such parameters ae BOD, COD, etc. API slon aua.bsls was used to dnelo~ factors stonn I'Wlolr: &ad c:aollar tower blow-
pJ"'DDOed IUideU.aes thac were to be de- bJ' wh.lc:h the median flows are adJusted down. Process waters were considered to
rlftd from the r-aw wute loads b? assum- up or down. depencUar upoa tbe com- requt.re treacmenc, and were to be sesrre-
IDI a reiDOVal dciea~ for each plesitJ' and alze of the reftaery. Por a- rated a.ad dl.scharred separat.elv tram
parameter. ample, a complez.. 'rel'7 l&rlre re&lery clean stonn nmatr ud once-throurh
There were aven.l maJor problema would be predicted to bave a hf;her ftow caollar water wh.lch were presumed to be
with &be spec~c approach recoiDIDended per uait of product2cm thaD a simple, less uncoal&mlnatecl. U the clean storm rua-
bJ' API: <1) After laltlall1 nmntnr their comples rel!nerJ'. otr and once-through coollar water were
rerresstoaa. API discarded 20 pereeat of 2. Sau.rt:es ol cfGta. Oae of tbe cWII- coacamlaated. however. no adcliUonal al-
the data paiD~ ID order to IIDProYe the cultles e.acouatered ID develo~l.a.c these locations were made.
conelaCioa. Kuc:h of the dlscan1ed da&a rerW&Uoas baa beea. u:cep& for.Che daca The process ftows appropnace to each
~ Co 1luV1I re1laer1es. 'Ibus. the suppUed ~ the API for flo'WI, abtalD.lac aubcaterory were derived trom the 19'72
I'IDIItAL IIGISTII, VOL 40, NO. 9...._TUISDAY, MAY 20, 1975
149
RULES o\ND REGULATIONS 21941
APli'ZPA sunu. This suneJ rave total -daca on re1!nertes l.a. cold c:llmates. A.nab'• operation of a stvea tacWt)'. Some tech•
tlow data. tpracesa water plw once- s.1a ot tbese data shaws that the pol- nlques used to mtntms:ut varl.abWC:V are u
tmaaab cooi1Diwaler) for 1311 ret1Dertes. lutant p&r'BIIleter cancentrauom eacab- toUows:
SIDce Weston's proposed &llocaUoa wu llshed for BPT are lD fact practlcabb' 1. Starm-runotl. Storm water hold!DC
to be baaed on process ftow, It was ag- atta!D.able. In fact. a n\IID!Ier of re1!Der1es facWt1es should be used. Their desiiD
proprlace to restrlcc nus daca base to Ule are acb.levtDc &11 of the l"!!ulatloaa con- capRcit:v should be based oa the nUDtall
M ret1Derles havtnc lese Utaa 3 percent eentraUoaa. M e:~~~eCted. re1!nerles proc- history and area beinc dra!.ned at each
removal of heat bJ' once-Uu"ou~rh coollDc eaaiDC Ught crudes renerall7 dlacharlre reftnery. 'n\eJ' allow the runol! to be
-water. Of Ule 94 reADerles. 15 had no COD concmtratloaa 2o-30 percmt lower dmwn air at a coaatant mte to t.be treat-
aace-Uu"oulh coollD; water. t.baa Ule conceDtratloaa on which the men& s:vstem.
EPA canUDued to use U1e 94.-reAaer,- dnal resul&tloaa are based. Olll:v the 2. FloVI wnatfons. system upseu and
daca base. because It was belleYed tba& a!Dmonla llmitaUoaa are oecaslonalb' be- raVI IDIISCC vcznatfon.s. The solution to
t.be lDclu.siOn of the 19 reazterles wttb 1-3 Inc exceeded bJ' a tew ot the re1!nerles these problema Is s1m1lar to t.bat for
percen& ot heat removal bJ' once_:-fhrou8b. eDIILI.Ded. However, moat of tbese re- storm ruDolf: leYellDc otr the pealra
cool1Dc would oa.IJ' cause a 111~JDt Oftl'• ftnl!'r1es are CIUTI!!Dtl7 d~ or m- throuu equa11za&1on. Equallzat1oD Is
esumace ot tbe process water ftows and sca111Dc additional SU1DD1Da' capadt)' or slmDlJ' a. retention of the wastes In a
Cb.a& tbe cU.sadftDC&I'II of the resultant a second scase ot sour wster str:lpgiDC holdlnr mtem to avemse oat the ID·
O't'er-ailoca&iaD at grocesa ftow 1nNld be wb.lcb will allow tbem to aclUeYe tbe am- ISuent co the treatment system.
more tbaD o1rsec bJ tbe adYe.DC&n of moaia 1lmitaC1oDa. 3. s,nzz.. Spills which wtU cause a
uamc a 1arcer c1a&a base. 5. VariGlnUtv /~tor. The l!ow basis heavy load!ns on the system tor a short
'l'2le PJ"'DQSed recul&Uon ~ered froiD and acb.lenble coa.cea.crauoaa dlacuaaed per1od of time. can be most damarlnr. A
the contractor's reoore ID several re- co tb1a poiDt are baaed on t.he 1lmits re- spUl znay .zsot only cause high emuent
spects. The dednlcton of process water bertes are deallned to atta!D and ex- levels as it roes throurh the system. but
remai.Ded tbe same. ezcept Chat aa added pected co achle"'e over a loac period ot maJ' also till or damare a blolollcal
allocation was srtven for b&llUC water time <leDerail:J' considered co be one treatment system and therefore have
and contam.IDaCed storm water, O't'er and :rear> Por eDforcemeDt purposes, .shorter lonrer term et!ects. EQuaUzacton helpa co
above Ule bu&c &llocaelGD. In addition. term Um1ta were set to allow determiDa- lessen the etrects of spills. However.
concentration 1lmi&a were aet for both Uon to be ID8de !Dare qu1cld.7 whether or long-term. re11able control can onb' be
cleaa storm runol! and once-throUih not a srtvea re1!Dery Is ID compuance attal.a.ed by an arrresalve S'Pill preven-
coollDc water. Tbese chanres ZDeaat Chat wtth Its permit Um1C&tloaa. Cion and ZDBiDtenance p~m !Dcluc:Un~
the buic 110Uuta.nc allocation wu aow In order to dertve ahon-term Umlta- careful tra1n1Dr of opemtlng persoMeL
accuaDJ' based on process water !!o-ars. Uoaa from lone-tam data. the dlaper- 4. Start-up an" .thut-doum. These
and tbe contam.IDated storm nmo1r. bal· s1cm ot shore-term values about a IODC· should be reduced to a IIIIDimiiiD and
laat. clean storm runotr and once- term ZDeaD muse be taten Into &cCOUD.C. their effect dampened through equallza-
Chrouah coollnr water each received sep- Some da1l7 ft!Ues WlU be hl1her than t1on or retention. aa with storm runotr
arate allocations. Ule !Dean, soiD.e wtU be lower. The dally 5. Trm,erature. The design opemttor
In the'promulpted regulation. the sub- varlabWt7 Is tbe marnttude ot tb1a dla- and choice of '"e of biolollcal trer
cateiOI'J' deftnlt1ons were c.banred. Th1a per:Uon of da1lJ' 'I'Blues about the lonr- ment system should In pare be based
cl1ance altered the zsumber of reftner:les term mean. The moDt.hlJ' averages Wlll the ttomperature raare encountered •·
ID each subcatfrol'7. and consequent!,. also show varlabWt7 about t.he Ions- the t•eftn!ry location so that this effecc
altered the median !Sows for each sub- term znean. but to a lesser extent. can be minimized. The daca base utilized
cateror,-. Hawevu. these !Sows continued Var:labWt:v occun lD both ftow and bJ' the Acency Includes reftnery datil.
to be based aaon tbe same 94 re1Sner1es. concentration. Some of t.he tactors wluch !rom cold cllmates and very large sum·
aad the prevtaua deiSDJtlons of d11rerent cause var1abWt7 are llsted below: mer-mnter tempenlture d!l!'!rences.
t:JDes of waste streams 1procesa water. 1. Plow 'IOUam• nnauo- II. Sczm,uncr tec:hnzques and anCil!ftfc:al
b&lluC water. etc.) were reta!Ded. EPA .L Storm NDO~ lll adcUCIOil to dz7 wea&ller rt"?Dr. These can be ln1n1m1zed through
haa aot modlfted tfte contractor's or1c- 4ow utilization of tral.a.ed personnel and care-
1Dai approach co ldent1htnc ftaws uaed
ID t.he calculation of the BAT Um1tatloruJ. llzlerr. slllc:. It WUl noc
BAT 1!ow Is the avemre ot the tlows tor ra&.ICI c:apeclty
&1_,.
B. The nF7U11 UU'oughp111: ot tile re-
open~:e &c Ita
ful procedures.
From the begtnntng It was realized thac
C. VUS&CIOIIIll Ill pump c:ap&City &Dd p...-
the causes of variability could not be
thaae reftDerles In eacb subcategory hav- a - \lln!Q&a Use "'ll.zlm"f quantlfted andlvtduaUy ne varlabiUty
tnr less tlow than the BPT ZDed!aD 1!ows. .un D. vanauoaa lll DlowdO- ~ume nvas <variation from avera,e• must therefore
'n\ese !Sow values have chanred as the Use COOIUIIr _ , _ 'Wca&IM ot Use eftpcu. . be calculated from actual reftnery data.
subcaterol"7 deftD!tlons have chanced. uou race nvm the towers represent1ng the combtned !l!'eet ot aU
4. Ael&iftGble eonc:entnzt1on.t. Tbe ef- LOthen causes. The Information sought rrom the
11umc coneentrut1oruJ used to calculate n. V&ri&Ctou lll tn&CIIIeDC •J"'ICUII. elll• data were the maximum dau,. and
the poUDd i.Uocattaaa 1BPT and new cteuc:y (ellllleDC coa.ceatractOili- month1J' avemSJe llmlta. which should not
saun:e) were the same for both the con- A. Plow ftl1actou reeulc ID 'I'V7tzll I"'IC.Il• be exceeded It the retlDery Is zneet1nr the
tractor"s draft reaan and the PTOIIOied .,.was ctou u.ma (eiD.oe ':lie tllololleal l:l'e&u:aeuc
tor • iSftD rnlDeFJ .,.. llzed lll ata, prescribed lonc-tena avenlges•
l'eiW&ttaDa. The acb.lnable concencra- u. rwceaaoa came wW '1'W7 .,ua aow-oratume The contractor anaiJ"Zed data rrom
tlOIIa were recommended bT the coD- &Dd tile remoY&I elllclenc:y 'r&fta .,,II re&aD- sneral ret1Der:lea. To determiDe the dan,.
trsccar and were baaed UIIOD actual per- ClaDWUI varlabiUt:v lvarlatlons of s1nsrle values
formance W1th1D th1t and ather IDdua- a. s.,.cem apNea tram the nenp) he arranged the data
trtes. and 1D pilot plaats. C. B&w . . _ nrt&UOIIIll tram each re1!nery ror eacb pammetcr
Wbea the ellluent resulatloas were gro- D. AIDDaD'C Of ~ll&llz&CIIIn. Wll.lc.ll COD• ID ucend!nr order. The data pain' that
ZDulpCed the achievable concentrattom trole the lmpacc ot .,.wm up•ce ar raw
'rVlaUODS wae exceeded only 5 percent ot the time.
tor chemical OXJJe%1 demand <COD) and wa~Re 1!:. SIUQlllc ot atonia I'WIII&:r and the znedlan point 150 percent above.
ammaaia were ch~ The COD Um1ta- P. Stan-up &Dd aii\IC dowu 50 percent below) were ldentlfted. The
Uons were IDcreued !for the craclCD8. o. 8pW. ratio of these values 195 percent prob-
pecrochem1ca1. lube. aad lzltecrated sub• II. ~ ar IUI1IIDal ••Ltt.lll' calld1ctou ability/50 percent probability) waa
catevorles) to accaUDt tor cWl'erences ID
--ao-
I. Taapencun .ar- called the dalb' vanabiUt)'. For the
treaca!1Wt7 ot raw waste uaocfated with m. Pliclorll ~ec:Qq l:loCII 4ow loAd COil• monthly varlabWty. the daUJ' values for
varlaua feedatoca tspec:lftcall7 heaVJ eacl1 ZDontb"s data were averaged and
crudes). Tbe chaa.ns ID the ammaaia these IDODtblJ' averages wen anai:rzed as
1lm1tat1ons were a caaaequezzce of the "' S&lllpUDc t.ec:II.D.Iq1lee abave. Tbe resultln; da&17 and ZDonth•·-
c:haDita ID IUbcateiOr!ZatJon. 8. K~t llft'Or ud ftl'tatiW'J' V'USabWttea tor each parameter w
Durlnc the puC ftftrai IDOI1tha !!:PA Ma~ of the !actors listed above caD avenged wtth the var1abWtJes tor
hu obcamect add1Ucma.l data, IDCIUdJDc be mtntmlzed t.hroash proper desta:n aad same parameter tor all of the retlDen.
PIDIIAL UOISTII, VOL 40, NO. 98-l'UESDAT, MAT 20, 1975
150
:!1!~2 RULES AND REGULATIONS
tc yield Ule dai:v and monthly v:~ortabiU· Instead or the proposed value of 2.1. 'tbe 'nle sources of lnfonnotl~n nvaUable
ties Car the entire Industry These In· • ftnal reJIUiatlons were 'based on the re- to the contr!lctor !or the development
dust."'7 vanabllltles were Ulen mu!tlplled c:l.lculllted BOD.S value or 3.1. 'nle of ~e subcatecortzatton and the choice
by .2211 1on1-term avera1e Uauts to ob· montbty ave.-a1e variabilities were not of weU-operat.ed reftneries lin t.erms of
cam tbe ma:umum dally and muimwn changed. For other parameters. the v:~.rt pollution abatementl were as follows:
monrhiY aver!l;e Uauts. ablllttes In the pro::oscd reiUlatlons were I. 10'72 EPA/API Ra• Wa•'- Load SW'Yef
l~ar the proPQI'ed recuJaUoll. au ot the mulllplled by tbe r:atto of the rec:alcu- 2. Corps ot Eagmeera !Refuse Ac:tl Penruc
v11rtabWUes were recalcwated. The ap- lated BOD.S vartabUlty 13.1/2.3 ... 1.351. AppUca'ioaa
r·raacb used by tbe contractor was re· 'nle d lly m:~.ximum to the median DOD.S l. Selt·reponlag dlarhanre daca rrom
e:ted because It w:al! lna~propn:ue ex• vanoblllty aqwntnr normal dL..crtbuct:m Tezu. nunola, uad Wubtns:con
\:ent ror exttemely lar;e quantlLJe.; of llmats wert' decerm.oed by mu!Uplylng the 4. Montconng daca tram sea'- "c:encles
datil. :~nd lt. made 110 attemPt to differ- lor~;-term aver:a1e bJ the reealeulated r.ndtor re11oau EPA omen tor IAdl'rldua&
entiate betwcer preventable and un· vanablllty reaaena.
11reventable variabi11Ly. EPA selecte~ On reexamination toUowtnw promul· A preUmJnary onalyslS ot these datn
Cram the contractor's clsta those t;:er1oda gatlon of the reiUlaUons. EPA has re- Indicated an obvious need for additional
tealeved to represent proper operaUon. viewed 19'74 dat.a from seven reftneries Information. Althouah 138 reiinertes
'tbe data used by tbe contractor tar some on au panuneters. WUh the exception were surveyed durtna the 19'72 EPA/ API
re&leries contained une.zpla.tAed perioda or suspended solid•. the vanal)lllty rae- Raw Waste Load Surve,., the survey
or hitrh values. Attempts were made to tors dt'r1vett !rom th•se data contl.rm the
did not Include any ellluent data.
detennlne the c:~.uses ol these values. ID vurlablllty factors originally esf.;lbll.shed. Re!u"e Act Pennie Appllcatlon dau..
one case. one month of exueme,y hi;b 'nlL" addltloDal data on suspended salida were l.lmlt::d to ldentltl.c, tlon or the
values occurred alter :a. ma.aor hurricane lnrilc:~ote~ th'\t the dally varlabWty ot 2 9
treatment systems used. :a.nd :eporctns ot
hlL the retlnery 1n 1971. Not untU a and the monthly van11b1llty or 1.7 origt- 1\n:~.l concentr:1UoJns lwhtch ..,ere dUuted
month llter was the treatment srstem aull:v c:l.lculated ma:v be too low. Accord·with cooling waters In many casesl .
back In normal o~eratlon. In another lniJ'lY. a dally variabWt.y or 3.:1 and a cot ..sequently, oper:~.Un; per'fonnance
C:l!e the treatment. system operated 'llllth monthly vartabllJty of 2.1 have been e.'l· could not be establl•hed.
re&aLiveJ.y low vartaaiUty for over one t:l.bllsh•cl. 'based on the addition ot tbl.s SeU-reportJnr dat.a. wu a.viUlable
year and then showed :an un!xrlalned new d:l.t:t. from Texas. DJJnob, :1ad Wasbtngcon.
l.lflll lncreas~P In variability the Callow· No exa::C1n1 plant employs the treat- These reports show oD.Iy the ftnal ellluent
lnl ye·u. Since the data for th~ ftrst ment rechnolo!D' lblologtcal treatment concentrations and .n only som'! c:ues
year ot operauon demonstrated that followed by acctvatecl carbonl ~p~csfted Identity ~e treatment syttem ill use:
lower variability could be a:hleved over f.Jr 1983. Tb~ v:~.rl:~obLIJty used Cor 1983rarely IS there production 1n!ormatton
a 1001 period nC Ume. thllt year W:\5 sc- wu. however. based upon the lowest available which would permit the est 1b·
leclf'd tor analysiS. vlln'\bLIJty achieved 'by any plant for lbhment oC ua1t waste !oad ...
The contractor determined daily var- each. parameter. The Agency believes Addltlon·l dat:l. r.n the !ollowtng aren ..
Iability by dlvld1nl the 95Ul percentUe th:lt this low v11rtabWty representa the were required: 11 J Currently practlcrd
point by the 50th percentile poant. EPA best predlctlon that can be made :st the or pctentlal ln-proce,,. waste control
modUled this appro,ch by selectlnli the present time of variabilities which w1U tecbDiques: 121 Identity .:111d e!Tecuve-
predlct.ed 99th percentile diVIded by the be :1chteved by 198:1. These should be ness of end-ol-plpe waste col"trol tech·
mean. The 'han1e Cram 95th to 99th much lowl'r than Ule :~.vera1e vsul:l.hll- niQuc:.. and r11 l1n!l'·te~m ::I:Jt'\ to e·rnh-
perceotlle wL" Intended to m1n1m1ze the ltle-: presently being attained ror the llsh the V:!.ri:J.hlllt~· oC IICriOI"TTRnc:: of the
chance thnt. a retl.nerv would be round In f1•1lnwlnq re:JaOn,: 1l the a.dcltttonal stcop
end-of-pipe wn.,te c.,ntrol technii'IU""
violatiOn nn the basis or random sam- or trentm•nt should tend to dampen The best .source nC u•f nT""a'l"n .v·s "'"
ples exceediD'I the llmltatlrJns Slm:larly, pe:sk~ In the d:tto:l: 2J most ot the emuent
petroleum r:-flnerl·• th .. ,.,•e :es N",. 1••-
EPA selected rhe 98th percentile Cor use d:U:\ were not from systemll with a lUter CnnnaUon was obt:llned Crcm dlrPct tn-
In determ1aln1 the maximwn monthly or P:Jll'lhlng stl'p after blniO'ttc:~.l treat-
t.ervtews and ln~rectlf'" netts to ;;~e
avera1e. ment :a.nd this 'lh'luid help dampen trolewn reftnery Cacthtles. Vertftc:aum
Tl:e upper percenUies were derived pe-~lc.o;: 3J the acuvat.ed carbon Is un- ot data relative to lonll'·term p::rronn-
based on the &~~wnpcton that the data atri'Cted by several of the factors c11us1nr
ance or waste control technl~u"" II''~'"
were distributed accordlnl to a normal v:~.nRblllty In blnlogtcal systeau: and 4l obt lned by the use "' ,c,,ndard EP'\
or 'bell shaped dlstrlbut1oll. An aver!lle the rndustry wUl h:!.Ve 10-11 years of ad• re!erence s:~mples to determine the re-
variubrllty for each parameter was !hen dttlnnal experience In the area of treat- Uab&llty ot data subm• tted by th" ;:r-
calculated and thot a.verage multiplied ment plane operation and control from trolewn reftnerles. :1nd by comr:1.11 "n
by the long-term average to sec the the time when data was taken. with monttorm&r d&t:l !rom th:: •t:1te
da&ly maXJmum and maxr.mum monthly SIDOIART OP M.uoa COMMZNTS qrnc1es ond/or re~lon ·1 F.P ,'\ c me~·
averages. 'tbe !election of petroleum retlnerlc-
Bet.ween proposal and promu11atlon, 'tbe !oUowtD8 responded to the re- as candidates to be •tL~Ited 'lll'a& Q'Uidcd
data were 11ven to EPA by tbe American Quest for comment.s which was made In by the trial cACesrort~ttnn. 'lll'hlch "V:I"
Petroleum InsUtuce for llve additionAl the preamble to the proposed amend· based on the 19'72 E'PJ\/API R:~.w Woste
reftneries. which were said to have BP't' ment: Shell Oil Compaft7, The Ameri- Load Survey. The !In~ I selection was de·
md-of-olpe treatment or Its equivalent. can Petroleum Instltut.e, a.nd Texaco veloped !rom ldentltvinq lnfcrm'\tlon
EPA did noc know the names or :oca- Inc. avatl:lble In the 19'72 E'P1\/\PI R:w
Uons of these reftnerlell and therefore Each of the comments received was Waste Load Survey, Cni'T's or EniJ'Inl'l'rs
cowd ooc check potenCial causes of vart- c:ore!ully reviewed and analyzed. The Permit APPlications. St:l.t.e self·renort-
abtllty. 'tbe BOD.S daca Cram these re- foUowU1r Is a summat7 of tbe s.11n1ftcant lnr discharge dar.a, and ront·ccs wtthm
ftneries were studied. IU1d the data bue commenca and EPA's response to ~hose re11onal EPA ornces :1nd the Industry.
us-d to calculate the J'lropa..ed BOD.S comment.s. Every etrort wu mode to choose rac•ll·
limits waa reexamined. It wu round that 11 J One commentPr stated that the ties where meantnsrful lnformotton on
for most retl.neries the data more nearlY resuJatlons and the Development Docu- bOth treatment Cac111tles and mPnu!D.C•
approximate a lOR·nonnal lwbere the ment Call to disclose or ex'lllaln the cri· turing processes could be obtained.
lorartthm of the data Is oormallJ' dis· te:1a employed by the erurlneerln1 con- Alter deveJopment of a pmhllbllltv
tributedJ rather than a normal dbtrtbU· tractor or EPA ror seJecUng tbe thirty plot for the respective raw waste loada
c:a.ndldace re.llneries for "exemplary !rom the tentative retlnery c:~teaonZ:I.·
Uon. 'nle vartab11Jt1es were then re- plant. treatment," and that EPA bad not. tton. the tentative e:~.ceaortz~ tlon was
ca.lculated a.uum1ng either a normal or explained or JusWied wby and bow the present.ed to API and EPA Cor rev1ew
lOI•Dormal dlstrtbutton, whichever was tlllrcy candldat.e redneries were oar- anct comment. Three reftneries tn each
tbe bett.er lU. Tb1s analysis yielded an rowed down to onb' cweJve "esemplary" category were then t.entatlvely deslg-
averace c1a11y vartabUl~ for BODS ot 3.1, re1!nerles. nat.ed aa "ezemplary" retlnertes based
FEDIIAL IEGISTII, VOL 40, NO, 91--lUESDA'I, MAY 20, 1975
151
aa low raw ~~r~~~te loads determmed b!' 121 One commeuter obJected to tbe eat conceutn.t1ona ac.hJeved b!' t.be
Ule APt'EPA IW'ft7. SJ.mv.ltaneowl1. calculatiou of 1971 dow rates from onb' empla1"7" retlner1ea and plane& In other
tellCa&lve Ust.s ot additloaal reanertes 94 re.dner1es, to peroeDC of Ule I.DdUSCZ'7. lnduaUies, t.he vartabiUUes achfeftd by
went collec:tect from. each at the Re- Of a total at 253 petroleum. re:tmer1es, the "u:emplar'J"' rednertes, aad Cows
ldaaal EPA omces. Se9en.l Ust.s were
USIIII D~d and subiDICt.ed CO EPA.
From. tbe approximate!)' 30 rdlnerles on
race .,.,er
EPA holds permJt appUcacton, tor sur-
~charre rar 19G-200 re1m-
erles. Tlte rem.auuns 50-SO reftner1es a.re
achieved by t.be I.Ddwtr)' u a whole. EPA
cl111 noc expect Ulac these retl.nertes would
unJtormlJ' compi'J' wtcb all llmitaCSon,,
t.hese Ust.s, Ule re1lDerles ror further either '"Zero d!Kbarse"' operaUoa.s or are since they d111 not have all t.he recom-
nucb' were Uleu selected. CUZTmCIJ' dbc.ba~ to mUDJcJPal 'oi'U&e mended tedmol017 ID place. Far ex·
DW11ll' tliJs SC1"ee!!11D1r pnx:a., &I'• treacmeac JStems. EPA Is aware of a ample, few of t.he "ezemplar7"' reftDerles
raapmeuca were m.a.cle to either vtslt Ule Dumber of zero d1sc:barge re~er1es I.D went expected to meet the detree of
re&1ertes or caU~ additioual LDtorma· and or .semi-and areas ot Tesas. New ammonia removal speclfted. since lew
CloD l"'!!atl'fe to plaDC aperaUoaa. In Mnlco and So11t.bern CaUfom.la. a.ad were gract1c1n1r adequa&e ammonia
laDle cues. rebertea clecUDecl to ~tct several reftnertes LD Los A.Dseles COUDtJ' s&r1tltll.n8'.
pa&e 1D the procram,. Aa a result ot Ule a.re ciD'ftDti:J' c~Jac:.b.arsmlr to miUiidP&l EPA baa obtained e~uenc data coYer·
sc:fteDJI28 procram. tweDC)'·three 123) vuce trncmeu&. SJDce Doae of Ulese ID8' a tun year for six ot the twelve re-
I'S!Urtes were thea tu~ved ID piau& Pla.Dt.s l:la'18 dlrect .w1'ace discbarre. Uley !lllertes. Pour of t.bese had no rio.latlons
'ItaSca. '1'!lese reaautes are Usted LD are excluded u pocenual .soarees of data. ot the 19'7'7 Um.ltaUona. wb.lle aaocller
Table L Of Ule f1!m&IDJDI 19G-200 dJsc:harc• l1&d oDIJ' ftye data PG1nts. ouc ot several
'rhe PllriiOM of Ule Te1lnel'7 'Nita was IDI' ret!Derlei. 131 went Included ID the hundred data polnca. aboft thel1mU.s.
to coUecc sWI!deD& cia~ LD the area.a of 1972 AA>IIEPA suner. whJc.b II Ute on!7 In Bdd1Uon, EPA now baa data on 10
wucewa&e.r Dl&IIC operaU.Oaa to d.e&le anOable campre.b.eiiSin souree of data additional redDerlea In t.be t7Di&ed States
raw ...a laada. e111UeDC. tnatmeu& au reaner,- water uae. SJnce the .survey wh1ch had ao vtolar:l.on.s of the resula-
IC.b~ operaUzl8 caudlU.Oua. mel <toea Dot show process water uae aa a doD llmlt.s Ia 1914. and tow- others that
tduea' ~ A& a resalt ot these separate dJ.schar"'e, l:l11t lus&ead. U.s~ total anbr' exceed the ammoa.la llm1ts..
plane. 91slt3, data from ~ \weln ( 12) dow YOlWDe, t.llla Um.lted Ute number of IDduded ID th.la IT'allll of 11 rednenes
re11Der1ea ldeaiCD&c.eci bl' atana ID Table rl!dnenes for whJcll data could be used Cl4 wtt.b Do 11olatJon.s a.ad 4 esceedlng,
1) were fCIWid to be aYaila.ble f(a a IW!l• to than tor whJc.b. Process ftow comu- t.be ammoma UmJt.s) &re "301U"" cnzde
deuel7 lou.-cerm period laDe 7e&r or hlilld. most or an ot the total waat.nrater uaer.s aad l'dU!erles t.ba& are Dot located
IDOft) to Provide IIA adequate data basla di.ldlarsed, Data rrom redDerles !"emoY- ID areu wttb water shortace.s. n should
for furtber de11DlUYe praJecUaua. COD• IDg man~ than 3 peremt at heat b7 be AOcect that these 18 reftnerles do not
Mq~U~DCI7, ol)ei'&UDI data from. thae m.eaca of om:e-t.hro111h coolma were no& neces.sa~ Tetlraeut all of the reftuenes
twei'fe 112) n~.GDertes were thea WW!d u lllled. s!Dce cooiiDI' water would cau.se bl Ule coauC1'7 c:un-ent.I:J' meetms the
cm.e of \he maJOl' d.a&a sovca ID d.evel- IUU' esCUDate at Proce:Y l:!ow based ou regulaUona. The avatlallle data cover
opm.eu& ot the reculal:lcm&. tocal plaac ftow to be II'KCI~ oftr.stacea 0111!' 12 ot 33 States wtudl have refineries.
lor t.baae redDerles. 'l'hu:s, EPA could use EPA has requesled tbe American Petro-
·-.......
T....,.1 data from oDlJ' 94 retlnerles. S1Dce the leum Imdtute to suppl7 addJUonal ef!lu-
~ ftlrnll Vllllft C:OIInACT 1'10. AZ-I~A n.w waate load mn..,- waa entd.a.ta.
deai1Ded CO be representaUve of the total 14) One cammeuter na&ed thl
compaar:.
ou_ ______ _ ~ I.Ddlllltz7, and ab:lce !PA used all ol the Called to bue the sta.Ddarda a
t~~a.~aa
t.aaaa&.lll. ret!nerta 1D t.be su"..,- wttb 3 percmc average ol the best ui.st.mc perfonna....:es
or lea beat removal by once-throush b)' 'l!lants curreutbr I.D place.
~-----------
W!IIUISif, tAcL
cooi1Dc water, Ule ftoq used are actu&lll'
~·------------
TDI'IrlciWIII,V._ EPA ha.s based ICIIllm.1taUon, UDOD the
c:-ca& a~- •-- ~USClu\Rl.TIL Aicher ~ the process wa&er l!owa best emcmr performance of plants cur-
czauapUA • - - · - - Do. acbieYed 117 t.lle lndustr7. raee "l'!ow reuu,. Dro11d1Ds treatment excep& w.bere
~JollcD.
'ftu.IZ..Oa...s · - - -
ti'DIGD 011'·•••-•• a-WIIODI.Te&.
Baals'" parUQD of Ule Bllt.o17 ot Ou1de- t.be lad~C17 Ia UDUonn.ty provtdinl In·
LIDes Developm.en&ID Ch.la Doc:u.au!II.U. a11equace creat.meuc. IzJ eve17 case. t.be
~-------··--
BuaD Boql, LA.
~..a-· •••••• - Tnu Cl.ty. Tn. 13l Ol1e c:om.menter seated tba.C, of the Umlt.atJon, Cor the Petroleum Retl.ninc
a.a '·--·-·-·-- Deer PUll, TIL twe.ln "aemplar7"' nCnerles onb' oae Point Source Catel1)ry re11ecc actual per-
OKC Bd~Wlc. ··-·- OIUDulpe. O.a&. IW:Qial17 eom.pUes wttb t.lle Prescrtbed formance of plan&a cu-re:a&l)' ID place.
Teaca• •••••••••••• ~ru. 111'7 IeYda fa-r eftr7 poUucanc panuu. The !oUow:tnc table aummartzes the
PbWl,. ·---·-····-
a__,,Tn. eter. approacll toUowed by the AgeDey 1n de-
0'.& Oil .. -.aDIAI '· T-ma.wua. EPA b.ued t.be rerulatlona DOC IIOOD velapina the ~atJona.
1\olarUDn. C.ut.
SlleU '·-··-·····-- !.he overaU performance ol t.be 80-Ca.l.led
BP-----······-
0111t-------·-······
PIUiadelpllia, p._
Clot. "e:xea:aDlarT' reauer:les. b11t oa the e111u-
EPA set t.be BPT, BAT s.nd New
Source l.lmJCII as tollows:
Paft Rololdmr. K.J.
~----------
AIDawla · - · - · · ·- PI\11-IIIIIUL PL
Pan .vtllar, TIL VuiiiWUIJ'
Olllt••- · - · - · · · - DallcaD, a.Ja.
IIIID '···---------
Kerr•IIIIICOW •••••••• w,ma-. 0111&. B P'1' Cl!m'l •••••
z.a. . a.ea•rr--- Laaatde, liiiL
' = - I I u ~aniD;tlUT" NUtlft-.
Aa caD be ueD tram. U1e ~ve. Ule
RlecUGD ol theae twelv-e rUIDer1m wu J.D
_,_
RAT IIBI .....
B.t.DTc..•
lane PAr' dicUiced bp U1e ll.m.1&ed af'aU•

uwcr of LDtormaUoD.
WON com.glet.e or I:DOI'tt recmc data !See Sect1ona rv, v. IX. X. lo: ot the at Ule 1804EmPhlcal c11strtbu,1on of the
l.bow acme of the Or!I1D&I t'relve r. DeveJopmmt Dacumeat ta-r E!lluent Lim· IDdustn-. The c:ommenter co&ed t.bat
I!Deries to be lea thaD "uemDiarJ," See ltactou.s OUldellnes and Ne-w Source Per- subcaterones "C", ''0", aacl "E• are rep-
Deorelopmenc Documeuc tor .E.11111m& formance Standards fO!' the Petroleum resen Ced sol.eJJ' by re11Dertes ID the
Llm.ltaUaaa Owdelmea aad New Source ReazUDs PaiD& SOurce Cat.escn. aad coaata1 a.rea.s of Texas and Ca.W'orrua.
Pel1ora.ace StaDdarde for Cbe Petro- 8uDPiemmc B-'"Pmbabmtr Plot:s'". re-
ber,- data aad aaa.lrlll.s mes. "'Vartabll· A. BPA"a a~ daca 11... LDcludlll reaaal'les
leam Bdmzls PoiD' Soa.rce Catewor7, pp. I tJ' Anai)'sll. ") r:ram all ..,..... at til• cauacrr.
la-t•: '"Drat' Dll'relopmm& Dacumct 8. Of ~ tour relll.Derlea Mlec~ ::J,- ~bot
(~) ODe COIIUDeDter obJected to the caacraccor LD U1e "A" u4 "B" aullca~~
ltsr !!I!W!Dt LJmitaaoaa Ou1dei1Des a.m1 AcmC7"s reaaace IIIIOD rcln.enes 1D CIIIJJ' cme . . . IOC&IIG LD TIIUII Dr CalltDr111&.
Slalldardl of Puformaace. Petraleum. Tau md CaJUomia, lloZ'IrUIDir that C. 1'21.111'1 18 ODif OAe "Z'" reGDery (P' '\
Rdldlll' IDcluaCr7... PD. m-24. EPA's sample abould be resrresentaUve
z:::..a- Cl.ty I •IUc:ll 1.1 llOC loea'-1 1
CalltDrDl.. or LD a DDMt.al .,..,
IIIIIIU.. IIGISnl, VOL 40, NO. fl-fUISDAr, MAr 20, 1975
152
0. T!le dan - tor ··o-· refta.•rl.,. llq DeeD The rJiove table sbows tbac the In· treatment plan& ol the type required ta
llrO-.IenMI· 111 ldd&q • rell!llery LD niLDo&a. c~:ued. re11Dei"J' complwtv usodated meet the 1917 llmlta.Uons. ID eacb cue
• B. or tile 11 "C"" rell!llerte• 1n ta• ~uacry. •.,Ul those reftaerles orocesslDcr CaWor- specUled b7 the commenl.er. acCivateci
1 .,.. JD T••u. Cailtomta. or en • couta& ana. nla. crudes =•cb.t. weU be a C&USe al their carboa trP.a&mea' wu appll:d to waate•
'l'be acwiiC'f 1\U llroaden•d Ita da&a 1111• &o
llleiWie • ·c•
nll!llery lA DllAOIL b.lgber raw wa.sce loada. SlDce tbe proc- wacen ot conslderabl?' poorer quality
ess factor Is a comPODeDC oC the allowed tb.an Is required tor 1977. dnce scUvaced
18) Several commeaten stated that eatueat UIDltauoa.s. IL adequately com- ca.rbon was belnr used In Jleu of blolortc:al
EPA has IIDOred the etrect of crude oU peDS&ces lwtUl tbe poulble ezcepUon ol treacmmL
Ceedlcoc:k c.haractensttca on the trea&- phenolsl tor l.b.e larger raw wute loads 18) Comments were received wbiah
abWty of re1!Der7 dueaL Th117 clalm of those retlnertes. EzlsUDcr treatmeac ao:aen tbac speciAl I&Dproven techruaues.
Ulat feedacoca CODcaizllDC bea\17 cntdes. tacWUes have demoastnted that the sucb as blolorical niCr1ftcaUon--denltr1·
In rua.rUcuiiU' crudes Cram Calltom!a. pbeaol limits are acbJevahle. evea. wbeA 1\c:aUon tor arnmoDia removaL and some
have a subltaacl.a.l im;sct on emueat raw wa.sce loads are rrreacly In uce.ss un.speclfted techaolo1r7 ttlr phenols.
quAlltJ'. ot &be mecU.aa... would be reauired to meet tbe ammoDI.a
s-.wea~ ta p.ubUcatlOD ot the PI'O- Eve.a. ll 1& were pou!ble UDequivocallJ and pbeaol LlmltaUaaa.
PQied reculaUaaa. the Shell OU Com· ta ae&nbute a.a I.Dc:ftued raw wasee load The acbievable ILIDDlonla Umlta are
P&DJ' a.ad the PbJ.WPB Petl'oleum Com- to a !eedstac:k t'J"De, UUs "'70uld DOC lD based oD ID-plaac sour -.cer sertpplnr
IMIIJ' sWim!&ted data ror tbree re4Deries lt:sell Jusut,. an IDCr"eued ea!ueat Um.lta.• CechDIQua wbJch ...., current17 In use
pracesamc Calllorma crudes: Sbell ac Uoa. tar reftDezles procesalnr Ulac teed• In the reftniar IDdUSU,.. A a.umber of
MarUca. C&WomJa: Shell at WlliD.IDc· stock. The loa.r-term aver&C8 quaAUC7 of plaats Ia Ulls lDdustry are meetlrlg the
toa. CautarDia: and :Fb.Ullpa at Avan. a pollucanc ln. a re4Det7 c:~ueac depe.ads ammonia UmJta Wilner this technaloa.
Califon~&. Tbese dac. IDcUc&tetl t.bat: more UTIOD l.b.e deslllll aad ooerauon of <See '"De"elo~tmeat: Doc\lmenc tor Elllu-
these re&lena appeared ta bave ape- Ule t:reatmeac. sntem than UPGD tbe eat t.lmitat2ona Ouidellnes aad New
rteaced blrber I)OUutazst raw wuce avera.ce- raw waste 16ad lnguc ta the sn- SOIU'Ce Perfonnaru:e Standards for the
loads (&be quaa ClUes ot I)Olllltalllll ID the t.em. Petroleum Rednla« Paint SOilrCe C&tl!•
waste stream betore treatmeat) t:baD the To determiae wbeeb.er tbere u:lsts In IOI"J"". PP. 95-81; 40 C'PR Part 419, 38
mediaD re&lertes ot their subcaterorle.s. pracUce a relaUoasb!p bet1Hea averace PR 18582C23) MaJ' 9, 1914.>
EPA coaatdereci this addlUon.a.IIDtonna- e.alueDt qua.LiC7 aad raw waste load. EPA The acblevahle pbenollinUta are based
Uon lD age=n:ur wbemu an addlCSoaal compared. !or 14 reftoertes wtUl botb on t.be reAD1rr7 edlueat data. and refer·
poUaC&Dt alloeaUGD should be lllowed raw wuce load aad ea!wmc data. avaUa- ences cited ID Tables 28 aad 71 ot the
Ulose rdDerles pracesslDC .l:l.ea97 crudes. bl.e. Cb.e averace amaunc of pollutant ID CeveJopment Doc:umeaL In addlttoa.
EPA was IDterested iD determJIWir Ul3 dlueac. wltb. tbe raw waa&e load ot EPA hu receaUy acquired ph~ol emu-
wbetber the above-mecUaD raw wuce the pollutaac. No meantDCful c:orrelaUoD enc data !rom 11 n11Denes not dted ID
loada ot the t11ree teaneries c:ould be bet'llll'eell averace eGiueac and raw wu&e the DeYelopmeat: Docum.eac, wbJch data
clea~ attr1bucect ta Ulo!lr Calltamla load •as aOserved 1'01' the POllutants shaw aa aver:ase pheaol ea!ueat aaacea-
crucle teedlc.aca. or wbetblll" tbelr b1&b BODS, TSS. all aad rrease. pbeatlla, and tn.Uoa. ot 0 058 IDS/llO.lO 1111/l was used
waste loads reaec&ed tbe compleziCSes ot ammocia. aa t.be achievable conceatraCSon ID se&-
Ulelr rellae17 procii!Ses. Eacb or Ule. Thus. tor these DOUutants, cWrere:u:es tlDrr Ule BPT l.l.mlts).
tbrett ret!Dertes 18 weD aboYe-averare lD In etaueuc qualUJ' betweea retlaenes are 19> some commenter.: s&accd that
OOIDDlaltF tor Ita SubcateiOI"J'. a.ssoclated more wUh other factors ce.cr.• neither the reguJaUon nor the CeveiO"'I·
The commeaters grovlded raw waste dl~erenc:es lD treatmenc sntems or ID· men& Doc:umenc exPlains or assesses how
loads for 12ft param~er:s CBOD5. COO. plaac concrols~ &.ba.a ••tb dl~erences In refineries of Widely vamns ace. proce:q.
TOC. pbenola and ammoDI.aJ tron each ra-v wuce load. However, EPA did ftnd Jre<JrrraPblc location. load aV'aJlahllltJ'.
Ill tbe tbree reftaerta. or these raw a Sllni8caac corre!a&loa between the and other cfrcumsta nces can further re-
wuca loads. 13 011& or w 15 las&aaces quaaCltv ol COD In tbe edluenc ot eac:.b duce ftnW! ta the 1983 volumes.
were atlove the :il'Dllcable subcal.esor7 ot the reftnertes aad Ule reftnertes' raw The methods currently being applied
mediaD. This Is sAOWil b7 tbe toUowta.r waste loads. b7 the lndustrT ta achieve t!ow reduc-
Cllble: 'Ibis ftndlar mereiJ' SUDIJOr1., EPA's ac- tions are listed oa pase 169 ol tbe Devel·
R•-••,. ILl• w..,... ~... •• l"a•a" Aan•• 11n Uoa. when It promwrrated the recub- oomenc Document tor Ellluenc tJmlta-
... ·-- ··-

II......, IVa ftla AlftGN14ft 8UIIC&'I'...,a'l' uan.s. In 1ncreaslas the COD llm.lta.&.ons tton.' CUSc1elin8'11 ~nd New Source Per-
to avotd any poasable Inequity to) proces· formance Standards ttlr the Petroleum
----·- ...........
,..I... R.,.u 1.,.11 a .......... :ors or heavy crudes. csee "'History ot the Reftnlns Polnc Source Cate&"OI'J'.
ReruJ,atloc.s", .Part 4. MachJevable c:on· SOme other methnds of reduclnc !lows
centraUons".J noc llsced on page 169 are:
In :~odd1Uoa. EPA ezamined d11.1.a from
11nn•••.••• :!1
...
Ill 7.1
.
ll
tlfte re4Dery wbJcb processed a mt.Xture at
I. Mu:unum rrmso ot lrea&men& pluu
-
CRIJ .••••.• 7 Ill! 1111 I?a etllueac. e.,.porauon. a.ncS coa.IUIIp&l'le u.e.
·-···
TRC 1'1 'II Ill crude types . .In pantclwar. tt w:u claJmed ~- Lime and lime soda ..,rt.en1111 '0 recSuce
A - l a •• •'0
Vl7
3111
.,
-41 II\
Ulat tbe dumc quallty Cor BODS. phe-
nols. and aZDmoa&a decres.sed a.s Ule per-
bardneas ca allow runrurr recvclln!J.
:s. c . . ot specially desl;uecl lillh dl&ml9ecl
ceatare ol AraOian crude ln the teed- IOIIde eoolln!r lOwen wftlch would .... Ute
Boweftr, If rellDU7 c~DlaiCV Is LakeD scoc:ll: lncrea.sed. 'l'be A8eDC7 could !1nd lllo-owa ft'Om o&aer eoouas cawen u aaaa-
ID&o accoi&DC. bF d1v1dlllr each re.tlnUJ"'s upwawr.
no siCJUAcant correlaUoa betweea ef-
rePOned raw wuce loacls bJ' tbac re- tluenc quallt7 and l.b.e perceac ot A:U· Ot the 94 renner1es u."rd In determin-
ADarTs process lac~. Ule resuiUcur blaa crude ~ed. Ing the ftow base tor the 1917 llm1ta.·
•coiiQIIeaC7 adJWited" raw wuce loada C7l Oae commeacer stated thnt op- Uoc.s. 25 we~ dolns :~a well or better U1.aD
aceed Ule appropriate subca&erroi'J' me- er:atlas e~leace witb the CUll-scale the 1983 t!ow base. These :a re11Dertrs are
dian ID aa.br 7 ol Ule 15 Instances. TZ:I.Is carban adsorl)tioD snc.m ac BP's Marcus locaced In 15 dUI'ereac states CAiulca,
II demonstrated bJ' Ule rollowiDI table: Hook reftD.el"J' ha.s been les.s than saclstac. Calltomla, Colorado. nunols. ltansas,
R•""'••• R~ow WU9a lA•D llr•~a•o .,. "'• R• tory. that Oull' Oil Company baa touaci Kentucky. LonL,Iana. Montanli. North
n,. ..... i"S~~C&M t"&C"PP• &A l"w•n,.., A.•o•a ma that carbon treacmeru. Is noc tes.slble !tlr Oalcoca. New Mrxtco. Ohio. Oklahoma.
MaG~AM taa ... A...anu?a Suw•nnon
Ulelr Port Arthur reftae17 WI\Stewater. Texas. 'O'tah, and Wyom1ntr).
- aad that Texaco .bas apgareatly re:~ched c10) One commenter staced thRC the
"'- ................,g... ·-
Pltlllne ..,.u 111... •-- the :same conclusioa wttb recrard to Its
Eagle PoiD& retlnery.
control e.121cJencles needrd to meet the
Umltat.loas are hhrher than those ac-
ne best avatlable tecbnoloo econom- t.alnel.l by munJclpal plants employsnrr
II) D••••••• -4 -II -12
• -•aa lcaDy achievable soecltled !or the petro- tradlctonal secondary treatment. and are
-
con ....... --~ :::1 leum re.dnJnr ladunry Is the appllca·
TOC ••••• _,:s -n -4
-·
derived pan.la.lly rroat EPA's Inclusion ol
""'-··
l'llonraY.... a&
Ill -1'1
=
- I :I
Ill
Uoa ot carboa adsorption ta the etaueDL
tram a weD opera&ed blolosh:aJ/olu'stca!
pollshlns stePJ. tncludlnr granular ftltra-
tton or pollahJnr poElds. The commeater
IIDIIAL IIGISTII, VOL 40, NO. te.-ruiSOAr, MAr 20. 197S
153
RULES AND REGULATIONS 21g.J3
AA ID the cues cited Ia response to
U'l11ed tha~ F:I'A'a own pui:UcatSoas con:. a~-. Ollond- commec& ao. 10. U:le.se Olters wera belDI
cede tba& Ulen Is no canf~ docu- lms/11 11111111
used tor mare than tbe poUsbiDC st.ep
menaed tUter aoerat1n1 eXPtr1eDCe wtt.b h••-• as- laS.....,. lllluaa& EPA ID&ended. EPA did. DOt baae the retl•
wucewater, aad l:b.U USe ogeraUII.8 ex- ulaUon.! on tbe liSe ot II'SDUI&r media
perteDce at the twa reftnenes W!IDI sraa- lwy am 11t EU&ratlon tor BOD5 aDd COD rrmov&L
ular media tUtrat1on I Amoco, Yorktown: 1' 'LI
·~·
AIIL llrl .•••• II The ~eatmeat model uswnes Che ln-
BP. Marc\11 B~J rbowa tha& t.bJa t.ech· a.o&. urn 11t
No•. urn •••• IIJ.I II &.S duent to tb.e lUter be below 25 m1!1 ot
•" •
aolov wtll no& achleft t.he limits. Doe. ltrlllt suspended soUds and 15 ID311 of 8005.
J4aZU' d111cbarrn wtU be able to meoe~ Feb. IVI'Z. .... II lO
..... 1117'110 Thus, the blolollical treat.mcn& step pre-
tbe UmSC&Cloas wtuaouc a polllhlnll step.
Bowenr. the cos~ of !!lters was Included
..Cay 1117'1•••••
SetK. 1117'11.0 • • 17 g
••
c~lnl tUlraUon s!louJd deUever aa et-
lQ the esUmates stnce some rld!ner1es
mllb~ need a poiL~IUDc deP to a.c:tlleH
Noor.lllft.- • ~ I !lueat of sucb qua.U&~ to t.be !Uten. Sucb
treatmeac cao be accomplished b7 ae•-
La.- U... ~ -I.Ny - - UIBII of 11' lftCI\
eral techDiques. e.l&ber separa&e17 or In
the su.Daded saUdi aad ail r.ad cnue I
caa~binaUon. lncludiDr acuvat.ed slud~re.
11mB&.
'l'!le aft!'BP emueut IUillellded salida
-...-ao•.
-'CI8d
lillr IDUd.lo - ol I lllc/l "" all oad - ·
blololllcal ponds. trtckllDil Olten. aDd
The aiMI9e clata lndlcatel adequate aerated laiQOas. 'l'be teclmique selected
tu taw 12 nd!Dc'les lor wb!cll EPA hu clepends upon an mstneermr evaluaC1oD
liTt IIWDGlded solld11 data Ia 15.1 mill pertormaace "ot the filter wben the sec-
oDdar7 \reatiDell& emum& was wLthlD &be al the apeciAc aiCe aad raw wute c.barac•
no 1118111! the IIUidrl•ne buill . ODJ:1 ou I"&D8U ot apecllld operaUoa. 1D Sl)lle of terhtlc:L ·
ol &beM plants cMarac.tum OU • .Roblnaoa. Where lai'OQas are emgloFed. Che ef-
m.> hu a 1Uter ID a~ratSoa. Seonral an UW tollow!Dc UAusual laad correcublel
cUmcultlea eacouceered ac Ule tac1Ut7: auen& quaiiC7 of a 1a1oon m&em can be
acb.I1'91D1' Ina tbaa 10 mill of .suspended. atrected adverse~ durt.DI cert&ln periods
1011111 wtthaut a po!L•htac 1:tep. 'n!.e te'D U lUter a1edla la.saes aocl chanDeliDif
reaDeri• ,,_ wblc!l !PA hu 11T4 aU aad eYeD~ forced replacement of tbe en- ot the 7ear by Ule al1ae renerated In the
1Z'DM data IU'P lt-.er&di'C 5 Q ml/1 (5.0 tin !ll&ar bed: 2) an uoex;~ected increase s:ncem. The al1ae caa sett.l~~: ou& l.n t.he
ID t!ow wlume wu cawed b7 retl.nen' K• bl&tom of a receh1nlf stream or lake, w:a-
ml/1111 tbe resui&C1on bub). c1ei'IO deat.b and decradacJ.oa. exert an
EzDaneaee With na~~ular media al- cept&Dce of ballast •a&er; :u uatreac.ed
laiOOD water luscd tor baclcwasbJ ,.,, OX111!11 cle.maad 1.11 ellluent .samttles and
ters. u weU •• wttb otber poJJ.shJalf LD U:le s&ream, and will be meuured aa
ateiiS. 111 atms~~ and we 11 dacumeated. len .J.D the !!Iter alter back'Wash1DI: aad
DA'.! '"Proceu Drtm Maaual tor Sus- 41 tbe !llter was aot. properl7 desl;ned part of the .solids ID tbe ellluent.
pended SaUds Remcmu.. lives the rr.ulta far boeh SUIDDier aDd winter lu!lueat nere are. bowe•er. a oranee,r of ap-
ol aCadia ot ll'h'I'Uon of dluenc trom condltlon.s. pro.c.bes wbfcb can be used to control
aeccnad&r7 bloiCIIIIic.l tna&JDmc tor 32 ta.- Noc aa much 1Dionaation was a'lllllable the ouaaUtJ' ot soUds Ia the dlumc. Most
c:Sl1tla Thne 32 rbow an avers1e sua- to F:I'A aa the Marathoa. Robl.asc.D. 01- at thne apnraacbes elt.her are Ia use or
peaded soUda dtu'!!DC concencrauon Of ters aa wu available on Amoco. bu& Che bave been Choraush&F demonstrated arod
1.1 J:q/1. wtt.b oa.l1 3 at Ullt 32 on:r 10 toUoWIDI Ia lmaWD: The da~ tar U:le 9 can be usrd wbere netded. tTnder s~cinc
IDODC!U c8/'J2-V'73l of opera.Uao pnar de•Jrn aad operaUonal candltSoa.s, eaC'h.
mll/1. ap,.roach ca~~ be ecQnomJcal. AnoUcaole
lD addiUon. theft are approldmate~ · to l.l:!.e ln.!&:lllatlon of t.be dlters shaw i.
uao II'Ulular mflffta mters "Oe1D1 u:ed swgended solld.s etauenc tram the sec· apr-ro.cbes Include mlcro-stralrl.lag. co-
for IQ8IIeaded •ollds r.m~ova! In Ule oadar7 ~ear.zaen& ~:lane of 19 mlr/1 aver- alfUiaC1oa-aocculatton. land disposal.
Water SDM"I~ lndu•tl" Maa~ tUtus an AIL Tbe secoadarf tnatmeot glaDe et- 1ranuJu media or later=Uun& sand 111-
ID apenUon In oth!!' bldunrles. sucb u !luenc for the 12 moDChs of 1914 s~owed tn.ttm. IUid cbemlca1 =n~ol.
1ceeL for oU and :ol'ds remoYal. aa averace susgmded solids cooceatra- Mlcl"'l•S&ralners :1ave be-en used suc-
cess.tull~ In awnerow appllcauoas tar the
Wlthill tbe IMI'rolewn lndus&1'7 m&IIJ' tSan of 4& IDI/L TbU.!. the lUter.s were
altus are be1111 emploFed tor oU removal aPU'&CiDI ac a lnel •ell above t.helr de- removal ot &lpe &nd ather suspendtd
from produccton waeer before Its dla- aiCQ 11Du&s and on 2.11 umu b.l1ber t.nau- material rrom wac.er. In a senes of nine
cbarve trcm off• ho~ all plattorm:l Fll- eat suspended soUds concentration th'ln lnvii"Uif&Uans over a pertod of yean.
ten are aL•o betnc used pnor to second- ac Uleir lniUal lastalla&lon. It should be plankton ~oft! averarea 89 percent.
&1'7 treatment f8P. Marcus Book, PL: no&ed that ID Slllte of this, the .1111 er Mlcro-sU'&iDIDg requires UUie maUltP..
ZDcm. 8'1~0Dne. N .1.; Amarada-He:sa. emueoc avera.1ed 12 z:a111 of swpended nance aad caa be used tor the removal
Pore Reaci1Da'. N..J .. etc.). sol1ds tor the drs& 18 a10at.bs of opera.- of &1188 tram stablllzaUOD ponc1s or
Two tU&en are curr:onnv be1D1 used aa Uoa.. lacooa.s.
a polllhiDc sUP for second&r)' \reaLmenc Oraoulu z:aedla tuters are cot a cure- CoaiUlatlo.n-!locculatloa. toUowed by
dueuca CAmoco. Yorktown. Va. aad all or a subiiU&ute tor a well desiiDed and sedlmenta&ton. ba3 been applied u:ten-
Mara&hoD. Rolllnaon. m1 and Sl'lemi weU o;Jer.lced secaad&rT tres.&ment SFI• slvelv tor the ~moval ol suspended and
o&bers are Dow lD deslau or W1der COD· tem. bu& rather, as EPA IDUnded. a colloidal macen&llroa~ water.
acrucctoa. poll.shiDIJ seep to tunber improve a road Land dlaposal CsoraJ lrrtlatlonJ tor aU
I& Ia true Ulat the two lzls&all&Uona secoodar7 creatmeac ~lane ea!ueat. Thw or a paruoa of tbe 1a1oon emuent can
wtch !liCen aow In place do 110& achJI'Ie emS~IoFed. us~ caD producUvel~ 'be oan reduce out~ow c.o a stream dw1nl perloc1s
U. 10 1D811 ot suaoended sallc1s and ~ ot a ,!7Stem ra meec the 1!1'71 Um1tat1ons. ot hilA a11ae. This reduction can com-
llllf/1 ot oil and lftUe e:KDected trum U U IA suppar& ot the preY'Iow com- pen.~a&e lor t.he tm:reued sollc1s concm-
these UDita. 'l'hSa ts a l'ftUl& ot tb.e condl- men& oppoainlf Ule use of rraawu media trac:loas aad pennJ& t.he Uml&aC1oas to be
Uou IIDder wbtch &!'lese lnstaUaUou mtratSoa. a dlxusaoD of the results tram attained. S'PI'SJ' 1rr11aUon Ill"' controlled
ha'A been apera&:d. EPA's urn tna&- a plloC plane s&ud7 earned out b7 Stand- maoner onto adJacmL land can be ac-
mau model Ulumes '~ac the lm2uenc to ard. ol Obla ac It~ Llma. Obla Re4Def7 coa~pllslled WIUlOUC add:Uoaal e.D'YtrDn•
a polllhilll seep wiU be an ea!ue.ac tram was IU.bmltted. The PIIOC study WU cSe- menUJ problems.
• weU clestmed. wen operated secandarr sllfftld to det.ermiDe ~e reducUons AIU1ouiA l!:PA clld not contemplate
Cl"eatmeD& plan~. and that the aven.re achievable 1D 8005. COO. a.ad suspend· using rraaulu media. 1\ltrauon sgecl..tl-
IUSDended 10l1ds aDd OU aDd grease In• ed sollds When a granular :aedla nner c&.U:I' to remove alsae. ftlUrs have been
!lum&a to the alters woU l:le 1~25 111111 was used c.o treaC U:le rftlueot from tnelr shown to achieve tZ1e 8PT UznJt.s eve.n
&Del ~10 IDII/1. r!SllecUvelv. blolalical treatzoen& Dond. when ln.auent quality waa degraded. due
The foUowtn1 da&a tram Amoco. York- 'nle commeoeer claimed that t.he to alra1 ln'Owth. 'nle L!ma Reft.neo- pilot
town'• lUter operauoc •now a dlsuncc growth ol aJrae precluded a.&tamme.oc of pr-oJecC .sboll'ed UJac t.be llm.lt.s were ob-
lmpravemeac Ill emuenc Qua.llt7 whee tb.e the .BPT su.soended saUd:!. SODS, and tained wtth cerL&i.D a~edl.a sizes aad .aaw
IIUiuanc Ia wtthi.A tZ1e upected ra.a1e: COD 11.1111t.s. rates.
f'IDIIAL IIGIST. ., VOL 40, HO. 9~rUUDAY, MA'f 20, 197!
154
21946 RULES AND REGULATIONS
OemJcal 111e&aiU'es tor t.be control of The commencers owa data submitted were not used In the rerresslon analysl.s.
ucaalve alrae P"Owt.b.s 1D IBIOOill are w1.Ul the coaunmt.provtde little support nte regression :lD:IJ:vsis wa.s blued on the
alao eifecUve. Proper appllcaUon depends 'for the position taken In the comment. size. do\"1', and reftnlllr proces~es of each
IQXIn Cbe f::rpe, maiDiCUde. &ad (requeaC7 These data tend &o show, a.nd EPA arrees. re1Sne17 wed.
ot a-owtb.. t.be !c.-cal concUUoa.s, aad t.be Chat temoeracure varta&loa.s. with a holt US> A comm'!nt was received &o the
dea-ee ot control t!lat Is necessaz"7. l"or of otb:r racc:::~rs. do affect re11ner:v vana- eifect t.bat EPA ~~Sed 111edlan values
111aximum eirecUveness, algal control bLlltJ. nw effect 1.s tullJ taken Into ac- rather than 111nn vulues to determine
measures shou.ld be undertaken before count bJ the vart1b1llt7 factors and does allowable e11!uent loa.dlars aad vartabU-
Ule d.evelo"111mt of U1e &~sal bloom. not appear co depmd on rednery It7 factors.
Thus. Ulere are 1111DY altemaUves location. The commenbr waa lncoZTect. ~ean
Ula& caza be u.sed tor alr'e c~ntrol and/or 114> A coauneater argued t.bat EPA values. not mecU:uls. were calculated
removl&l &o usure tbU t.be l&~oon etlluenc rerulatloa.s would require la-glanc 111ocU• from tb.e Mexem'll&r7" refineries. These
aul&lltv meets Ule described llmU.aUons. ftcat1on.s, and that EI"A was not a.uthor- mei\DS were used &o develop tb.e achiev-
The altemauve selected u a spec:!ftc re- lzed under t.be law &o require sucb 1110cU· able concentn&ttoa.r.
11ae" w111 be a nmcuoa or laad avl&ll- acaUollS tor 1!1'7'1. In calcuJatil'lr the -nriabWtles for
abWt:r, av11Uable cn~ent.lac persoauel, EPA .s re1Ulat1ons do DOt require lll7 es.c:b re11Der:v. t.be 99 percent probabWt7
decree ot cWBcu.lt:r 1D meecmc t.be Uzalta- particular form of treatment. nor do tbeJ UmJ.t was cilvtded by the 111ean because
~aa. aad ovvall wuce maaacemmc require la-pla.nc mocllftcat1ollS. The reru- tbe YartabUitles were U'ied to ;~redlct 30·
ecoa"!HDics. laClaaa reqUire ·t.be achlnement of et- daJ and da1lv 111a:dmums from aa aa-
c12> A commenter susrested. tbac the 1luenc llmltattoa.s wblcb are ba.sed upoa nual averace cm~n).
BP'1' dow bult was baaed oa tlows ex- t.be gertormance of good emt.mr giants. 11'7) A commrnc~r noted that the
periem:ed by rednertes wbicb applY rood Since t.be tats~ I emuent loaclinr In pound.s variabUI t7 allowed Ia 111an:v ot EPA's
water coasernUOa practices. and t.bat ar kilorrams Is controUed b7 t.bree V'lr1· other 1Ddu.stz11\l ruldellnes Is greater
cmiJ 50 C3'l perceac> of tbe 1311 re11Dertes ables, t.be total emuent dow, t.be concm- than t.bat used for t.be Petroleum Re·
1D the 111'72 API/P:PA .surveJ are meetmlr tn.ttoa of pollutant In t.be emuent. a.nd ftn.lnr llmltAt.tons. The commencer there-
tbe EPA tlow buls. tbe nu1&11Wty, reduction of one or more fore n:questcd bJ-rher variabWtv factors,
EPA baaed Cbe BAT aad BADT C1983 of t.bese components can be U!ed to especlall:r co cover up::et condlt1olll.
and New Source> :Sow ba.ses oa retlaena acbJeve t!le l!mltaUoa.s. Th: Umitattolll The v:irtabUltt~s used bv EP.'\ In set-
emp~aytns rood water cOillervaC1oa prac- are based UJ:OD t!ow, concentratiDD, and tine the Prtroleum K ..ti.D.Iag llmltat1oa.s
Ucr.. The BP'l' dOWB were based aa wha& vertabiUtv 1181U'el wblcb are read1l:r are d.ertved from eztellSive lone-term
cme-ht~lf ot t!le tndu.stry wu acb1evtnc acb.levable. U a d1sc:harger's ftow Is data tram reftner:v opera.t.tollS. These
ID 18'12.. ID tact. 51 C5t percm&> of tbe It higher t!laa the ftaw upoa wblcb t.be vartabUIUet t.berefore redecc what Is
re.ti.Der1es u.ed tram the 19'72 APIIF:l"A rerutat1ons are blSed. tbe dlscbsrrer bas currently belnr acbleved 1a this ladua-
aurve? were at or beJQw Cbe BPT process three options : he 111BJ recluce b1s dow to tr:v.
wuer dows. No aasessme~~c of process or below t.be pred!cted level and 111al:a· Comp:u1soa to variabilities In other
water aowa wu made tor t.be remalntnc taln the artpropriate etauenc concentra- Industries Is cons1&1ered Invalid for sev-
U ot tbe 1311 re11Derie: Ia t.be SU&'VQ'. t1ollS and vartabWtJ: b.e may 111od1tJ b1s eral rea.sollS :
smce t.belr tlaw volumes Included Janre tZ'"e3aa:nt systrm .so ~~ to achieve lower 1. The 11aca b - u•ed to ealculace the
am.oUA&a of oace·tbrourb C:)OI.Jns watar. emuenc coacentraU;,Ill: or he may de- 9Vt&IUIIClft Ill Ule RIIGD.IDI I.,ISUSQ-7 wu &C
wtw:h was aac Included J.a the aaw bue s1ru aac1 ogemte mare C&Rfully to leu& 10 ttm... larr-r tha.a. that &va.Uable Ill
deda.IUoa. It muse be nco!IUIZed t!lac t.be acbJeve lower variabiUC,. EPA haa data a.a.y of Ule otaer IDduama meacloned by
ftow bue Is aoc a dow UmltaUOa, aad or. c11scharrers which are a.chievlnr can- Ule cammen cer
tbat tb~ poUutaDc allocaUollS allowed. b7 centrat1olll. Cows, and nriabtiiC1es weU 2. tn OCI:Ier 1Ddl1stne- 11:1~ •genCT wu Of•
tbe ~Uaaa can be met wtCb ftows below those u~:oa 'lrbJch the Um1tat1oa.s cen :oeau&red to ...caiUI•b vartabllltles ba•ed
u~a :oelac&veiY ll~e lonr-c~rm. clatL In such
hilb.er Ulan gred1cted It tbe etlluenc con- are based. ca-... ~allllltt~ ,...,.. ortea coase"atlvely
c:eaCZ"' t1ollS are lower thaD t!lose uaed EPA Is ar.Lre. b.owever. t.bac for mo.st sec ac a l:lllfll lrrel. lft order to campeasace
b7 EPA. Since a aumber ot retlnenes such dlschaqers rec1uct1on of ftow tor cne laclc of 11aca. Because of tbe av&ll•
are acb.levlnr caace.acrauoaa tor eacb would be the masc ecoaomlcal aad. Ia aiiWcy ot ~aod lonq·cerm data oa pecroloum
poUuC&Dt parameter tbaC. are coa.slder- the lonr run. the: most elfectlve means reftaer-. tfte Asency I• canftdeac tbac thes.,
ablJ below t!le coacenuauon.s ~~Sed bJ at meet1nr the rerul:zctors. AccordlnrlJ. •artabl"ltln "re reactlly ac:nt=vallle by aU
EPA. a re11nel7 la.l8bt be able &o meet our cost est1matc.t :\rc: bucd upon the In- Nftftl!l"'' over tfte la.,c·term
tbe etlluent limits wtth a hlgher tbaa stallation of tre:tcmenc neces.sar:v co 3. The te:bnor..,- •pectfted u tile be•t
practl:allle cancr,l tecl:l'lolocy currentlY
precUcted Oow. The .same result m18'bt 111eet ::he rerulaUoi"Js. and tor :1n:v lnplan'G avaalallle bas bee:~ Ia u•e Ia tnc pecraleum
be achieved by careful control and de- 111oc11ftc.t1on.s neccssaq to reduce proc- Nda.tar 1a11uacry ror a lone period or ume
a.IID &ad coaaequent lowered vanabWt:r. esl water tlow commellSUZ'atel:r. "nle exp:r1eace accumulated over thl• per&ocs
113> Some commmter.s .statecl tbat It :ihould be e="h.'\Stzed th:1t. even for ot ;&me !tu enabled tbe l.,du1U7 to &ron out
EPA d1c1 DOC adequately consider t.be those cllschargen who choose to reduce many &rrerulartCl'" wn&cn cancr&lluce :o
decta of cllmate oa blolor1cal wa.ste· process water flow by In-plant 1110dl- •al"labliiCJ. Thla lias 111'\bled tile etetroleum
water treatment aad tbac substantli&llY acat1ons. sucb modlftcat1ons ~111ount to ladWJCI'T to acnte•o lower var&alllll ties than
blrher reductloas caa be acbJeved Ia nothlar 111ore th."\D modlt!cadon anc1 re- raany ocher lndu·tl"l ..... en Irs elr'Pf'r&ence
ID pol•uuaa abatl!meat. The .. t:enCT believes
sou them .scates a.nd tor lnstalla tloas re- plplnr of elds t1n:r processes. To 111eet the tllaC ~fte ladu•cry as a wllale •llould be 1"11•
q'USJ1DC summer operatlaa.s cml:r. Ia- 1983 ruldellnes, 111ore exten.sive chan•es qulrlld 1:0 ma&ftt.'\1'1 ~ne level of control
cJuded were several examples of claimed may be approor'.Ate. l"or example. ells· presea&ly practiced Dy many reftnen.
SUDUDer•WUlter venauana In redner:v chanren emolo)'ta"l ftuld cata1Jt1C Cr:lek·
easuenca. lnr m&J c.banre to hJdro-craclttng: or The commenter also requested hl8'her
EPA bas collected dat.s tram ten re- those acid treattnr r.aaJ chanre &o hydro- 'l'ari&GUities &o cover uns'!'t conditions As
ftnerte• located In IDlnols. Montana. treat1ac, &o help In meet:ll2r the 1983 has been stated prevt')USIJ. c1sta taken
Nort.b ~lr:OCL Wa.shinrtan, and 'Otah. UmltaC1ons. However, such chaa~res "will during periods of spill~. In-plant upset
mumt. data from these. cen reftneries not be nece!sar:v for an:v dlscbarrer &o condiUons. etc .. were Included In calcu-
for tba parameters which could be ..r. meet t1'1e 19'7'7 Um1tat1ons. la.unr the nriabiUtles. However. a· rew
fected by cold cllmat.es are as foUows: c15) One commencer IJ"'rUed that EPA data golnts. which reported either pr'=-
BOD5-13.2 111C/1 average lt.be Um1ta- made many errors In Its dnelopment ot ventable upsets of cab.strophlc events
t1on buts Is 15 111111>, COD-15.5 1111'/1 the r.aecUan raw "'aste loads from the Csuch. as the elfects of hurrtcane Ames
a.verare <the llmltaUon basis tor t.b:se API/EPA surveJ U!ed In t!le retrreS.sloa oa a coastal redaer:v In Texas I. were de-
leted rror.a tile var:la bill ty c1ata base.
redaer1es vvtes between uo-us mr/1> anal:vst.s. since theJ dld not ret!ect the normal
a.nd phmob-0.049 1118/1 average lt.be nte mecibn raw wute loads CT:lbles operacton of a weU run. ca.re!ully 111aln•
llmltat1oa baata Is 0.10 1111/U. 18-22 In the Developmmt Document> talned operation.
FIDEIAL IEGISlll, VOL 40, NO. 98-JUESDA'I', MAY' 20, 1975
155
RULES AND REGULAnONS 219-17
fiiU ODe commeat shows \bat EPA Slx d.a&a poiD&a are deolcted u l:lavtDc ftaery d.ata, to malte tbe &4Justmeac to
Uled aa 1Acorrect ecn~atloa ID the calcu- beea lraored bJ' EPA ID lt.s aaalJsls ot the ortala&l v&rtabW t1es whlch bad beea
I&Uoa. a.f samole 'IViaDce. MaraUioa'a COD daca.. Two of these based upoa a aarmal dlsCZ'1buUoa. S1Dce
A a:dDor error waa !DAde ID the calcu- po1D cs are dupUcat.e:s 11/12/12 ADd EPA baa beea UDable to ObtaiD the
lau.cma used ID prepu&Uoa ot the pro- 1/ 15/'l3). aad oae paine U/:11/'J:n waa aamea of tbe reftaenes u.aed 1:1,- Bz'oW"D
po.ca Z'efr111at1oa.s. BaweYer. smce the mlsCaltea.l7 deleted by EPA. BaweYer, aad Root. IC baa beea uaable to zaau
apDroac:h uaed for data anlib'all a.tter Use dele&loa of U1.ls m:~rle polac lwb.Jch further use Gl tbese daca..
putlllcaum at the progoaed revuJ,aUous waa a low value) would ha.ve Do .til· !2tl Oae commeater stated tha& slnce
c:onected tha& error. It d1d no& appear zuacaac e1fecc oa t.be rerW&Uoaa. The there Is eaormou varlaUaa ID &be Ya.ri•
ID the l!Dal re;WaUon. rem&ID1q tour c1ata poiDta were de- abWtJ' taccors tbeauelves, tbel.r atat1a•
C18) A commmt.er camgla!ned of bl· lec.ed becauae Westoa's tnp repon ldea- Ucal "eracJt7must. be cballeased.
ued da&a aelecUoa aD tbe part a.f EPA UAed Uzem u Ule resul& oC ope:a&or The vallcUC, of a YartabWC)" CaccOr ID•
ID detenDSD1D1 tbe nr:!.abUlUu. mlatall:es. creases u the aumber oC data poiDCs and
'nle CommeDter pre:sea&ed tour c.barta !21)) A COID.IIlm&er quesC1oaed tbe lA• the l~ ot time aaalT&ed 1Dcreue. The
&ba-tDc the moatbl7 a•erare load1D1 Cor clusiaD ol tbree d.ata po1DLs s1ace tbU commm&er baa calculated d&1l7 varta-
BOD, TSS. oil &Dd D"'ttM. IZld ammoma were preceded by tbe SJ'Dlbol mean!.Dr blliUes wl&bJA each moat.b. aad a coem-
f.ram JADIJU7, 18'r0 &Mautll AD!'11. lwr.l '"less &b&D the seuai&lntJ' ac &ba& leveL M cieac ot YIU1&Uon. !staaciaz'd deYiaUan.
for SbeiL Yar'Uas. EPA ae!ected oae Por aU aaa17&1ca.l tec.bAJques a llmiC dlvtded b7 the meazu tor each ZDDD&b.
reu's daca, for each parameter. to cal- of aeaaltlv:ltJ' ezb&s below wtucb. the Thus, l:l1a calcul&Uoas wowd be U'D41C~
cWu. tbe Yar:!.&bWI:r. Pur BOD. TSS, meCbod does aac yteld reliable Qu&nUta- to show rei&Uve17 wide auccuaUoaa. El"A
Wid all aDd lftS,Se. EPA cboae the J'nl' uve m. .uremeau. EPA. t.brou!U:Iouc lt.s used loaaer term cla&a Ua moec c:asea. a
.nero the laltall&Ucm of Shell's waac.e. aaalnls af &be Re1!aei'J' Il:ldus&l7 daC&. .Cv.ll year>. A.ccon11Zial7, tbe uaoert.a.IDtJ'
trea&mea& plaDC ID SeDtemJ:Ier, lt'fl. The bas used t.be lnel at aaal7tlca1 seDIStlYIC7 observed b7' Cl1e commeater Ia miD'm'zed
data t= these P&r&meten pnor co tha& u t.be daca polaC.S wbere & "less t.baa bJ'"EPA'.t method ot aaa4rW.
daM cauld DOt be used becauw It wu aemi&I'I1C7- tacUcator tppe:ared lA th~ The coaunear.er also compared t.be
npr 1iDV UYe at raw wuee &Dei ao& etllu- da&a. n ls be11ned tha& elJ..m.l.:aUoa of d&U:y Y&rtabWt1es based aa lema-term
ea& var:!.abWt7. A period at oae :rear wu these low d.ata pom&s m.t~.bc si~caatly d.a&a to shoW' tbe w:lde ~· of "alues.
cbosea tar MYeral reuous: 1> one yetU"a biM t.be &aal7sia o1 t.be tot&! data base. EPA ls perfectlJ' aware at &be wide raaa:e
dat& .sb.CNJd adequa&eb' :egresea& the ua- (21) A CODUileater quesUOaed I:PA's of '1&1'1abWt1es, and one at &be ID&eatloa.s
llftftD&&ble caUI!e3 ot nrtabW~: aDd 2> nnabWC7 aaalJ'sls 1111 Amoco. York- ot tbe UmUaUaaa Ia to preveac these
Ule quaaUt'r of d.ata ls m.mdea& for sta- towD'a" BODS claC&. oa the rra~mds thaC wlc1el7 YUJ'iDI' c11sc.barres. Ill d~alal'
&ts&Scal IZl&lnls aad Prediction ot boLb two aaaa:sea by EPA of the same daca BPT, operaUoaa.l coacrol Ia coaaldered
ftriabWt'J azid lonr-tena oerformaoce. Yielded S1:11JdD&I7 cWfereat. resulta !4.54 utremeb' tmportaat..
Par oil aDd II'ISM. EPA cUd erroaeo~ ..... 2.281. The preq~~;Uoa of spWa. operator edu-
aaa1Tie da&a tar a oer1od before the ID- ThLI NUIIOSed 1Dcon.slst.enc7 arose a.s ca&loa, Um.IClac ~dc&l error. aad.
a&allatloa of bloloCScal tzoncmenc. Bow- a raul& at tbe prorreastoa foUcnred by proper crea&meat Plaat. desJIJil tor tbe
enr. EPA bu recomuuted tbe nrtabWt7 EPA ID pnpal'Uig &be re~laUoDS !aN control of var:!.abWC7 are Jus& as tmpor-
UIIDI clata from the .tame pertod Ca.tter "VartabWt7'' above I. The 2.29 da.117 YU• tan& aa tlow r:a.lalmlza.tloa or desiiDil:lc to
IIIS&allat1on of treatment> used for the labWtF Ia the result of lltUII.r Amoco's acb1e•e a loas-term coaceatra.Uoa llm1L
oLber parameters. the cW!ereace 1s aer- d.ata to a DOnD&l d.latrQ)uUoa. •bile Cbe 125) Oae commea&er stated that. .s1Dce
l111bl& t 54 arure 1s based on A Ioc-aormAI tU. EPA based etllueat UmiCs liD paUDd.s) OD
EPA belleYes, u lad.lca&ed prmausb'. 'l'he lmDZ'OYed methadolo17 DOW beiJIC U1e produce ot ftow Umes cooceatrauoa
thac low Yel13ht'ttJ' a, concamltaDC Uled bJ' EPA riS'\IICs ID a 2.80 da11J' tilDes varta!IW&:.J', aad slace tbe commea-
wt&b IDOd plaac operatloa. Por tb1s rea- YartabWtJ', The correc&loDS madelait1al.l7 ter fouad DO coas.Lstent correladoa be-
SOD a nar d11fermc from thac used tor tar tbe faces tbat t.be d.ata n& oal:y lm- tweea ftow aad. aa:r etllueat parameter.
the other P&ran~ete~. a year In whJch pel'fecUJ" to elt.ber a aorm&l or lot• EPA should ree•aluar.e the bas.Ls ot lCS
low ammonJa nnabWt7 was &ttalaed. aorm.a1 cUscnbuuoa are DO loaser ellluea& l1mlt.s.
waa selected f"r cala.latlnlr ammon1a aeces&&r7. 'nle commeater provided EPA wUh a
nrtabUit'J. It Is lmmater1al tha& tbJa year 1221 A commencer s&aced that EPA l.Lsc ot tea re4aenes tor wbJc.b be exam-
preceded I.Dita.Uatlan of the btolollcal erred 1D USIDI 2.3 u the BOC.S vartabil- Ined tbe correlaUoa of elllueat load w1th
treacmeac system, since mosc ammonia lt7 lor three retlaenes In c:alculat1.D&' dow. aod a l.Ls& ot those etllueac. param-
remo98l Ia a.ccompllabed b1 a separate variabWUes lor oth:r parameters. since ltters wtuch he tound to be .!lsnU\caaUy
IJ's&em. the me&~~. of the &bree rel!Denes• BOD.S correlated with ftow. These l.LsC3. for
T22e commencer also ;x~lnted to se•- varta!!Wtles ls 2.14. whlcb the commeater Called to provld'
eral da&a points that were deleted fi'OID '11\e mean of the three re.dnenes· estber the da&:.a OD whicb Ul17 are baaed
the da&a aaalnect from the> 3ilaratboa. BOD5 variabilities 15 ID tact 2.22: haw- or the resresalon model he used to a.a-
Tuu Clt7 Ra!De1'7. Ptve daca poiDta eYer. EPA used t.be med.laa YVJue, 2.3,111· al:ne tbat data. constitute merel:r a aum-
were droDI)ed dur1Z1g Ute aaalnls of c.be atead at tbe meaa. • ID&r7 of results obta1aec1.
ammonia data ae Do& beJnl represenca- 1231 A COID.IIleater IDdlcat:d thac EPA
tiYe at the DOrmal plaa& operation. 'nle did DOt avail ltaelt of tbe data Ia t.be EPA determLDed •hlcb etlluent param-
dat& IIQiata were aLl at tbe data tram the BraW"D and Roo& Val1abWC, scud,.. eters were reporc.ed b,. each of Ute tea
Plr:!.Od 10/11/72 throup t:Z/S/72. The reftaertes used bF the commencer. None
EPA dld ID lace u&Wze data tram ftve
data PJ'lor co 10/U/72 ra.Died !rom 2.2 to ot the reJ!Dertes used Ia th' Brown a"d of c.be ten retlnertes reported aJl etlluent
2:1.1 ZDirll aod Ule data atter 12/S/'72 ~~ VartabWr:,o Study. Howner, the Parameters, alt.bourh the ccauneater's
raDPd li'OID 3.2 to 39 f. The polJlta BroW1l aad Roo& Val1abWty SLUd7 Itself Uses milllC lead oae to beUe•e tbe7 d.ld.
dropped were o.s. a. o. 0. and 80 mr/L could not be used In der:tYiag the Umlta- Based upoa the commencer's OWD sub-
Tbese data PGinta were drooped beca113e: UaDL Tbe s&ud7 did ao& stve an,. nw mlssioa, thea. tbe lollowtar table caa be
U th17 LmmecUate17 taUowed a. 23 c1ay data. or Identity the re~aeries u.s~d In coas&rucced:
period tor wtuc.b Do data were recorded: the stuciJ". 'I'bua, EPA had co lalowledge 'lum-nl
&nd 2) tor whateYer reason II!:PA bas of the operation ot the~e retb:lerte.s and I'IIRn•rt.,. rwiUI
beea uaable to determJne the cau.se of no oppartunitl' to de&enn1ne the causes m,.,..l.rtann
da&& ftiMnl•t
these &Oerraac n.luest. these ~ve coa- of suapect da'-. Moreo•er, the na,l5tlcal NCII'I't.ln•tJae
aecu&lve dele&ed data PGIDta are both aopraacb used bJ' BrOW"D and Root wu .m.....,
atar&lngly lower &Del h11her thaa. &11 the IAconsistea& wtth that selected by the ,_,.m.. •
res& of the daca. Th17 tbua may reore- Agenc7. Bnns••.••••••••.••
·········-·· ft s
aenc samJ:I!Inl or analytical erro~. These cnn I T
daca an cJearl7 so atn~&cal that EP.'\ de-
The da&a !rom ft•e of the renaenes
+~~:::::::::::::: I I
used lA the Brawn and Roo& VIU'!ablllty
""- ···········
I
•
••
Cided DO& to UM them ID the aoain1a. 011Ud- .•••••
I
v
S&ud:r •ere used. aloar wU.b o&ber re-
';DUAL UGISTEI, VOL oiO, NO. 9~1UISDAT, MAT 20, 197S
156
RULES AND REGULA nONS
"nlus. ID 111011t cues wb.ere the re1!ner- menc IDstallatlam uaiDa' actlnt.ed car• mODla released from the ammoa.la strip-
les record•~ dl& a on a ~ecl11c param- bon. ID adcUCiaa. tbe art1cle lives the per to reach the amaunc Juat needed
eter, the IOIIUDID&.er ICtualU reported resulta of 220 carbon l.sathem tests, de- to satlst:y the nutrleat needs of the blo-
a ldiDUlcar.& cornlaaon between elllueat pic~ t.be almost UD!venal appUcabWCy 1011cal treatment plaa&. 'nle Arezacy con-
lCMdbl• Uld aow. There waa no reason. of activated ~ as a viable treat- cluded t.b.at several adcUtlaD&l years of
theretore. tor EPA to ~valuate the meat.. ezPerlence and eX~~erlmentatlon with
basis for Ita elllueac llm.lt.s. :Much of the wort done to date on both ammaa.la st.rlppera and IDcUvtdual
<28J ODe commeater seated t.b.at, since activated cart:an adaorptlon baa beea to blaladcal Sl'ltem should result ID better
data mm Sbell'l Martlz1ez redneJ'7 were shaw It Is aa a.lteraaave to bloloi1C&l control of stripper ellluent.s and mare
no& dJ.sCJ'tJ)uted either normally or 1oc- tn:atmmc. However, carbon adaarptlan complete lmowledse of the nutrleDC
DOI'ID8oi17. EPA'I approach to vartabillty seems mare UDiversaU:y appUcaiUe aa a needs ot bloloclcal Sl'Stems. Therefore,
wu !Dcarrect. poi.I&I:LI.nw steJJ alCU biololical treatmmc. the ~ezaey set the BAT ammonia llmita-
'the commeater provided '111th bJs A paper by Short aDd Myera states: uthe tlaDa co reJ1ect the elrl!ected reduction ID
CCIJIUIIIDt a &able IUIDm&riz1Dc the sta- best Ieveli of reducelaa were obta1Ded "excess" ammaa.la <the dl!ference be-
t18Cical parameters he IDvestlca&ed a& wttb blolo81cal trealmeDt toUawed b7 tween the amount dl.sch&rced from strip-
the MaraDn rdae17. Be cUd aoc prcmde carbon adsorption• .ApparentlJ". blo•treat- pers now and the a.maUDt. of ammama
EPA Wltb the data be used. Prom the ment aad actlvaced carbon complemeza& needed b7 blalalical ancems> .
alllllbft of data polD&I be I"'!!IIrted. how- eacb otber ve17 well and those materials <28J Several cammezat.s were received
~WV. he aopar•eatl7 Wled daca tatea wbic.b. are reslacaa~ to biola.Sca! decnda- concemlDc the apparent aDOmaly In
OYer appl'lnl1mace.l7 a three-year period. taoa are adaorDed talr17 ealdly wt111e the 4na1 pound aUacatlans <ba.se Umlta
S1Dce cb.e treacmea& plan& a c the Mar- thaae materials wnJch are not adlorbed times procesa ta.ctora tlmes size !actor>
tiDes reftDft7 wa.s ao& !Dstalled untU late by earboa &re blolodcaU,. del!"lldable." far certain subcaterartes. That Is, hypo-
Ia 18'71, I& II Wl:eiy t.b.at the commenter 'Ihla statement Is con1lrmed by: UJ A theticaU:y, In some Instances. If sumcient
combined Ia hl.s SWIUD&I'V data taken paper by Hale and Myers entitled u'l'he petrocbemlc:al operatlan.s were added to
both before and alter the treat:Denc ra- OrcanJcs Removed by CarboD Treatment either cracklnc redn'.!r1es I"B"') or lube
cWUes were lnatalled. U two IUCb cUa- of ReAnery WutewaCU"; <2J A sCud7 redner1es I"'D"'J to c:.hange their c1a.ul·
puace staaaCinl populaCioat were 10 c&rrled out b7 O'mon Carbide Corpora- 4catlans to, re::specttvely, petrochemical
combined. the resultll ob&alaed would be tion oa 93 orcanic com;ounds: 13J a reftaerles t"C"'J or lnterraced retlner1es
mKDIDclesa. paper b7 E. 0. Paulson. "Adsorption as <"E"J. the ftDa1 pJund allocatlan.s tar
Ia adcUCioa. the procedure now used a TreatmeDt of Re.4aeJ'7 EllluenC" ID those redner1es would decrea.ae. The
'by EPA to decenalDe the varlabWty fac- wb.lch carbon laotberm testa sbow hlrher cammmters surcested two solutlom far
tor does not requ1n that the data be dis· BOD and COD percent removals from this aaamal7: 11ther IU add a welg.banc
trlbu&ed either nonnally or loc·normall7 blololical etlueata than from raw wastes: !actor far the 'f'&rlous petrochemical
over Ita enCire raace. and 14J the 19'74 pUot plant s&ud7 at Che ooeratlam co lncreaae the siZe of their
<2'JJ A commeater anai9Rd BOD dat~ BP. Marcus S:c.ok ReftneJ'7 where a Blo- procesa ractora. or <2J ellm1aate the "C"
from Ezzoa'a Baytown re1lneJ'7, and de- Disk '1111'&1 used to remove a portion of and "E" subcaceranes. and add to the
rtved a varlabUI&Y facior of 3.08, aot BODS .,nor to ~arbon adsomtlon. resuiC- paund allocatlom for "B" and "D"' re-
2.03 u dven bJ EPA. Inlln .subatall tlall7 better .elllueac quallty ftneries addltlanal pounds based upon
'nle cammenter's value·of 3 08 Is the than provided b7 the carbon alone. the re.Wat1ona !or the pla.stlcs, rubber.
raao between the 98tb percenUle of the 'nle ~enc::::r derived Ita ac:hlevable ancl arrame i:hemJcallnduaCnes.
vartabWtr dlsCrlbutlon and the 50th per- BAT ellluezac·eonce.,tratlom from the l.n- ID calculating the ftows, based upon
ceaWe o1 that dls&nbutlon <CSIJ/CSOJ tor tormatlan available oa the resulta of the ~I/EP.A survey <see "ftaw basis"'
the BaJtawn reftnery. EPA actuaU:y de- acelvated carbon polishing of blaloclcaUy aboveJ. EPA attempted to derive tram
tiDes the vartsbUltv factor a.s the ratio treated e.alueaca. 'nle 10uroes used to the survey data the actual process waste•
betweea the 88th percenUle of the nr• c'ntlna the probable achlevabUit? of water dow whic.b would require treat-
labWCV dlaCrlbutloa and the cnesn !C991 these elllumc concencratlom are as fol- meDt. For the mast part. the dows iJsted
AJ. 'nle correcc varlabW&y factor tor lows: Short and :!47ers-"Ptlat Plant ID the SW"Yey combined bath process
the Baytown re4DI!J'7 therefore Is 2.19. Activated Carbon Treatment of Petro- water and once-tbrourh caoUnc water
EPA orl;tnall'f' nYe the d;ure 2.03 a.s leum Reftnl.nc Wastewater": 'nle BP. SlDce the once-throurh caoUzur water
tb~t factor. Oaoa reaaalVZIDC the Bay- :lolarcus Hoole 1974 pllaC plant stud7 of would ordinarily nat reQuire treatment. It
town da&a. EPA dlacavered that It had FUtratloa and Activated Carbon <Bio- was necessary to develop a means tor
ande an error ID tnLD.sertbtnc the ori81- Cialc>; EPA Proces Dealr:n Manual tar dennnc the procesa t!ow trocn the total
Dal 4nres trom the wan: she:ts. EPA Carbon Adsorption. ~a~~eclally the South t!ow listed In the survey.
t.beza recomputed the overall vartabWCJ' I.alce Tahoe. CaWomia, and Ora.are. 'Ibe promulgated reculaUans were
factor ualnc the 2.SII lhrure. and round CaWarD.La. blalaclcal-actlv:ited carbon based upon the ~ows trom 94 of the re-
It rem&laed UDch&nced. to wttblD the treatmezat plant stacUes. 4nertes ID the API/EPA SW"YIJ". Of these
round-a~ llm1ts. An Important factor ID the EPA's !M rat.nenes. 75 had no once-through
<28J A commm&er &rli'Ued tha~ EPA choice of activated carbon adsorption as coolla8 and 19 removed lesa than 3 per-
baa no& demomcn&ed the avallabWtr of a treatment st.~~~ OD whlcb to bue the oeDC of their beat by mean.s of once-
carbon &elsorpCiaa u a proper bull tor 1983 Umltatlona waa the fact that. It t:hroutrh coo~ water. It was caasldered
ea&abllah1n• the 1883 llmitatlam. 'nle would be an add-oa to the 111'J'J creac- that tocai !!ow tor these 94 reftnertes
cammmcer cited MVera& references, ID meDt t.echDolou. ID adcUtlon. the cur- would correspond closely co procesa ftaw.
addlaoa to thoae u.c1 bF EPA. Ia ma.k- rent. lnteresc ID activated ~n ad- After promuJnaon of tbe rt8U!atlon.s.
m. tbla azvummc. sorption should m.a.ke avallabJe sWZic1• EPA undertQCIIc co ldeDtlfy the cauae or
ca.rt1oa adsarpUan tedmol087 has beeD IDtarmaUoa for the Anlll:7 to deter· the apparezat anomaJ:v ldentUled by the
uaed b7 lndustz7 tar ID&ny yean tar zn.lae, :;~rlar to the Implementation of commeDter.s. Upon carefUl examination
the removal or orcan.tc cancamJaauan ID BAT tec:Julalou not later than 1983. If at the !!owe In the API/EP.'\ survey. It
the Sutrar and Liquor Industries. In 1980, the Umltatioaa wW require mOCW1ca- was CauDd that the a.c:Cual process t1aws
tbe deC&iled evaluaCioD of carbon &elsorp- t1on. tor 108 of these 138 re1lner1es ClnclucUnc
Uoa u a paulble wu&ewater treatment The commeDter also ouesCianed the au the orlglaal 94J could be calculated.
tecbnolOU bep.n a.s pan of the mandate Juat!Jicatlan tor lower ammon.ta con- When these process t!O'aii'S were compared
ceatra&loDa !Of' 1883, sln.c:e activated car- to the total !Iowa Wled. the reason tor
of eoa.re- <Pub. L. B'J-88J to IDvesci- baa does nat. remove ammoa.la. WhJle the the anomaly became apparvnt: of the
Pte advanced wane treacmeD~ tecbnol- commencer Is correct. be misunderatood ort81Dal 94 reftaerles. mast of those With
oa'· the BAT ammonia llm1t.a.UOD. 'that llm1• more than zero buc less than 3 perceDt
A li'J4 art1cle by Bacer ID IDdusCrlal tatioa Ia noc lfued IJIIOD ase of c&rtlon on.c:e-throutrh heat removed by coollnc
Water ~eerlnc cites alxtem aamples adsorpaoa. !nit rather Ia baeed oa Im- water 113 ot 19J were In the cracldnc
of tuD•scale 1Dduatr7 waacewacer treac- proved control of the amount of am- C"'B·l or lube <•C'') subcaterortes. 'l'hls
I'BIUAL IEGiml, VOL 40, NO. 91-fUISOAT, MAY 20, 1975

RUlES AND REGULATIONS 21949
cool1D8 water appea.rec1 ID tbe proc:esa cost. eaUmates, whereas t.he lndu.stry has § &19.1:: Effiuenl linaotation• ~ruodrllnr•
da•IUlacaUons for the cl'1lcltlns &nciluae swrtrested that the costs actua.Uy are as r<"pre•enunc the de-"e ot etnurnl
reanerta.llYIDI those ref\nertes aa extra much as 158 percent. hl;.her thaa ortgt- r<"duc:tion 1111.:unable b, the •ppli.,._
wc:ushlan·· wtuch wtU make tbe reaula- nallr esUmated. This da.Jm was believed uon ol the be••
practoc:oble conlrnl
tlons euler to 01ttala. !or suc:b re4ner:tes. to be totall7 UDreallsUc !or several technolotn" currenl17 ••••lable.
EPA does noc ~Mlte"e that the acesa reuons. SpcCillca.Uy, the eaUmates ca> • • •
wacer aJJocaUon.s tor Ule crac.IW:Ir aad
lu.be subcaceRrtes reQWre mocW'l.:.ttoa of
should not. Include "sunk costs" Cthose
costs thac alree.Q have been Lacres.secl ------------- l!llluuu Ua>IIAUullll
tile reiUiacJons. such mocWlcatlon would ln. the pasc Cor poUuUoD abatemeatl.
have t.be e~ecc ot decreasfnr the QU8.DU· NeJt.her mould co.stl whtcb would be £1111... 111 A.•.,..eofd•-.1•
tr ot poUutantl allowed to be c1Lscbarsed Incurred regardless at EPA reiulatlons di~IIIClmollc !JI.ulmum lor •a.lu• lOr UUriY
be Included Ira the estimated costa of t.he UII'O ... dar CUIISIIC'UUWe l'lu" I
bJ' reftnertes La tbese subc:Atecortes. Pe- 1111111 no&ue-1-
Croc:belll.lcal a.nd IDterr&ted reftaenes ;utdellnes. 'tberetore. a.n 1Dcrease ln the
would be lesa a4'ecsecl. s.LDce tbe ortl1a.al coat esUmates of 50 ~:~erceDt Is more thaa
1!ow c1aca tor ~subc:&tesortes IDc:lUded adequate to test tor the posslbWty that
a refal.iVQ lotrU llrDDOC'UGD ot oace- tbe ortcma! cases were In en"'Or. nts Is
pardcularlJ" tn&e because I& Ia Uke(T UlaC BODI ............. :::1 ............ . 1%.0
Cbrau;A cooUDa water. TS8 ............... IS.I ........... .. IU. I
n Ia cJear, Ill &EU' evenc. tbat tbe solu- a.aJ' once ~ruses whlc:b =llbt bave coc •............ 117............ .. lll.l
:1.7
ra.tsed the costs sance Cbe ort;1Dal l l l l o n d -...... 1.11 ............ ..
tloaa gropoaed bJ' the co111mea&ers would l'loonm. 11111............ . ,lr.l
·-
be Laagproprtace. Since the resu.~auo~ aaalysls was made would be ol7'set bF tbe ......_..ciS.
are bued upon actual ~:~ertormacu:e br conse"aUYe auumpcton.s which were Ammonia u N ..... Ul ............ . 1.n
Sulllde ............. uv ........... ..
redzlertes ID eacJl IUDCSCoeiOIT, IC would bwlc tau the ortsnnal co)1t estimates. Too .. cllramlum ... ~ ............ . ..v
be absUrd to attemoc to raodU7 them on ne cosc estimates are based upon a II•••••"-"'
rPII"'''IIiuaL
cz:a ........... .. .011
Ule basla of ret:Uiattoas dest;ned tor otber complete activated slud;e treatment pU ................. Wllllln Ill• .......
1Ddu.crtes. :W.Oreanr. no '"Wei'lhdnl fac- s7stem Lncludlnlll equa UzaUon, ftoC3Uon Lll ... t.O.
tor'" Ia necessaf'1 to accoanc for ~:~ecro ceils. and poUsb.lng with mtxec1 media.
cllemlca.l operauoaa. slnce Ule dows con- ftlters. Bowenr. tram the daca before '&IICIIIII 1111118 1-"'" - 1.1111 t111C ol '-~doe• I
trtllac.ed by such aperadons are tully the Aa'alCJ', IC Is clear that such au. elab-
reCecCed 1D the 4ow daca trora oecru- orate S7S'I!ZD wtU not be reqwred In all ann1 ............. 111 ............. .
.cbemle&l mel LD&etrSted redames used =ses. Ot the plaacs which are &ebleviDC TSS ................ .t..l ............ ..
---.
to deveiOll tbe rerulaUoas. Ule Umltadoas. a number use oaly aera- cnu• ............. n-2 ............ .
Ulluod.,.. ...... U ............. .
C30t Oae commencer &r~Ued c.ha& the tion latroons for treatment. Where ade- 1'- - ........... ..
Umlt&Uon tor baavlllenl. chromium wu quate laud Is av:rJlable ac a ru.soaable Aa>mcmla•N ... 119 ........... .. 4.!1
lmreUODRble smce tec!moloo to raeu- case. the coats of coascrucC.LDr a lacooa Sullld.e ............. 11113 .......... . .IIZI
are IUCb law concencraUoas wu uaava.U- srsc.em caD be coastdera!IIT lower IJiaD T•... cll"""lu"'.... 122 .......... ..
u..........., 0.10 ............. .
1171
.CIUM
&IIIe. t.be cases a.ssoctated with lnst&Wnl an F"hrwmum.
Tbe COIDIDI!nter was correct. C'oase- activated slud1e s:ncem. Moreover. tha 1•11. \TlUolll ""' ......
quenCIJ'. the acbJevaGle caDceacraUon for ooer:nl.rlr coscs of a .._oon s,.cem are a.o ... v.o..
hezavaJent chromium bas been c:hanled m..LD.lmal. Thus. It EPA coet esttmates are .-------·--------
tram 0.005 m"/1. to 0.02 mrtl Ill the ln error. the,. are raore Ulceb to over- lbl • • •
amended resulaC1ons. IC&te. rarber Chan to anderscate. tlle re- 1 1•Size factor
!3U Several commencers stated thac qul.red capital and ooen.Unr casta. 1.000 ttlll ot 1-IOC.Il .Stae
EPA 1111dereselmated the costa of a.chift- <c> As a result at the rev1ew unJc:r- per sueam ar· turor
lDa comDUaaee with the reruJarlons. tall:ea b)' EPA In resoon.se to I"Ubllc cc::a- t.esa UI&D. 24 1------------·••••• I. 02
!'PA reexa.mtned u:ur eeonomlc lmga.cc raeat ~a the promwrated recuJ.aUon.s. 2:1 0 1o0 til...................... I.IUI
anaiJW UIUIIIIDII tbaC the COIC at COlD• aad upon the modUicatlons thereto pro- 50.0 1o0 141--------·-·······-·· 1. Ill
piJ&ace WGuld be ~ percenc ht;.her than posed on Occ.ober a. 1914, the Collowtac
the coecs estftnated when the resruiatlons 15 0 lllr
100.0 co • 1::at.a__
··---------·----------
_____________ • 1. 211
1. 2e
c.baaii!S have been made ID the re;ula-
were ortl1na117 ana.l:rzed. nat Is. the Uoas as gromulpted: 125 0 co ltl.l •••••••••• _________ 1. 50
conclusions ot the aaal7sls were c:bectred
usiq con estimates thac •ere 50 ~:~ereeac
Revision ot the proposed amendment
aad promul;ated noguJ&Uon: 150.0 r2 cres&•r---------------- 1. 57
b1aber Cban those shown In the eco- CU The proposed amendmet.l have 121 Process taccor.
n.olllic llnpacc report cEP.-. :z:~on-74- beea groraul;ated wltDout change <See P'roc:n1
020) far BAT treatment and Cor the ...,. 3g PR. 31069) : f'rac- COIU!i'&RU.Oil:
m~:~lanc cost excraPOiatiDn csee Table m toea UI&D. :z.te ••••••••__________ /fiCfOI'
a 52
r2> The achievable eoncentraUon Cor co l.te, ____________________ _
on pqe II-30'. The coaclustoa at tbls h.exavalenc chromtum has been chana-ed :s.5 co t.te. ___________________ _ 0117
:z.:~
II!NtUVltJ' aaalysts was that. the Impact. tram .oos rDir/1 to 02 mrl1: aad • 5 co s.ta. __________________ _ 11.80
of the ~CloDs would noc be ap. 131 'nle daU7 aad montb.l)' "artabaU- 0.116
predali..IJ' c:hanled evm It Cbe casu •ere ttes for suspended soUds haVl: been 5.5 loO '-"·--------------------
1. 07
...umed to be 50 ~:~erceac higher. Thus.
..,ea 1f this assumoUon abouc cosc.s •en
ch&nled tram 2.9 and 1.7 to 3.3 aad. 2.1 11.5
1.0 loO ll.tl.--·----·-······
co , ... __________________ _
, 0 loO ' te ________________ _
I. IT
1. 2T
CCD'I'eCC. the result.s of tbe lmoacc 1WctJ' resoec:U ve.l7. 1.liJ
40 C'PK Cbapr.er I, Subc:ba11ter N, Part
aad lobe approprla&eae~a ol tbe resula- T.a co T.ll8---·-··············-· 1.51
Uoaa wou14 be uacnaqed.
Spec:Ulcally, u.slDI the bJ;her case aa-
419 Is beretly ameaded u sec torch below
to be ~ecUve JUDe 19. UrTS.
U co Lt11-------------· 1.1M
1. 7t
1.0 loO t.ca.
.... co • --- _________________
--------------- _
IWDDUoa. tbe aaa17sls lDd1cates tbac a Oac.ed: .,.,. 9, 1815. I. as
total at ten Sllall re.dnenes. represent- I a co 1.111 •••••••••••••••______ _ :a. 12
IDa a toCAI ol 33..GOO benoda per cia7 Rvssa.z. E. TII.ADf. 10 0 1o0 IO.tt,. ____________ _
1o.5 co 1o.N. _______________ _ 2.31
CSIIIIC1CJ', would bit econo.!!Uc&U7 UU'I!a&- Admm~rrrtor.
I!Ded bF lobe reiUI.aUoas. 'rllro of these n- 2. "'
Ern.VDT LD11TAno11s avmu.uru 101 n a5 10
11 u.tl.----------------
co u 118, _______________ _ J,Tl
4Aerles. repres&DI.lnc 7.000 barftla per E.la:s'I'DIG SOUIICI:s AHD BT.uo.uAS OP 2.118
ciQ capadC,., would face a sJsaLCcaa& PnFOIIIILUIC:. .uro PRI:Ta&An.&arr ST.a•o- 1.::10 co :1.2.
Cbla& ol c:loe\Aft. 'r.1ese esaenual17 lU'e AJIIIS POll N.w Soo•c:a POl nm P.-no- 1::1.4 loO 12 ... ·----------------~ :S.Sl
c.be lmpacr. proJecl.ed Wldu Use criGDal 1:1.18,
12 · · -_________________
------------ _
LZVK R~ PoDn" Senna CAn-
&IZ&I)'Us umc Cbe lo9er COR uUm&c.ea, COlT
13.0 loO 13.118. _____________ _
1S.6 co
:S.M
... 18
aad raa)' be a.ll'ected ID aa7 evmt. by lOY·
erammC&l ~X~Uc7. IU '111• tables 1D I 419.12 Ca~. 1111 11) 1•.0 or ca-car------------- t.. 211
TbJ.I lloi!JWUYity IU2a!ysls was COD- and <2>, aad <c> <1> and <2> a.re rev1sed IC) • • •
ducl.ed uaiD8 a 50 ~:~ercerac ~rease ID Ule to read as toUowa: (1) •••
FIDUAI. IIGISn•, VOL 40, NO. 9~1UISDAY, MAY 20, l97S
158
219GO RULES AND UGU:.A T:ONS
I'Pof:u• Proe•••
----
. ,.....,
Mulmum•or
P:ll-1 IIIIIIIA&Inl•
" .......... n1
•.au" Cnr \hlrl 9
dour
~ COIUIII'IftUOD:
• T 0 CO T · · · · · - - · · · - · - · · · · - · ·
T a to 7 "··•••••••••••·-···--
,_,_
I.~~~
I. Sl
~- COdlr'IJ'aUOD:
1 o co T . t • - - - - - - - · - · · · - · ·
1 a 10 T.ltll ••- · · · · - · · · · - · · - · -
/OIIlttW
I. 38
I. Sl
enn...uLI•• da••
1.0 to 8 ····-·-······-····-- I. M 8.0 CO 8.18 ••••••••••• · - · · · - · · · · I. M
lllall IIGI · - - 8 •.1 to 8.88·-•••••••••··-••••••• I. 78 8I CO 8-"--··-··-·······--• 1.
1.0 to 1-••--------------
71
1.111
)l.ulr nnlla "llooaluU s-ruhlc .....,.,.., ftowl
11.0 to II • • · · · · · · · · · · · - · - - · - · · 1.116
I.S 10 1.1•--------------------- 1 12 1.5 CA 188·-··--·-·-·······- 2.1:1
10 0 to 10.48 ••••• --···-••••••• 1 31 •0.0 CO IO.tll ••- ••· - - · · - · · · · · - 2. 31
IO.S CO IO.H •••••· - - · - - · · · · - 1 51
lhll"---······
T..,. .••••.
• G.DI....
em••.....•••
• • •• O..CDI
.11!1 u.o
I' co n.••---------------·- 1 n
IO.S to 10 " · · · - - · · · · · - · - · - · ·
u.s u.a•----------------
11.0 Co U.te••- · · · · - · - - - - · ·
2. 51
:1. '7:1
'"·--·
I"IIU '··•· •••• Zl· •••••• •.••••• II U.88 •••••••••••______
.I to 1118
DIS • .. ... .118 10 1118
12 a to 12.t1---------·····-----
pll ••••• "ll~lnllw...,p
IUIIOtloV.
......... .. 12.0 to 12.••-------------------
IU CO 12.11-------·---·-·····
13.o co 1:a.••-------------
3. 2.
3. $3
:1. M
12.1 co 1312.88--------------·--
.... _______________
:1. 21
:J. 1M
$3
or..,_._____________ ..
1~.0 ~-
1::1.5 to 1:a,.gv______________ .. 18 co 1~-"-------------- t. 38

IU 01' sn-eer••·--·-·-··-- I. :II
lt.O
1::1.5 18
IIODI...-........ 0..40...........- 0..21

• • • (C) • • •
C3J The :abies ID 1 419.151&), Cb) <U (1) •••
TSI...... ....... . :11......... - - . 1:
c·oo •...........
1.1 ............ _ 1
.:.. aad (2). IUicl I c) 1u IUicl 12) an revtsecl
IJ&IIIId-...... 1211............. ·-
to read u .foUowa:
--
pU........ _, ..... Wl~ll:.:~- ................ -
1419.15 S&andarda of perlon:~~aace 1- A-aldllll•
Mu&mnm• .wu.. tor 1111r1r
(2t • • • .nr-Ciar OII,_UUftl\an
(&) ••• lllal.l-t._..s-
sar-&llmllauo..
IIODI ..... - •• - •• 0011 ..... - .... . G.Qft

TSII................ u:J:I .... _ .......
cnu •..........._ .:n ............. . .U:I
.Ill
Oil Md - - · · DIS ............ , .011.10
pH ............ ___ Wllllln ,.._
....... llftlla ~ -CUIIIIIID-DI llowl ...... uco
t.Oo
Q.GCII
.......
DOl" .. ·····- O..IMII ............ .an 80 , .__________ ................. 1.1
'nllt. • 00 0 .liD ............ .
........
t:ou1 .......... 11 ............. . Tll8 ...· - · - · · ·..- I. 2. .......... - . ._,

p&L.
...........
U l l l l l l l - · - .. 111.1 .......... .
•...... 'AI"'In ,,_
enD• ...... ·-···· •• ............. _
~=..------- ~=--.:===
L~
80., ____ ..... 0..10 ............ . Q.21
7.1&. CDGIIIOUIIdl.
Am-la u H ..... z.a..............
8Uiftd• ............. cr.a.............
ft=~:"--- ~~i~:::::::::::
=
.011
I. :J
TSS............_ •• 'Zf ............. .
cnu •.............
0 1 1 - -...... 1211
~• ..............
..........
pll................. WIUIIn ,.._
.17
-~
•••
._
Gall ...... 1.1110
·-
II.Q.
tiU'DIDIIIIIIo
Q.2l pll •••• - ........... lll'llllln lllo .... ,_ ............
~ ...........................
DON .......... 0..411 .............
17 ....... u (2) •••
............-
.LD
'"'_
1'11111 .... ..
pll.... ..... ":::.~ ..

.....
1.'1 .............
t/61
----- --- -----.
P!lllllllnlllnollillla,.
Aw,..,..-pttldiiiiiY
110111____ .......... 2 ........ ___ _ 1.2 )IR\Imllftl .... P1 1 IIIW ltw lltlriY
• • TSR ................ I.D ............ _ Lt
IL2
...,. ..., flar •u•..eul.l •• ' •1•
, ..... 1101 UCIIf'lll·-
1"1)111 ........- .. ZJ.7 ........... _
12) The tables ID. 1 419.131b) 11> ancl Ull n m l -...... l.l ............ - '111
12) are ntvbccl to re:~cl :u~.foUowa: l'llenollo 181 ........... - .ala
!Maute Ulol .. tllikllftiUO .... oublc IIIUI ... ol now1
comiiOUIIda.
1 419.13 Emuen& llmi&adou ~r~~idrlinee Am..-ouH ..... I o ............. . .u
rep-ndn• the dcpoee ol cmuenl ~ulllde ............. an ............ . 012
T.,...lcllraml....._ ... 0114 ............ . a:n' RODJ............. a.aca ........... . 0..11.11
reduction aa&aiuble It, the applica- Tll-4............. ... RD ............ .
tion ol the brll a ...ilable aecbnoloQ
_ _ icall,. .cn.... ule.
...............
UuuaiOft& .111113 ........... .
pU.-........ _ .... lll'ltllln lllo
.GilD
C:DIJI,, ........... t7 .......... ..
011 a n d . -...... 0111 ........... .
tr:l
1\K~·
...... u pll ................. "IUI.In llle
• • • co t.Oo ,..,,.e.a~a
II.IL
lb) •••
( U Size .factor. (b) •••
UJ Size taccor•
11:"'111111 Ulll&.o (!*lnda '*' I.GDO pi ol ftowl
.Siu
1.000 ltlll ol tNda_. 11ft' •-ua d&f: /M'- .Siu
/t~~~ror
D 0 1)1•• •••••• ••• • •• a.ta- •••••• •••••• CL i~
r- Ulaa 2 1 . 1 - - - - - - - - - - 1. lr.l 1.000 ltlll of t...S.COCI: per acrttam da1:
Leu UlaD 2t.8------------ I. 02
TSS................ •':1. _ ...........
COU1 ............ l.D.............. LU
211.0 C O t e · · · · · · · · - - · - · - · - - I. 08 011 uld .......... 1211 .. .......... 1.1ll
50.0 CO 14.1••••- · - - · - - · - - - I. I I 211.0 10 t 1 . 8 - - - · - - - · - - - - - I. 08
PU- ............... Wl&llln lh• ..................
ta.O CO 111.0 •••- - · · · · - · - · - - - I. 28 50.0 CO T t . O - - - · - · - · · I. Ill ....... u ..
11 0 to 111.8---···--:........... I. 21 t.O..
100.0 CO 121.8 ••••• - · · · · · · · - · · • • I. 38
121.0 CO ltlt.l---·--·-·•••••• I. 50 100.0 CA 12t 1--·-···--·-· I. 38
UIO.O 01' pwa&oar···-··--··-· I. S7 12.1.0 CO lt8 · · · · · · · - - · - · - · · ·
110.0 v poeacor••--·-······-··
I. SO
1.11 •
12) !'rocesa .factor. (4) The ta.bles ID I 41D.22 Ca) and <b)
P'rllce• codpraiiOD: ,.,,.
l'roca•
o.a
12) Proc:es: factor.
Pracna codruraciOD: turor
Praea• (U mel 12J a.re re\1aecl to reacl u .fol•
lowe:
L..., ~ 1ti······--····--- Laoa Lbaa 1t8---··-·-······-·· 0.12 I 4l9.2Z EIRucnl limila110na llrUidclinca •
2•.S co~-··---------------
3.1 ro t.t•---·-···-··------
0.17
0.80 2 ..1 co :1.••--------------- o. 17
:I..S co ····----------------- o. 80
rep..-ndn• lhe dcc;rce ol elllucnl
redacli- all•onal:tle lr, tho applica-
t.l co ····---------------
o.aa t.l • •·••------------------ o. aa
5.1 ro l.lla ••••• - - - - - - - - - 1.07 don ol &.he IMaa prHiical:tle con&rol
II CA 11.88.--··•••••••·-··-··- I. 07 ledsnolo.,. aarrenll' andal:tle.
I. 17 1.0 to I 11----········-·····•••• I. 17
1.0 ro •·••--···----------
1.1 CO 1.111--··•···-·--··-· I. 2'7 1.1 to 1.88.·--··--------· I. 2'7 (&) •••
fiDUAL UOISTII, VOL •o, NO. 98--fUISOAY, -r 20, 1975
159
RULES AND REGUtAnOHS 21951
12> Procesa factor. ,.,._.,.
~ eaaasunaaa: ,_,_
A....,...aldnlly Prac.- co~noa: 'P.S 10 ' " - - - - - - - - - - - - s.n
s. 53
ftlue..,.lblfty
a»>UUC"UU't'W da'l
lllall ""' u-.1-
' - !IlliG 2 . 4 8 - -
2.8 CD :S.tl,,_,,.,, _ _ _ _ _
3.5 CD t.lol •••••- · · · - - - -
0.58
0.83
0.'74
1.8 10 1.118-------------
1.0 to 8 . 4 • - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I 0 to I 41 ••••••••••••••••••• -
1. 8'7
1. 112
0.88 18 ~--------- 1• •
11o1U1e uiU 1111--- pe 1,11111 aol al 1__.1
8 a s.•--------------
4.5 10 8.41----------"'-----
CD
1.00
1.08
01'
•
8001----·····- &2 .............
1'!111..•• - - - · · · - · ......_____ _
cou •.......... -
lA. I
12.1 8.8 108.119--------------------
8.0 CD 8.t1-------------
'7.0 CD ' 7 . 4 1 - - - - - - -
1. II
L21
C'r> The tables ID I 419.32Ca) and lb)
(U aDd <2> are l"Htted to read u tol·
2111., ............. IIQ
T 5 CD '7 111---···--···--····- 1.n Iowa:
..-------
Olllllld . , _...... Lt ............. . t.l
.._
....._.... ~
.10
Ll
1.0 CD 1.41 ••••- - - - - - -
LB 10 1 . 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - 1.8'7
1.83
§419..3Z EIRaenl Umiladana pidellnt"e
A I I I - M H - IU ...........- 1.0 CD 1 . 4 1 - - - - - - - - · 1.1:1 l"e1'raet~dn• the depoee ol eiRuen&
IUIAdl. ............ II ........... -
, . _ ciiNift"WF •• a ..............
.1111
Zl
lA or ~·---------------- s.• redaelioa allaina&le bY' the apiMic•-
l i - of me t.e.. pncttcaWe eanual
a ...- , .-..........-
-
.Oil
.tuwm&- • • • • • technola., ~ a•ulaJale.
P I L - - - - · WIUIID IIIP Cl) T2le tables lD 1 419..26 ca> aDd Cb)
....... u .. tU &Del C2> are revised to ra4 as tol• (&) •••
...... .... --
lows:
I 419.25 Scanduda of p e r i ' - r-
80nl.......- •• u ........- ...
TIIIL................................. . Ll (&) •••
~-
~-"-~---
··----
cou• ............. :t...............
ou ODd-...... a.o ..............
"·----·---- -- 1.1
... _........
--
1 .0 A.-.ald .. ll'
-- ...,._da,.
BulftdP ............ au ............. .liN Mulllllllft .... -larlhlr\l'
c-..--.. ..II,.............
TN!......,
Jl_ ... _ _ _.
.CIII ..lfWICIIUW dan 8001---------· ,.,..............
Taa ............_ .. :za.t ............ .
11.4
14.1
IUD
,._,
pL.........-
..........
WIUIID liM
COD • ............. 210 ..............
on llftd . -......
·~-
11.1 ............ .
.A .............. • 1:0
Clll) • • •
\U SS.factar.
lA
~~===:::::= lt.~::=:::::
cnoa ............. '"'"""""""'
L7
7.2
••
AllllftMUI • H ..... D.t .............
IIDIIIU ............. .%2 ..............
,._ciii'OIIIIa-. -» ..............
&:a.:=:.. .-........____
.......
--
ICI.I
. 30
,!liD
'*' r:a.::.....
-
111111111- ................. Z.l
s.ooo ot r....,_.
pu ni':AIII caa,:
.s&u .111..........- - .Oil pH................. wtWnllle
,...
turor
"'"""-·"---· IlL'-----------· .....
Ll
--
r - uau 2U. _ 0.11
25.0 10 48.1••- - - - - - - - - 0. Ill ~~-~ j~::::::::::
H•••-•
It
10.0 CD Tt 1------------- 1. 1M .11211........... ..
'75.0 CD 88.1..- - - · · · - - · · · · - 1. 13
100.0 10 1ll11.8-------------- 1. 23
clllalftlwa.
.........
pH ................. Wlllllftllle
11001............. 12.1 ......... .
...
LS
sao 10 1d.J.
_.. "-.:S
_ 1. • 1111.0. TSII............. •~ ........... .
1ao.A- pacer_ _ _ _ _ l.tl CUI) I . . . . . . . . . . . 14 ........... ..
C2J Procesa factor'.

z-ODaJII'IftU-:
..,._.. ua- a..._____________/Mior
o. aa
,.,_ ... lbcllall 11111111_....- 1.11111 IIIII allftdllaclll
OIIIIKI..-...... 111 ........... ..
..,.__
I'll......... ............. .
Ann-III•H ..... LJS ............ .
Sullkl• ...... .11711 .... ..
l.l
,0125
Z.l
.au
~~:::::·:::::::: ~:::::::::=::
1.1
z.s TMU .-llftllftiWD.- Ill....... .. 107
2..5 CD 3.41---·······-······- II. 53 ~~~~ ..;.u;.::::: :~7~::::::::::::: ll lin••-•
C'ftromaum.
011. . . . . . . . .. .oorJ
3.5 CD 4.41---········--····
U CD l.tl,--··---~---··
0. '74
0. 18 ..... ....
~~.
_.. --------·--·
Aonmonla u H ..... 1.1 .............
!II
.!liD
z.a
pH ................. Wlllll11 UM
_._o ..
IIJI.
a.a 10 s " - - - - - - - - - - 1. oo
:;.~:::n.;;;;.~wa::: ::!::::::::::::: .017
·--
1.0 CD 8.t1---·-··-·••••••••• 1. 08 .ooe
Ll CD 8 1 1 - - • - - - - - - · 1. 11 u.........., .aan. ......__ _ . oa:a (b) •••
'7.0 10 '7 4 1 - - - - - L »
'7.5 CD 111--------------
1.0 CD 1.41 ••••-••••·--.:._.
U CD I " · - - · - - · · - · - · · · ·
1. tr
L 53
1. 8'7
.........
pU ................. Wllllln IIIIo
lei.Q.
cu Size factor.
1.000 bl:lt at reedacoc& pv acna.ar.-caa,:

.St.e
tacror
1.0 CD I 41 ••••- - - - - - 1. 1:1 " - • Ul.aa 24.8---------------- 0. '73
lA OP pwalel'••- - - - · 1• • Cb)
Cl> Size factor•
..a ro
50.0 c..
41.1 ·----------------- o. '78
o. 53
• • • • • '74.8-----------------
'75.0 10 88 1..................... 0.11
f5) The tables ID I 411..23UU CU IDd .SIIIe 100 0 CD 124 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0. ,I
C2) are revtsed to read as follows: 1.000 btl& at reecs.toc~: Pft' . - a caar: /t~~~Cor
125.0 10 148 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1. , .
1419.23 EIR-• Gllli..tfone Jnridelines L - llllU 2 1 . 8 - - - - - · · · 0. II 110.0 ar ~--------- 1. 13
28.0 10 tl 1 - - - - - - · - · · · · 0. Ill
N1ilftMIIIill• the depoee ol eflluen1 <2> Procesa faccozo.
50 0 10 '74 ~----------- 1. 04t
redactieft lltlainaWe It,. lhe appli--
u- of die be« •••ilaWe tedaaoWC7 '78.0 10 Dl.l------------
100 0 co 124.8_______________ 1. 23
1. 13 l'Ncea CGD4S~&nttoa: /GCCar
l"rot:u•
-•mletil:r ...;~awe. 121.0 10 141 ' - - - - - - - - - - &. 311

WSI t i l - 1.41------------- 0. '73
180.0 al' pwa&.ar.__ 1. 41 t.S 10 S.41----------------- o so
Cb) • • •
5.8 10 8 "------------------ 0. 91
cu Size factor. C2> Process factor. 8.0 10 8.41--------------------- 0. 91
1.000 bill r..sacoc&
o1 .s&u l'roceu u
'P 0 '7.41......................
10 8 "---------------------
10
1. 08
I. 1'1'
pao · - - da'· tcror Ptoc- caadi'U'D&Ioa: /GI:tor
r..- uau 24.1---------------- o. tn t.- taaa 2.41------------------ o sa 'I's 10 '7 "----------------------
II 0 CO 8 tl .....- ••••••••••••• .:.
1. 28
l.lll
2.5 co 3.41------------------ o. 83
21.0 CD 41 1 ......- · - · · - · · · -
50.0 CD '74.1--••••-••••••••-
0. 10
1. 1M
48 10 • ·~--------------------- 0. '7t
3 8 co 8.41_____________________ 0. 88 0 ro
I8.0 co I8.18 •••••----·-···-----
41 ••••••••••• _________ 1. 55
1. ~I
'Tli.O 10 88 ~----·······-·-··--
100.0 CD l:at.e_______________
I. 13
1. 2:1 8 5 10 8 11---------------------- 1. 00
1.11 01' pwa&er---------------· 1. T2
10 8.41 ••••••••••- - - · - - • •
128.0 10 1 4 1 . 8 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. 31 8.0
8.5 10 8.n___________________ 1.I. IKI
11 ca, The tables lD t 419.J3(b) (1) aDd
110.0 - lftDCDr-- 1. u '7 0 10 '7.41-------------- 1. 28 C2J are revt.sed co read u foUow8:
FIDDAI. ncmn. VOL 40, NO. 91--NISDAY', MAY' 20, 1975
160
219:52 RULE!: AND REGULATIONS
1 •UIJ-13 Er.1••rnl limit:~lio"" ~idrlinee cn Sl.ze factor. 1u Cl:o ractar.

N'PI'I'Wtllinlr 1he d~peoe ol emuenl SIU She
N'Ciucllun allainable by 1he appllca- i.aao 11111 ot tnclaiOCk per ICI'WIIII claf: turor 1.000 IIIII at tMclaCOCk per acnam cllf: /UitiP
lluft ol &he brei •••ileble 1echaolo17 Leu uu.a 2t.lt-------------- o. 73 Llml ~~~~ t8.1t-------------- 0. 11
..•u, ...
--mica.lly achie9able.
Size !actor.
2J.O
00 0 CO
.. ,.ttt.tt
...••••••••••• --···-·
_________________
'l'S.O co II 1-------···•••••••••
100.0 &o 121.1. •••••• •••••••••••••
O. 83
0. '711
0. IL
0. Ill
SO.O 110 T4.tt •••••••••·-··••••••• 0. ":"t
,., 0 110 "•---------------------- 0.11
100.9 ~ l:lt.tt___________________ o. 88
125.0 110 148 •------------------ 0. "'
Slu 110.0 .. 1'74.1------------------ 1. 01
1.aao 111111 ot tncla&oek per stlum 1111:
L.,• uaaa 2'-•---------------
/OI:rt/lr
a. 73
12J.O co 1411.11••••••••• - · · - · · ·
rso.o or p-:ac.r______________ 1. 13
1. OS
11!1.0 to 11Mt 8------------------ 1. 14
:aoo.o or pwacer••••••---·-·-·-- 1. 11
12) Process factor.
:aa.o co•t.o •• -------------- o. 1s 12) Process factor.
,....,
50.0 ... .,..
C::ll ' l ' !______________
.lt----·--··-·• a. 8:1
0. !II l'rOciiU
~'roc:.- COILGI\UIUOa: /lll:ltlr .Prac:•••
a." ~ coaA~uoa: turar
100.0 .. 1 2 l . t t - - - - - - - - - - -
IU.O CO ld.tt •••- - - - - · -
IIO.G .• .,.acar••- - - - - -
I. 01
I. 13
tA•
u .. $.(1t-----------
uu.a · · · - - - - - - - - - o. 13
0.80
U co U l l - - - - - - - · · - - · · o. 11
Lew ~~~~ 41.48.·----·-······
S-A 110 1 d.·-···
,._. to 'l'M--------------·
O. II
O. Ill
1. oo
12) PrDcesa fadal'.
,.,.... LO CO I 4 1 . · - · - · · · · · · · · · · · -
S.A CO. 1
'7.0 . 1_____________
,._ •• .811---·-···-·•
0. 18
1.
1. 08
1'f
1.0 ~ 1.4•-------------------
U CO l.tt8·-·-·-·-······-·
1. 01
1. II
. . . . _ aaaprauaa: J~or
,_. w '
I 0 co ....
- ______________
" - - - - - 1.a
1. :18 1.0 CO 1.41---·----····-···· I. att
z- uaaa t.ta ••- - - - - - a. n . . . . . . "···------------------ 1. tl
u
t.a ra L41----------·-
..... o. so
___________ a. ttl 1-A CO l . l t t . - - - - - · · · · · - 1. Ol 10.0 co 10.41-·•-••••••••••••- 1. f3
s.o .......___________ 0." 1.0 co ll.tl•• - - - · - · · · · - - · · · - 10.8 ~ 10.88----·······--·-··--· 1. n
or &r•••r·---·-·---- I. Ill
u.o coco n•----------····--
u.••···--·--·--·----- n
U .
'7.0 LDtt------------
CO. ,._ •• ____________
, . . . . , ..._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1. 11
I. 01
1.21
II-A
UOJ The tables ID I 411U2 Ia» anli I~»
1. T.l
u.a
12.0 co 12.•1 ••••• - · - - · - · · · · · ·
1.
1.111
2. IS
(U azad <:u are re11sed to read u fol· 12.5 &o 12-"-----······· 2. :M
s.o .. a.••----------- ...
lUi CO~---···-···---···
att
1.S1
Iowa: 1:1.0 -
•
1"•-----------
• • • •
2. ..
tt.o co • · • • - - - - - - - - - - - - · 1. sa I 419.4.2 Emun~l llaai111ion• p.idelina

. . . . . . . .- - 1.12 acpr-..dn· the depee of omun~l ClU The tables ID I 419.431~) (U aa.d
• • • • • redued- allaiftlhle lrr lhe applica-
lion of the bfta ,...e&icable cona.ol
(2) are nmsed to read aa follows:
II) '1'2le tabla ID I 4111.35 Ia» &Dd lb) ._..--.,. _ ..,. ••UJabl.. I 419.43 Ema-1 Umiaadona pidelince
cU lolld C2) are reviled eo re&d aa fol· nptaeDiinl lfle dcpee of emnerU
---
(a) •••
loft: redaction all&inable b,. lhe appliCII•
1419..35 Stendarcla ol pa'l-•ncw lor don ol lhe bell eYeaJdole 1echnolo11'7'
---.Ja,. .dU..ule.
(&) •••
..
M••lmlllltlar
~-•r
A._elrlollr
._.,_ llw
-·~&In
"'l"r
dan
111111111011~-
•
. . .• • • •
UJ Size factor.
Slu
1.000 111111 ot tncla&ock per 1~-cla,.: /Kr-
r.- UliA
10.0 .. ____________________ 0o. '7\
.. ,., 41.tt.................... 74
RftN ••••••••••••• 50.1 ••••••••••••• ZLI '75.0 ...... ___________________ 0 81
...... - , .......... por · · - ... ., ............ Tllll •••••••••••••••• Dol ••••••••••• _ ZZ.T
---------------------------------
~,.__ ~t:::::·:::::: ...•
ILl
,.,,.,
nu-
'· 0
-""'•••IS.
0
1"11-lo- · - · · · .a
•••••••• •••••••••••••••
111.2......•...••
•••• ······-_
1111'
a.s
.JM
100.0
125.0
150.0
110 124.8---------------
to 140 •------···-·······
.. 174 0------------------
o. 8!1
0.117
1. 05
COD•
""••••..--.• ....
~
•• ••••••••.••••
• 1:11 ••••••••••••
.ua ............. 1.1
.rtn
""""'IIIia .. If..... ::3.1 •••••••••••••
lullllle •••••••••••• ..33 •••••••••• __ _
...
II. I
.ua
1'75.0
200.0
~ 110 0...................
or lft&&er•••••••••••____
I. 14
1. 10
--111M. ell--... ..............

A m - • H •.. 'lS.t ••••••••••••
II.._ ••••••••••• ItO •••••••••••••
IIU
••
TOIM
a...,..,,
dl--
Tf. ·•······-••
. •• 12» Process !actor.
T••l ell--._.. :D ••••• ••••••• II pB.---··--··· Wllllln lila .Prac:e••
,,._.,.
H _ _, -··········-· .1112 -UIO
LQ, Proce• COIIApraUOD: /tM: 1 Gr
pH. ••• .WIIIIIul,_ Lin ti'IIA 1.48................... 0 8\
........ u
~.
..
B.,.lllllllllllo 1 - - por 1.1111111111 e11-.-.1
e.a co ,. til------------···----
'7.5 COT "··-····-·•••••••••••.
o. 88
1. 00
I 0 . . ····----------------- I. 09
1-A ~ ••····-··---·--········- 1 on
IODI.....
Tll8
COD •
0 ••••
• ••• ?? ••••••••••••••
• •••••••
•.••••
1.20 ·········-··
f7 ••••••••••••••
4.1
1J
Zl
BOD1-----···•• 17.1 •••••••••••••
TSI ••••••••••••••• IU •••••••••••••
COD'· •••••••••••• 121••••••••••••••
011 ..... - - - · · · 1.7
1:'11111_.... l.lll----······-
..
lo.l
LO
10
•.a
1.0 ......•••
COII.d _____________________
----·············
10.0 CO 10.48---·-············-
IO.a CO IO.tt8·-·-··············
•. 41
1. 2D
I. t:l
I. ST
111111111-••••• 21 •••••••••• _ •• 1.1 ~.. .0111
u.o u.••---···-·-·-----·-··-
0 •••••••••••••
.....---.
............ Jllll •••••••••••••
•• Am-•• H •• _. u .....·--···· 11
co
u.s co u.eo.·-······-····-··---
1. 82
1 91
·- -
4111-•H ..••• Ll .••••••••••- . 11
"'''"""· ··········- m.
Ill.············ .au 12.0 110 12.48.·--·······•••••• 2. I 5
llala. ••••••••• 1110 •• ···-······ .CIZI T - _.. _ _ _ _ ·········-· .liD
12.5 .. 12.tttt---------------- 2. 34
0 •• •
TCIIII e l l -•••. Ill. ··-·•··-··

.,._._
lln•or- . -•••••••• - ••
01111 a ...........,
pB•••••· - · - · · · WltiiiR
.-...•••.- - .au
1U Ill' lftiC.I'•••- · · - · · · · · · · · 2. tt
pU •• •••••••••••• •• WIIIIIR U.
nooc-t.Oie ···-·······-··-
_u
LO..
U. ..
• • •
1.1. U2) The table. In I 419.45 Ia» and !b)
lbJ • • • (~) ... IU loDd C2J are revtsed to read a.s Col-
~-= .
I'IDUAI. IIOISTD. VOL 40, NO. 9a.-NISOAr, MA"t 20, 1975
161
IULES AND REGULAnCNS
---PC-
1 419.45 Scand....U ol per~_._. r_. cal • • • Cbl • • •
cu S1ze taccor.
(&) ••• Sl•
1,000 IIIII of t..Ucadl per e u - day: /Ot:ttw
lAM Uiloll 1::14.8----------- 0. T.l
125.0 10 111.1•••• - - - - - - - - - - - 0. ,.,
........ otdallp
....,_,........."
. .,...., ... UUI'IY
,..._......._ M - anlll ~ DU' I,DIIII aa• olllodatlldl
ITS 0 10 181 It----------- 18
100.0 '0 1'7t.1.---------------- 0 13
2241t-----------------
0. I I
o.
,__
200.0 10
2:115 or JNaWr •••• - - - - - - - - - - I. 04
au c........- ..... ,. • ..····-···- :S.I
ns................ ~J ........ - •• :lo.7 C2> Process taccor.
... --
COD I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. I'll I"Poccu
nu uoc1 - ...........--- 1.1 PfoDceM CGDJll'lftUDD! /OI!tOP
RftDI-··-······· Me ·•••·•• ··••
TSII •• ·-······-···
g.y~-~== ~:::::::::::·
!'·'· ····· · ····••
lA.'
~~·
I:B
...... 11.1. -·· .. ·-···
A I D - M H · · - ::S.t ...-······-
.IG
IILI
.1»
r - ua- e.••-------------
11.6 10 '·''-------------------
o. T5
Q a:l
,IJ laUido ............. ». -····-·-·· .Ill T.a 10 7.18-------------- 0. 92
• .._ .:1 ••• ---···-· Total .,....,....___ 11. -·····..··-
.aa 1.0 ~
ciL-·-
1.1 10 1.11
._..••_____________ 1.10
"=-~"-··· 21-t •••••••• - II. 7 g _ _, ·····-··"'" --------------· 1. 00
••
hi...,._ •. •••••••••• .220•••• ---·--
.II
n 1111----·..·-··- W\tlllll .... 11.11 10 ''8------------------ l. :3020
Tcrtalftl......._ • .U •••- - - ·
n.......,. •····---·- Clll
........Cita
..... e.a ~ ~------------------- 1.
····-·-······- ,.,.:. .....

•h- WIUII IN 10.0 10 10.41.-------------- 1. 42
lO.H.---·-·····------- I. M
t.l.
10.1 10
u.o 10 11.••--------------------
.H..................... 1. a
anrM..........-. 111 2 ............ .
Tl'i:! ........_ •••••• 11.2 ...... - .... .
roo • ............
...
IlL~
:'D
U.IIO II
12.0 to 12.48.·-·············•••
I. 8:1
I. 19
--
1311 ••• - ........ . 12.1 10 12 "···-----·---------· 1. 1T
011 u o c l -...... LO .... _ ....... . :u 13.0 or cnawr.................. 1. :ze
_
LJ
-1
BODI•••••• ···-··· 12.1••••••••••••
Tllll••••••••• - - - · U •••• -·····-· Ll ·-~-
-ltd&. lt. - · - - · - · ·
nu.,...-......
cnu • .••....•.••• u t6 Ammonia• H ••• - ~s ..... _ .. __ _ •
_...... "···········-- to S .I
.... - ....... .
...... 11111\d•
,..... .................. 1:11.
......-.... •• .:! .. ···-··· .._••
___ .. ___ .1118
p-..u. ................ .Oil .17 U51 The ~les ID 418 55 cal and cb)
_ .a ............ .
Bo. . .CIII
_.....
A_,..MN .•••• U .••••••••••.•. S.l cu aad 121 ant amended to I"Nd a.s
eMailI -•
...._.......
........... • •• • •• • • • • 11711 •• ··-•• • •• •
TOial cltPDml--.. IIIII ••••••••••••• pR.............. ~':: ... roUcnn:
=--·-········
---
Clllr2 90.
tn••... -. Wlllllll- 1419..55 Sa.ndardo ol pet"(ornu~nrr r....
..... Cb) • • • taa • • •
1 u Size rae car.
0 0
Cb) •
Siu
(U SIZe raceor. 1,1100 bill ot t..ucoca per tll'Nnl cl.,: /at: lor
I.QIIOrbltl
- DfUlloA
C...S.CDCII pel' ICI'HID day: _
.... ________________
"'-
/DI:TM .._ ua- 12t.l. --------------
12S 0 to 1,1.11 ••• -----··· - · · · · -
0.'73
0.711
,.lfturnl
.........lfof'l:llllu ... UIIIIUhl ,,..
A.~Of•lrUhr
Yalurt fnp lhh & v
08:1
1----------------- 0.11 UO 0 to ITt.lo ••••••• - •••••••••• ... , 01• ... ,. Cllftii'III'IU.IWfl 1l11"'"
0.'74 ITI.O to IM 1 ••••••••••••••••••• o. 9\ &nail ........... -
110.0 '0 '74
TS.O '0 111.1 •••••••••••••••••••••
100.0 10 1:114.1 ••••••••• ______ _
0.11
o.u 200.0or~ pwacer·-------------
2:15
2:114 8----------------- O.H
1.0.
Aloufellltlll ,.,.,.....,..,_,.CIIIJmlof-lolo• at
I :IS 0 10 Itt '·-······-··•••••• 0.11'?
I. 05 C21 Proc:esa fa.c:COr. ------ ------
1110.0
175 0
:MMIO
10 IM
01'
1-------·-··-··-
10 .,. • - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
lfta&er·-········-····· •••• 1.1t

Pl'oc.- OOa.lll'lftCIOa: /CII:tfW
l'roeaa IIUUI .... - ... ··-· 1111 .......... .
TS.'I - · ......... .JI.I ........... .. ;i" .!
cuu 1 . . . . . . . - ..ll.~ ............ .
121 Procesa faccor. r- UiWI II t9..................
0. Tl
Pllenullll
...
nn ...,. .......... u.e. .. ...... ..
JD ............ ..
••'~
1
14
I"Pfft:u. a.a 10 T.tl ••••••• ·----·------- o. a crnn•..•ruta..
Jlrac:8s. COD41UftDOII:
t . . uaaa e..a_______________ /OCIDr
a. 11 1.$ Co '·"·-------------------- 0.112
1.0 10 I t1---·--·-·······-·· I. 00
AlntnftlllaM H ... _ • .:I. I
SUIIIIM ............. :11 ...... ..
•••••••• IU 1
'·r7
1.1 10 1-"---------···-··----- 1. 10 'l'ooLal """""''""'·· •• M .... .
L5 10 '·····--------------- 0.. lf~~t:Uftd••' IIU • ••••a• l&:l
I 0 10 I 411·-··-··-·········•••• I. 20 l'"htn1111Un't..
T.5 10 T.!HI ••••- · · · - - · · · · - · · I. 011 8.$ 10 1.91 ••••• - ••· - - - - - - · · · · I. 30
1.0 10 I. at Jill ................ W\l~1n "'"
10 1.411 ••••• ---··--·-····- 10.0 10 10.41--------------- I. U ....... u
1.5
1.0
1.18
I 41 •••
1.1 10 198 •••••••
•••••••••••••
·-··-----·•·•
______________
______ I. 11
I. 211
t1
10.1 10 10 H.................... 1. H
"'"""
U.O to U.tlll •••- - · · · · · · · · · · - I. a
u.a 10 u.ae_______________ 1. a
10.0 10 10.4111 ••••----·-·······- I. 53 12.0
10.1 10 10 111111·-·-·········---- 1. n 10 12.t1---·····-----··
1:115 10 lUI •••• ___________ 1. I. 118
IT
11.0 10 11.•111--------------- 1. a 1.3.0 .. . , ....._________________ 1. :zG
.
II.J 10 11 1111••
•••• _ •••••••••••• - I. II
12.0
12..1 or .,.10 l:ll.tlll
12.91._____________
10
_____________ 1.
1.
1a llftOI.............. It 7 ............ .
'nlll. •••••• - ....... '"· .............
~ '
~·
C:OD I . . . . . . . . . . . . ICM ............ . - ~J
1:1.0 .........._________ 1. M 1 1 1 1 - -...... , , ........... . '
<14> The tabla Ia; 418.53(b) U> aDd ""_.,. 11» ............ .
12) are revised ta read aa toJloq: CWIIfMI!UuJa.
Am-liMN ..... l l ............ .
'"''
--
~..
C131 The tables ID I 418.~2 cal 11.1111 S..llhll.. .... .. ..... II!" ............ . IIIJ
Cbl en aDd 121 ant revised co read u O419.53 £111uent Rlmo&•tlo- IUiddlnea TDLII tft"""oum.. m ............ . 11
Hna""'""' Ull .............
foUowa: repll'ftlndn• 1lle deane oC cllhaenl cnr~mlwa.
reduction anal-bl .. by 1he applic.e- ptl...... .. ..... IVIU>In "''"

1419•.52 tmuenl lhaalallone pidellns ,.,,.. 6.0
repi"Cllenlinc the de~P"ee ol ciRuena tion ol llle beel &W'aoleble lecllnoloQ' 1010.
redueliOft •utaoneble b,. the •pplic.e- eeanonoica11., achiCYable.
loon ol lh• be.1 pnc11cable C'Dnii"'J
lechaoloQ' ca_ll,. ••.. lable. lb) •••
FIDIIAL IIGISTII, VOL 40, NO. 91--TVISDAY', MAY' 10, 1975
162
::19:il
• &• Slze factor.
SIU
I.CICIO 1101 af tNda-11: per ~cre•na dar /tU:tfll'
t.na &n&D 12t.a••••••••• -------- a. '73
125.0 10 1411.11 ••••• ··········-··· a. '78
150.0 10 1'7411 ••••••••••••••• _.. II. 83
1'711.0 10 !YII.II.... •••••••••••••• 0. 91
200.0 to z:I4.1J •••••• •••••••••••• a. st
:&:ZII or 1reac•r................... t.ot
12) Procesa factor.
Procc ..
Prueeu c:onowurauou. /tM·Cor
Llu uuaa ll.tiJ ••••••.••••••••••• o '75
11.5 IO '741J ••••••••• ··•••• ••••• 0.112
T.a 10 '7 IJII •••••••••••••••••••••• ll.ll2
1.0 to 1.411. ······-········--·--· 1. ao
1.5 to IAII •••••••••••••••••••••• 1.10
1.010 8.411 •••••• ·······•••••••••• I. :ZO
IJ 5 10 11.1111 •.•••••••• · · · · - · - · •• I. 30
10 0 10 10 411. · · · - · · · · · · - · · · · · I. 42
10.1 10 10 ... ------------------ l 54
11.0 10 II 411 ••• ········-··•••••• 1.118
11.5 to 111111..................... I 83
I:Z.O to 12.49.................... I 88
12 5 co 12.11. ••••••••• •••••••••• 2. IT
13.0 or sre•&er •••••••• •••••••••• :z. :zs
IPR Doc.7&-1211511 Piled ~11-TII:I·U ami
IIDIIAL DGISTH. VOL 40, NO. 91--fUISDA'I", MAY' 20. 1975
163.
Friday
December 21, 1979
Part IV
Environmental
Protection Agency
Petroleum Refining Point Source
Category Effluent Limitations Guidelines,
Pretreatment Standards, and New Source·
Performance Standards
164
75926 Federal Register I Vol. 44. No. 247 I Friday. December 21, 1979 I Proposed Rules
''IRONMENTAL PROTECTION analysis is found in Economic Analysis 8. !lola Discharge of Wastewaters
NCY of Proposed Revised Elfluent Standards b. BAT Selecllon and Decasaon Cntena
and Limitations for the Petroleum IX. scr Effluent Lamatatlona
40 CFR Part 419 Refining Industry. X. New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS)
[FRL 1312•1] DATE: Conurients on this proposal must a. NSPS Options Considered
be submitted on or before February 19. 1. Increased Reuse and Recycle of
Petroleum Refining Point Source 1980. W81tewaters (SZ'Rt)
Category Effluent Umitatlons ADDRESS: Send comments to: Mr. 2. Granular Activated Carbon
Guidelines, Pretreatment Standards, William A. Telliard. Effluent Guidelines 3. No Discharge of Waatewaters
and New Source Performance b. NSPS Selection and Dec1sion Criteria
Division (WH-552), Environmental XI. Pretreatment Standards
Standards Protection Agency, 401 M St.• S.W., a. Pretreatment Options Cons1dered
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Washington, D.C. 20480. Attention: ECD 1. Metals Removal
Agency (EP..J\). Docket Clerk. Petroleum (WH-552). The 2. Blolosacal"I_'reatment for Certain Indirect
ACTION: Proposed regulation. supportina information and all Dischargers
comments on this proposal wtll be b. Pretreatment Selecllon and Decision
SUMMARY: EPA proposes regulations to available for mspection and copymg at Criteria
limit effluent discharges to waters of the the EPA Public Information Reference XlL Regulated Pollutants
UniL Room 2404 (Rear) PM-213, (EPA a. BAT
Uilited States and the introduction of b.Bcr
pollutants into publicly owned treatment Library), 401 M Street, S. W., c. Pretreatment Standards
works from facilities which are engaged Washington, D.C. 20460. The EPA XIII. PoUutants Not Regulated
in refining petroleum. These facilities information regulation (40 CFR Part 2) a. BAT
are defined more specifically as those prov1des that a reasonable fee may be b. Pretreatment Standards
classed by the Bureau of the Census in charged for copying. c. Pollutants Lamated by BPT
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: XIV. Non-Water Quahty Aspects of
2911. The purpose of this proposal i.s to Pollution Control
Technical1nformation and cop1es of a. Air Poilu bon
provide effluent limitations guidelines technical documents may be obtained
for "best avallable technology,'' and b. Solid Waste
from Mr. William A. Telliard, (202} 755- c. Enei"SY Requ~rements
"best conventional technology," and to 7733 at the address listed above. The XV. Coats, Effluent Reducuon Benefits. and
establish new source performance economic analysis may be obtained Econom1c lmpact
standards and pretreatment standards from Mr. Louis DuPuis, Water a. EconoiDJc Scenano One
under the Clean Water Act. Economics Branch (WH-586), 1. BAT/BCT
"'he effect of these regulations on the Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Z. PSES
3. NSPS/PSNS
:Jieum refining industry would be to St. S.W.• Washington, D.C. 20460, (202) b. Economac Scanario Two
Jire pretreatment of process 755-7733. 1. BAT/BCT
wastewaters introduced into publicly SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 2. PSES
owned treatment works (POTWs) and 3. NSPS/PSNS
treatment of process wastewaters Orgaaizatioa of This Notice
c. Effluent Reduction Benefits
discharged to waters of the United I. Lesal Authonty XVI. Best Manasement Practaces
States. After considenng comments lL Backsround XVIL Upset and Bypass Provisaons
L Cleaa Water XVUL Variances and Modifications
received in response to this proposal. b. Pnor EPA Regulations
~A will promulgate a final rule. XIX. Relationslup to NPDES Permats
c. Overv~ew of the Industry XX. Summary of Public ParuCJpation
The Supplementary Information lD. Scope of This Rulemalwls and XXI. SoUctauon of Comments
section of this preamble describes the Summary of MethodoloSY XXIJ. Appendaces:
legal authority and background, the IV. Sampling and Analytical Prosram A-Abbrevaallons. Acronyms and Terms
V. Data Gather111s Efforts Used in This Notace
technical and economic bases, and other a. Techmcal Quesllonnaires
aspects of the proposed regulations. 8-Tox1c PoUutants Not Detected in
b. Sampling and Analysis Treated Effluents (Darect Discharge)
That section also swnmanzes comments c. Results C-Toxic Pollutants Detected in Only One
on a draft technical document circulated 1. Analytical Results Refinery Effluent (at concentrations hasher
on April 21, 1978." and solicits comments Z. Ac:luevable Pollutant Concentrations than those found in antske water) and Which
on specific areas of interest. The (BPT) . are Uniquely Related to the Refinery at
abbreviations, acronyms, and other VL Industry Subcatesonzallon Which it Was Detected (Direct Discharsel
terms used in the Supplementary VII. Available Waatewater Control and D-Toxic PoUutants Detected in Treated
Treatment TechnoloSY
Information section are defmed in Effluents of More Than One Refinery or
a. Status of In-place TechnoloSY
·Appendix A to this notice. Detected an the Treated Effluents of One
b. Control Technologiea Cons1dered for Use
in 11us Industry Refinery Bul Not Unaquely Relaled to the
These proposed regulations are Refinery at Which 1t Waa Detected (Darect
supported by three major documents 1. Reuse and Recycle of Wastewater
Z. Powdered Act1vated Carbon
Discharge)
available from EPA. Analytical methods 3. Granular Activated Carbon E-Toxic Pollutants Not Detected an.
are discussed in Sampling and Analysis 4. Metals Removal Discharges to POTWs (Indirect Oascherge)
Procedures for Screening of lndustl'lal- 5. Blolosacal Treatment F-Toxic Pollutants Detected in Discharges
Effluents for Priority Pollutants. EPA's VIIL BAT Effluent Lim1tatlons to POTWs (Indirect Discharge)
techincial conclusions are detaued in a. BAT Opt1ons Considered C-ToXIc Pollutants Found To Pass
·the Development Document for 1. Increased Reuse and Recycle of Throush POTWs Wath Only Pnmary
Wastewaters (27'Rt) Treatment (Indirect Discharge)
"-~DOSed EfPuenl LimiiOtJons
Z. Increased Reuse and Recycle of I. Legal Authority
'elines, New Source Performance Wastewaters (52'15)
dorris and Pretreatment Standards 3. Sesregation of Process Streams The regulations descr1bed in this
1 .,,- the Petroleum Refining Point Source 4. Powdered Activated Carbon notice are proposed under author1ty of
CDtesory. The Agency's econorDJc s. Granular Acuvated Carbon sect1ons 301, 304, 30111 307. 308. and 501
165
Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 247 I Friday, December 21, 1979 I Proposed Rules 75927
of the Clean Water Act (the Federal promulgation of regulations for NSPS, non-toxic pollutants. Instead of BAT for
Water Pollution Control Act and sections 304(f), 307(b), and 307(c) "conventional" pollutants identified
Amendments of 1972. 33 USC 1251 et required promulgation of regulations for under section 304(a)(4) [including
seq., as amended by the Clean Water pretreatment standards. In addition to biological oxygen demand. suspended
Act of 1977, Pab. L. 9~217) (the "Act"). these·regulations for designated industry solids, fecal coliform and pH), the new
These regulations are also proposed in categories, Section 307[a) of the Act section 30l(b)(2}(E) requires
response to the Settlement Agreement in required the Administrator to achievement by July 1, 1984, of "efiluent
Natural Resources Defense Council. Inc. promulgate effluent standards limitations requiring the application of
v. Ti!ain. 8 ERC 2120 (D.D.C. 1976), applicable to all dischargers of toxic the best conventional pollutant control
modified March 9, 1979 and in response pollutants. Finally, section SOl(a) of the technology" (BCT). The factors
to the decision of the United States Act authonzed the Administrator to considered in assessing scr for an
Court of Appeals in American prescribe any additional regulations industry include the costs of attaining a
Petroleum Institute v. EPA 540 F. 2d 1023 "necessary to carry cut his functions" reduction in effluents and the effluent
(lOth Cir. 1976). ·under the Act. reduction benefits derived compared to
EPA was unable to promulgate many the coats and effiuent reduction benefits
D. BackgroUDd . &om the discharge of publicly owned
of these regulations by the dates
. (a} The Clean Water Act. The Federal contained in the Act. In 1976, EPA was treatment works (Section 304(b)(4)(B)].
Water Pollution Control Act sued by several environmental groups, For non-toxic. nonconventicnal
Amendments of 1912 established a and in settlement of this lawsuit EPA pollutants. sections 30t(b)(2)(A) and
comprehensive program to ..restore and and the plaintiffs executed a (b)(2J(F) require achievement of BAT.
maintain the chemical. physical. and "Settlement Agreement" which was effiuent limitations within three years
biological lntergrity of the Nation's approved by the Court. This Agreement after their establishment or July 1. 1984,
waters." Section 10l(a). By July 1, 1977, required EPA to develop a program and whichever is later, but not later than
existing Industrial dischargers were adhere to a schedule for promulgating July 1. 1987.
required to achieve "effluent limitations for Zl major industries BAT effluent The purpose of these proposed
reqWriag the application of the best limitations gwdelines, pretreatment regulations is to provide effluent
practicable control technology currently standards, and new source performance lim.ltations guidelines for BAT and BCT,
available'" (BPT), Section 301(b)(1)(A); standards lor 65 "priority" pollutants and to establish NSPS, pretreatment
and by July 1, 1983, these dischargers and classes of pollutants. See Natural standards for eXIsting sources (PSES],
were required to achieve "emuent Resources Defense CounCJl, Inc. v. and pretreatment standards for new
limitations reqWriag the application of Train. 8 ERC 2120 (D.D.C. '1976), sources (PSNS), under Secuons 301, 304,
the beat available technology modified March 9, 1979. 308. 301, and 501 of the Clean Water
economicaUy.,ach.ievable .•. which will Act.
result in reasonable further progress On December 27, 1977, the President (b) Prior EPA Regulations. EPA
toward the national goal of ellmmating signed into law the Clean Water Act ol promulgated BPT. BAT, NSPS. and PSN
the discharge of all pollutants" (BAT), 1977. Although this law makes several for the ~troleum Refining point source-
section 301(b)(2)(A). New industrial important changes in the federal water category en May 9, 1974 (39 FR 16560,
direct dischargers were required to pollution control program, its most Subparts A-E). The BPT. BAT, and
comply with section 306 new source sigDlficant feature is 1ts incorporation NSPS regulations were challanged in tha
performance standards (NSPS), based Into the Act of several of the basic courts by the American Petroleum
on best available demonstrated elements of the Settlement Agreement Institute and others. Both BPT and NSPS
technology: and new and existing program lor toxic pollution control. were upheld by the court, but BAT was
dischargers to publicly owned treatment Sections 30t(b)(2)(A) and 301(b)(2)(C} of remanded for further cons1deration.
works (POTWs) were subject to the Act now reqwre the achievement by Interim final PSES were promulgated on
pretreatment standards under sections July 1. 1984. of effluent Umitabons March 23, 1977 (42 FR 15684) in response"
307 (b) and (c) of the Act. While the requiring application of BAT for "toxic" to the Settlement Agreement.
requirements for direct dischargers were pollutants. including the 65 "priority" The regulations proposed in this
to be inccrporated into National pollutants and classes of pollutants notice will supersede existUJg NSPS.
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System which Congress declared "toxic" under PSNS and PSES. These proposed
(NPDES) permits Issued under section Section 307(a) of the Act. Likewise, regulations will also estabuah BAT and
402 of the Act. pretreatment standards EPA's programs for new source BCT.
were made en£on:eeble directly against performance standards and (c) Overview of the Industry. The
dischargers to POTWa (Indirect pretreatment standards are new aimed petroleum refirung industry is defined by
dfschargers ). · principally at toxic pollutant controls•. Bureau of the Census Standard
Although section 402(a)[1) of the 1972 Moreover, to strengthen the taxies Industrial Classification (SIC) 2911. Tha
Act authorized the setting of control program, Congress added raw material of this industry ia
requirements for direct dischargers on a section 304(e) to the Act. authorizmg the petroleum material (generally, but not
case-by-case basis. Congress intended Administrator to pr1!scribe "best always, crude oal). Petroleum refiner1ea
thaL for the most part, control management practices" (BMPs) to process this raw material into a wide
requirements would be based on prevent the release of toxic and variety of petroleum products. including
regulations promulgated by the hazardous pollutants &om plant site gasoline, fuel oil, jet fuel. heating oils
Administrator of EPA. Section 304(b) of runoff, spillage or leaks. sludge or waste and gases and petrochemicals. Refining
the Act required the Administrator to disposal, and drainage &om raw · includes a wide variety of physical
promulgate regulations providing material storage associated with, or separation and chemical reaction
guidelines for emuent limitations setting ancillary to, the manufacturing or processes. The Development Document
forth the degree of effluent reduction treatment process. lists over one hundred processes used jr
attainable through the application of In keepins with its emphasis on toxic the petroleum refining industry. Becau
BPT and BAT. Moreover, sections 304{c) pollutants. the Clean Water Act ofl911 of the diversity and complexity of the
and 308 of the Act required also revised tha control program for processes used and the products
166
75928 F.ederal Register I Vol. 44. No. 247 I Friday. December 21, 1979 I Proposed Ru!es
-iuced. petroleum refineries are toward insuring the achievement by July effluent characteristics inclading: (1) the
·ally characterized by the quantity 1. 1984. of the best ava1lable technology sources and volume of water used. the
w malenal processed. rather than economically achieveable (BAT), which processes employed. and the sources of
oy the quantity and types of products will result in reasonable further progress pollutants md wastewaters in the plant.
produced. toward the national goal of elinunaung and (2) the constituents of wastewaters,
EPA has idenbfied 285 petroleum the discharge of all pollutants. In including toxic pollutants. EPA then
refineries in the United Slates and its general. this technology level represents, identified the constitutents of
possessions. The smallest refinery can at a minimum. the very best wastewaters which should be
refine n!ty barrels of oil per day (one economically achievable performance in considered for effluent lim1tations
barrel equal42 gallons), wlule the any industrial category or subcat~gory. guidelines and standards of
largest can refine 665,000 barrels per Moreover. as a result of the Clean Water performance.
day. Act of 1977. the emphasis of EPA's Next. EPA identified several distinct
The U.S. refming industry processes a program has shifted from "classical" control and treatment technologies.
total of about 15 aulUon barrels per day. pollutants to the control of a lengthy list including both in-plant and end-of-
However, industry growth has slowed in of toxic substances. process technologies, which are in use
recent years due to a number of factors In the 1977legislation. Congress or capable of being used in the
including elforts to conserve petroleum recognized that 1t was dealing w1th petroleum refimng mdustry. The Agency
supplies and competition from foreign areas of scienbfic uncertainty when it comp1led md analyzed histoncal data
suppliers. Growth has averaged about declared the 65 "priority" pollutants and and newly generated data on the
.five percent per year and has resulted classes of pollutants "toxic" under effluent quabty-Tesulllng from the
largely from adQ.itioos to existing section 307(a) of the Act. The "priority" application of these technologies. The
refmeries rather than by construction of pollutants have been relatively long term performance and operational
new ones. Largely because of unknown outside of the sctenllfic limitations of each of the treatment and
encouragement from the Department of community, and those engaged in control technologies were also
Energy's crude o1l allocation program. a wastewater sampling o.nd control have identified. In addition. EPA cons1dered
limited number of small, new refineries had little experience dealing wtth these the nonwater quality envll'onmental
have been constructed. The ratio of pollutans. Additionally, these pollutants impacts of these technologies. including
growth in U.S. refirung capacity by after appear and have toxic effects at impacts on aU" quality, sobd waste
additions to existing refineries to the concentrations which severly tax generation. and energy requirements.
growth by construction of new refineries current analytical techniques. Even The Agency then esllmated the costs
has been approximately 3.5 to 1. though Congress was aware of the state- of each control and treatment
·The major sources of process of-the-art difficulties and expense of teclmology from·unit cost curves
.... ~ ..tewater are cooling water, water developed by standard engineermg
·to wash unwanted matenals from a "to¥ics" control and detection, it
directed EPA to act quickly and analysis as applied to petroleum refimng
ISS stream. water used as part of a wastewater characteristics. EPA denved
decisively to detect, measure and
•--.:lion process, and botler blowdowns. treatment process costs from plant
Current treatment systems used by regulate these substances. Thus, with
the passage of the 1977legislation, the characteristics (production and flow)
refineries for this process wastewater applied to each treatment process unit
include (a) in-plant controls of ammonia Nation's water pollution control cost curve (i.e., powdered activated
and water use. and (b) end-of-p1pe program was thrust toward the frontiers carbon. metals precipitation. etc.). These
treatment consistina of oLI/water of science. un1t process costs were added to yield
separators. biological treatment and. in EPA's implementation of the Act total coet at each treatment level. The
some cases, mixed media filtration. requU"ed a complex development Agency evaluated the econom1c 1mpacts
Although significant concentrations of program descnbed in this section and of these costs. (Costs and econom1c
toxic md other pollutants are found in succeding sections of th1s notice. impacts are discussed in detail under
untreated waste, data show that Initially, because in many cases no the various technology options. and m
application of BPT results m substantial public or private agency had done so. the section of this nollce enutled Costs.
reduction of pollutants. ToXIc pollutants EPA and 1ts laboratories and Effluent Reduction Benefits ani:l
were reduced to near or below the consultants had to develop analytical Economic Impacts).
concentrations which can be accurately methods for tox1c pollutant detecllon Upon consideration of these factors
measured using avaLiable measurement and measurement, which are discussed EPA identified various control and
techniques. under Sampling and Analytical program. treatment technologies as BCT. BAT.
EPA then gathered technical and PSES. PSNS. and NSPS. The proposed
m. Scope of This Rulemakiog and fmanc1al data about the mdustry, which regula t1ons, however. do not requ1re the
Summary of Methodology are summanzed under Data Gathering installation of any part1cular technology.
These proposed regulations open a Eiforts. With these data in hand. the Rather. they requ1re achievement of
new chapter in water pollution control Agency proceeded to develop these effluent lim1tallons representative of the
requirements for the petroleum refining proposed regulations. proper operation of these technologies
industry. In EPA's 1973-1978 round of First. EPA studied the petroleum or equivalent technologies.
rulemakings, emphasis was placed on refining industry to determane whether The effluent limitations for BAT, BCT
the achievement of best practicable differences in raw materials. final and NSPS are expressed as mass
technology (BPT) by July 1, 1977. In products, manufacturing processes, limitations (kg/1000 cubic meters raw
generaL this technology level equipment, age and size of plants. water material) and are calculated by
represented the average of the best usage. wastewater constituents. or other mulllplytng three figures: (1) ach1evable
.. --·ting performances of well known factors requ~red the development of long term effluent concentrations based
1logies for control of pollutants of separate effluent limitations and on each control technology (2)
anal concem. standards for different segments of the achievable wastewater flow and (3)
Jlis round of rulemaking, in industry. This study included the variability factors to account for short
contrast. EPA's_efforta are directed identification of raw waste and treated term variations m effluent
167
Federal Register I Vol. 44. No. 247 I Friday, December 21, 1979 I Proposed Rules 75929
concentrations (daily and monthly sufficiently sensitive or specific for wastewaters in a sampling and analysis
variations). This basic calculation was application in water. GC Mth multiple program involving 23 refinenes and tY
performed for each regulated pollutant detectors was rejected because It would POTWs. The plants were selected
or pollutant parameter. Effluent require multiple runs and be primarily to be representative of the
Umitations for PSES and PSNS are incompatible with program time manufacturing processes, the prevalent
expressed as allowable concentrations constraints. Moreover, because this max of production among plants, and the
in milllgrams per liter (mg/1). For method would use several detectors, current treatment technology in the
POTWs which may wish to impose each applicable to a narrow range of industry. Compliance with BPT
mass limitations, the proposed substances, GC with multiple detectors requirement is also one of the site
regulations provide alternate equivalent possibly would fail to detect certain selection cnteria. Seventeen of these
mesa limitations. toxic pollutants. EPA chose CC/MS plants were direct dischargers and six
because it was the onJy available were indirect dischargers.
IV. Sampliag aad Analytical Program The primary objecuve of the field
techruque that could identify a wide
As Consre~s recognized in enacting vanety of pollutants in many different sampling program was to obtaan
the Clean Water Act of 1977, the state- waste streams. in the presence of compos1te samples of wastewater to.
of-the-art ability ta monitor and detect interfering compounds, and within the determine presence~ absence and:
toxic pollutants is limited. Most of the time constraints of the program. In relative concentrations of toxic
toxic poUutaats were relatively EPA's judgment. CC/MS and the other pollutants. Sampling vis1ts were made to
unknown until onJy a few years ago, and analytical methods for taxies used in correspond to three consecutive days of,·
only on rare occasions, has EPA this rulemaking represent the best state- plant opera lion. Raw wastewater
regulated or has industry monitored or of-the-art methods for toxic pollutant samples were taken prior to b1ological
even. developed methods to monitor for analyses available when this study was treatment. Treated effluent samples
these pollutants. As a result. analytical begun. were taken subsequent to biological
methods for many toxic pollutants, As the state-of-the-art began to treatment; in some instances samples-
under Section 304(h) of the Act, have not mature, EPA began to refme the were taken after effluent polishing (i.e .•
yet been promulgated. Moreover, state- sampling and analytical protocols. and polishing pond. sand falter). EPA also
of-the-art techniques involve the use of intends to continue this refmement to sampled intake water to determme the
highly expensive, sophisticated keep pace with technology presence of tox1c pollutants pnor to
equipment. with costs ranging as high as contamination by refuting processes.
$200,000 per unit of equipment. advancements. Resource constraints,
In all instances, grab samples taken
When faced with these problems, EPA however, prevent EPA from reworking every two hours were combmed into
scientists. Including staff of the completed sampling and analyses to
keep up with the evolution of analytical twenty-four hour composates. Samples
Environmental Research Laboratory ia for conventional and nonconvenbonal
Athens. Georgia and staff of the methods. As a result. the analytical
techniques used in some rulemakings pollutants were obtamed from the 24-
Environmental Morutoring and Support hour compos1te samples. Aliquots fro
Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio may differ slightly from those used an
other ndemaking efforts. In each case. the remainmg sample volumes were
conducted a literature search and combmed in equal portions at the.
initiated a laboratory program to however, the analytical methods used
represent the best state-of-the-art laboratory to obtain the 72-hour
develop analytical protocols. Th~r composttes for toxic pollutant analysis
analytical techaiques used ia this available for a given industry study.
(aCld and base-neutral extractable
rulemaking were developed One of the goals of EPA's analytical
orgarucs, pesticades, metals). Grab
concurTently with the development or program is the promulgation of
samples were taken in specaally
general sampling and analytical additional section 304(h) analytical
prepared vials for volatile (purgeable)
protocols and were incorporated into methoch fm: toxic pollutants, scheduled orgarucs. total phenols and cyarude.
the protocols ultimately adopted for the to be done within calendar year 1979. Pnor to the plant Vlsits, sample
study of other industrial categories. See Before proceeding to analyze containers were carefully washed and
Sampling and Analysis Procedures for petroleum refining wastes, EPA prepared by specific methods,
Screening of Industrial Effluents for concluded that at had to define specific depending upon the type of sample to be
Priority Pollutants. reYlsed April 1977. toxic pollutants for analyses. The list of taken. Samples were kept on ice pnor to
Because section 304(h) methods were 65 pollutants and classes of pollutants express sh1pment in insulated
available for most toXIc metals, potentially includes thousands of containers.
pesticides. cyanide and phenol. the specific pollutants: and the expenditure The analyses for tox1c pollutants were
analytical effort focused on developing of resources in government and private performed accordJng to groups of
methods Cor sampling and analyses of laboratones would be overwhelming af chem1cals and assoe1ated analytical
organic toxic: pollutants. The three basic analyses were attempted for aU of these schemes. Orgamc tox1c pollutants
analytical approaches considered by pollutants. Therefore. in order to make included volaule (purgeable), base-
EPA were infra-red spectroscopy, gas the task more manageable, EPA selected neutral and acid (extractable)
chromatography (CC) with multiple 129 specific toxic pollutants for study in pollutants, total phenols and pesticides.-
detedors, and gas chromatography/ this rulemaking and other industry lnorganac toxic pollutants included
mass spectrometry (GC/MS). In rulemakmgs. The cntena for selecuon of heavy metals, cyanide and asbestos..
selecting among these alternatives, EPA these 129 pollutants Included frequency The primary method used m screening
considered their sensativity, laboratory of occurrence In water. chemical and venfication of the volatiles, base-
avaalabality, costs, applicabality to stabahty and structure, amount of neutral, and acid organics was gas
diverse waste streams from numerous chemical produced, availability of chromatography with confirmation and
industries. and capabality for chemacal standards for measurement; quantification of all prionty pollutants
implementation with.Jn the statutory and and other factors. by mass spectrometry (GC/MS). Tot?·
court-ordered time constraints of EPA's EPA ascertained the presence and phenols were analyzed by the 4-AA
program. The Agency concluded that magna tude of the 129 specific toxic method. GC was employed for analy~
anfra-red spectroscopy was not pollutants m petroleum refining of pesticides with limited MS
168
75930 F.ederal Register I Vol. 44, No. 247 I Friday, December 21. 1979 I Proposed Rules
'"umation. The Agency analyzed the pollutants and will continue to seek sample for the efficiency of current
heavy metals by atomic adsorption additional data. EPA will periodically treatment methods in reducing the
.trometry (AAS). with Dame or review these regulations, as required by quantities of these pollutants. The
graphite furnace atomization following the Act. and make any revisions seventeen refmeries represent a range of
appropriate dlsestion of the sample. supported by·new data. In developing the factors required for consideration by
Duplicate samples were analyzed using these regulations. moreover. EPA has EPA in setting effluent limitations.
plasma emission spectrometry after taken a number of steps to deal with the including size, location and age of
appropriate disestion. Samples were limits of science and avallabla data. equipment and facilities. EPA also
analyzed for cyanides by a colorimetric V. Data Gathering Efforts selected six of the seventeen refmeries
method. with sulfide previously removed to determine the effectiveness of
by distillation. Analysis for asbestos The data gathering effort is described granular activated carbon in further
was accomplished by microscopy and in detail in Section IV of the reduc!ng amounts of toxic pollutants
fiber presence reported as chrysotile Development Document. The effort after presently used treatment but
fiber count. Analyses for conventional consisted of two general phases- before discharge to waters of the United
pollutants (BODS, TSS. pH. and Oil and technical questionnaires sent to each of States. In addition. the effluent from four
Grease) and noncanventional paUutiUlta the refineries and sampling and analysis of the six plants with activated sludge
(TOC and COD) were accomplished of wastewater streams at selected processes were tested to determine the
using "Methods for Chemical Analysis refineries. effectiveness. of powdered activated
of Water and Wastes," (EPA Wl&-7+- (a) Technical Questionnaires. The carbon. No refineries currently use
003) and amendments. / purpose of the technical questionnaires either of these treatments: EPA therefore
The high costs, slow pace and limited was to characterize the industry and Installed the equipment to treat a
laboratory capability for toxic pollutant thus identify those factors which, portion of these refineries' effluent. EPA
analyses posed difficulties unique to pursuant to section 304 of the Act. must also took samples of the intake water
EPA's experience. The cost of each be considered in setting effluent source from all of the direct discharging
limitations based on BAT, BCT, NSPS. refineries. The samples were intended to
wastewater analysis for organic toxic
PSES and PSNS. Questionnaires were determine what percentage, if any, of
pollutants nlll8eS between $650 and sent to 299 facilities believed to be
Sl.~oo. excludins sampling costs (based the toxic pollutants in a plant's
included in the petroleum refining point untreated effluent was attributable to its
upon quotations recently obtained from
source category. Two hundred sixty
a number of analytical laboratories). presence in the intake water. In additton
completed questionnaires were
Even with unlimited resources, however, returned; 25 did not return completed to the 17 refinenes sampled by RSI<ERL.
time md laboratory capability wouid questionnaires and 14 claimed not to be Effluent Guidelines Division and its
have posed additional constraints. operating refineries. contractors, 8 refmeries were sampled
'lugh efficiency bas been improving. In addition to the engineering data by teams from Surveillance and
1 this study was initiated a well·
needed to establish effluent limitations Analysis Divisions in EPA regional
.&ed technician using the most in accordance with the Act. the Agency offices. These teams sampled the
sophisticated equipment could perform also asked the refmeties for any refmeries in the course of their checks of
only one complete organic analysis in au analytical data they may have collected facilities for compliance with current
eight hour work day. Moreover, when measuring the presence and quantities wastewater treatment requiremens; the
this rulemakins study was begun there of both traditional and toxic pollutants. data collected was used to supplement
were only about 15 commercial It also asked the refineries to identify other sources of informa lion.
laboratories in the United States with any raw materials used which could be EPA also selected for sampling and
sufficient capability to perform these a source of toxic pollutant discharge. analysis SlX indirect dischargmg
analyses. Today there are about 50 The questions about raw materials were refineries and the two POTWs into
commercial laboratories known to EPA intended to form a basis for poss1ble which they discharge. One P01W was a
which have the capability to perform best management practices (BMP) secondary plant (i.e., with biological
these analyses, and the number is regulations. BMP regulations might treatment) and one was a pr1mary plant
increasing as the demand for such specify that alternate methods or raw (i.e., without biological treatment). The
capability also increases. materials be ublized to reduce or intent of this analysis was to detennine
In planning data generation for this eliminate discharges of toxic pollutants the presence and concentration of toxic
rulemaking, EPA considered reqwring (for example, m the refining industry, pollutants being discharged to POTWs
dischargers to perform monitonng and the use of organophosphate materials as by indirect dischBrRing rermeries and to
analyses for toxic pollutants under b1ocides in cooling towers could be measure the effectiveness of POTWs in
Section 308 of the Act. The Agency spectfied to replace the ones commonly removing these pollutants pnor to the1r
refrained from using this authority in used which contain chromium and nne). discharge into the waters of the Un1ted
developing these regulations because it Although data existed on the presence States. Additionally, the study involved
desired to keep direct control over and quantity of traditional pollutant sampling and analysis of the sludges
sample analyses due to the parameters, very little data existed on produced by the POTWs.
developmental nature of the either the presence or quantity of toxic During the above described sampling
methodology and the need for close pollutants. The major exceptions were program, replicate samples at nme of the
quality controL Additionally, EPA the metallic toxic pollutants and direct discharging refmeries, three of the
believed that the slow pace and limited phenol-many of which had been indirect dischBrRmg refineries, and one
laboratory capability for toxic pollutant mon1tored as a result of previous water of the POTWs were gJVen to
analyses would have hampered a pollution abatement requirements. representatives of the American
,.. .. 1\datory sampling and analytical (b) Sampling and Analysis. EPA Petroleum Institute and/or the company.
. Although EPA believes that the selected seventeen direct discharging These samples were analyzed
1ble data support these regulations, refineries to sample for the presence and separately by the industry and the
~ _ 1\gency would have preferred a concentration of toxic pollutants in results of the analyses at the nine direct
lBrRer data base for some of the toxic untreated process wastewaters and to dischargmg refmer1es have been made
169
Federal Register I Vol. 44. No. 247 I Friday, December 21. 1979 I Proposed Rules 75931'
available ~o EPA by the American discharsed by refinenes to similar levels The study in support or the previous
Petroleum Institute. Analyses of· the as that achieved by the BPT technology regulations (BPT, BAT, NSPS.and PSNS'
duplicate samples from the POTW employed by direct discharaes. This concluded that only one factor of-tha
sampling program have not yet been result is based on refineries operabng at total effluent flow per unat or
reported to EPA. existing PSES levels. The analysis also producfion-sisnificantly affected the
(c) Results.-(1) Analytical Results. shows that primary treatment (both the ab1lity of the various plants in the
The analytical data obtained on the primary-treatment phase of the industry ta achieve effluent reductions.
concentration of toxic pollutants show secondary POTW and the primary However, rather than establishing
signi.ticant. concentrations of these POTW) does not sigruficantly remove limitations for various groups of plants ·
pollutants in untreated refmery many of the taxies discharged by based on their flow, EPA developed five
wastewaters. They include, among indirect discharging refmeries. Analyses mathematical models which allowed the
others. volatile and extractable of POTW sludses shows that substantial Agency to predict the total effluent flow-
orsanlcs. heavy metals, and cyanide. concentrations of pnority pollutants of a petroleum refmery based on its size
Results of aaalyses for traditional (heavy metals) accumulate in sludges or and process charactensllcs. The
pollutant parameters also confirm the POTWs employms eather primary or Asency, therefore. divided the industry
fmdings of the previous study that secondary treatment. lnto five subcategories-topping,
significant concentrations of traditional {2) Achievable PoJJutant cracking, petrochemicaf. lube and·
pollutant parameters are found in Concentrations (Existing Treatment}. Integrated. Each subcategory included
untreated refmery wastes. EPA reevaluated the final the refinenes whose now was predlctea
During trhe sampling and analysis concentrations of regulated pollutants by one or the five models.
phase of the data gathering effort. EPA now achieved by existing technology. In developing these regulations. EPA
found that BPT treatment substantially The results of the data gathenng effort reviewed those factors. mclucing BCT
reduces toxic pollutant concentrations. mdicate thaL with one exception. BPT costs, which might warrant
Most toxic pollutants are reduced to technology is ach1eving concentrations subcatesonzat1on of the industry. Again,
near or below the concentrations comparable to those on which the the Asency concluded that total effluent
considered accurate for use in the original BPT limitations were based. The flow per wut of production is the only·
Analytical Protocol developed by the data also indicates. however, that plants factor which significantly affects a
Agency. Discharae of toxic pollutants are currently achieving concentrations refinery's abality to achieve eCfluent
into U.S. waters continues after BPT of 4AAP phenol far lower than that linu&ations. After review of the
treatment. however. even though at assumed for BPT. Although BPT previously developed mathematical
much reduced concentrations from that limatations for 4AAP-phenols were models. EPA found that wh1le these
of untreated effluent. Appeudix D is a models adequately predicted effluent
list of toxic pollutants wb.ich were found based on a concentration or 100 JA.g/L
the averase 4AAP phenol concentration flows before application o!BPT, they do
in treated. effluents at more than one not adequately predict current mdustr}
refinery in concentrations greater than in the final effluent from the seventeen
nominal analytical detection limits and samples refineries was 19 JA.S/1. The effluent flow rates. Thus, other models
in concentratiOIUI greater than in the results ranged from "no phenol were cons1dered.
intake water source. Also included in detected" to 64 JA.g/1. Without In developmg 1ts flow model. EPA
Appendix D are those pollutants found consideration of any variability factors evaluated which of the petroleum
in onlJ one refinery but wbJch could not for short term fluctuations. all of the 17 refanery's production processes were
be attributed to factors unique to that refineries were meetins concentrations most significant in predicllns its total
refinery (See discussion or or 4AAP phenol less than the achievable effluent flow. Over one hundred distinct
POLLUTANTS NOT REGULATED concentrations assumed for BPT. processes were considered, as well as a
below). VI. Industry Subcategorizatioa consaderable n•unber of process
Analytical results were compared to groupmgs. Ultunately, the Agency's
those reported by the American In developing these regulations. EPA analysis identified four groups of
Petroleum Institute (API) from the carefully evaluated characteristics of process variables wbJch. form the basis
duplicate samples taken at nine of the 17 petroleum reiineries to determine iC of the proposed flow model. These are-
refinenes sampled by EPA. While the subcatesorization of the industry was crude oal capacity, cracking capac1ty,
quantitative concentrations measured appropriate. In moat industnes. factors asphalt capacaty and lube capacity.
by the industry generally di£fered from whach affect the ability of facilities to Together. these four groups represent a
those reported by EPA contract achieve technology-based limitations total of 49 different processes. Although
laboratories (industry: concentrations vary amons groups o£ plants. In such these processes do not necesaanly
show a tendency to be higherthm EPA cases. EPA will establish d1fferent represent the largest contnbutions to
concentrations), the conclusion drawn- effluent limitations or standards for the total flow, EPA found that the1r use ill
from the industry data ia the same as vanous sroupa (i.e~ subcatesories). the mathematical model senerated the·
EPA's. Industry data confU'M that Additionally, the establishment in the most accurate predictions of that flow
substantial concentrations of toxic 1977 amendments to the Act of a "coat (See Summary of Public Participation
pollutants are discharged in untreated reasonableness" analysis for BCT section below).
refmery wastes: that BPT treatment limitations prov1des another basis for This flow model represents the cor~ of
makes substantial reductions in priority subcatesonzallon. Where one group of EPA regulations for the petroleum
pollutant concentrations; and that toxic plants has hisher costs per pound of refinins industry and it 1s used in two
pollutants are still bemg dascharged to pollutant removal. different BCT important ways. First, by comparing a
the waters of thtt United States after limitations may be established. plant's actual flow to 1ls predicted flow,
BPT treatment. Essentially, subcategorizabon allows EPA is able to determine which plants
Results of the analyses of samples the Asency to more precasely fine tune have hisher or lower flows than the
taken from the two POTWs show that the requirements of technoloSY based average for comparable plants in the
secondary POTW& red11ce the- limatations to thrcapacityof a diverse industry. EPA has used this informatlC•.
concentration of the toXlC pollutants industry. to determme the capacity of plants to
170
75932 F,ederal Register I Vol. 44. No. 247 I Friday, December 21, 1979 I Proposed Rules
. •ce their level of now to below that specific control and treatment equipment manufacturers and by
t current industry average. (See technologies appropriate to the application of standard engineering data
EfDuent Umitations- secUon below). pollutants discharged by the petroleum and cost estimation techniques. The
Second. EPA is using the model to refining industry. Some are currently in technical contractor which supported
determine specific effiuent limitations use in the pe&roleum refJ.n.ing industry EPA in the development of these
for each plant in the industry. As with and others have been successfully proposed regulations has extensive
the previous regulations, EPA is usmg applied in other industries. The control experience ID the preparation of
the model to,adjust a facility's effluent and treatment technologies considered engineering cost estimates.
limitations to account for its total in the EPA study are the following: None of the in-plant control or end-of-
wastewater generated per unit of (1) Reuse and Recycle of Waste · pipe treatment technologies considered
production. (See Appendix H for sample Waters. Total effluent flow can be in the development of these regulations
calculations). reduced by both In-plant control and the is considered to be innovative. All of the
This model does adequately p~~edict use of treated and untreated waste in-plant controls and process
the flows of all direct discharging waters as alternative water sources for modifications, as descnbed in this
refineries. Since this single model processes which currently use outside preamble and. more specifically in the
supplants the five models which formed water sources. This is a demonstrated Development Document. have either
the basis for the previous technology in the petroleum refining been used or investigated for use in this
subcategorization. the Agency concludes industry (examples include using treated industry and do not represent major
that no subcategorization of the industry effluent as make-up to cooling towers. process changes. The end-of-pipe
is necessary with respect to effluent pump gland cooUng systems. wasbdown treatment technologies have been
limitations and standards applicable to waters, and fire water systems). applied in this industry or other
direct discharges. Flow reduction is not a single, discrete industries.
Additionally, it is the Agency's option, but represents a range of options
general policy on pretreatment" from no reduction to complete reduction VUL BAT Effluent Limitations
standards that such standards be (zero discharge). EPA has evaluated The factors considered m assessing
expressed as concentration rather than three levels of now now met by best available technology econormcally
mass limitations. (See 40 CFR Part refineries. These levels represent achievable (BAT) include the age of
128.43 FR 27136). Since EPA bas reductions of 27 percent. 52 percent and equipment and facilities involved. the
concluded that achievable 100 percent (zero discharge) throughout process employed. process changes,
concentrations of pollutants do not vary the industry. In evaluating this opbon, non-water quality environmental
among classes of plants within the EPA has assumed that a reduction in impacts (including energy requ~rementsl
petroleum refuting industry, total now will result in a corresponding and the costs of application of such
'-o:ategorization for pretreatment reduction in total mass discharge of technology (Section 304(b)(Z)(B)).ln
tards is not necessary. · pollutants: A fuller discussion of this general, the BAT technology level
issue can be found in the development represents. at a minimum. the best
Available Waste Water Control and economically acluevable performance of
Treatment Tec:lmology document and below in the summary of
public participation section of this plants of vanous ages. s1zes, processes
(a) Status ofln-PiaCII Technology. BPT preamble. or other shared characteristics. Where
regulations have been in effect since (2) Powdered Activated Carbon existing performance 1s uniformly
1974 and there js significant urulormity Enhancement of BioloBicaJ Treatment. inadequate, BAT may be transferred
in treatment performance among direct Addition of powdered activated carbon from a different subcategory or category.
dischargers. Treatment is generally to aerated b1olog1cal systems. BAT may 1nclude process changes or
similar to the model BPT treatment. nus sign1ficantly improves the removal internal controls, even when not
includes in-plant control of ammonia capabilities of biological treatment. as common industry practice.
and water use and end-of-pipe treatment- reported both in the petroleum refining The statutory assessment of BAT
consisting of oil/water separation, and other industries. "considers" costs. but does not reqwre a
biological treatment. and a final (3) GIYUiular Act1vated Carbon balancmg of costs against effiuent
polishing step (e.g. filtration). Many Treatment After BPT Treatment. reduction benefits (see Weyerhaeuser v.
refineries have found that the polishing This treatment technology has not Cost/e. supra). In developing the
step is no't necessary to meet BPT been demonstrated in the petroleum proposed BAT. however, EPA has given
limitations, or t},at filtration is more refining industry. It has been used on a substantial weight to the reasonableness
effective before. rather than after, limited basis in other mdustnes and in of costs. The Agency has cons1dered the
biological treabnent. Types of biological treatment of municipal water supplies. volume and nature of discharges, the
treatment used in direct discharging ·{4} Metals Removal. The removal of volume and nature of discharges
refmeries include activated sludge, metals (such as chromium and zmc) by expected after application of BAT, the
aerated lagoons. oxidation ponds and pH adjustment, precipitation, and general environmental effects of the
tnckling filters. clanfication is a demonstrated pollutants, and the costs and economic
Current wastewater treatment technology in the petroleum refintng impacts of the required pollution control
practices by indirect dischargers industry as we if as other mdustries. levels.
generally are limited to phys1cal od/ {5} BioloBical Treatment Despite this expanded consideration
water separation and. in some cases. {Pretreatment}. Wastewaters discharged of costs, the pnmary determinant of
sour water stripping for ammonia and to POTWs were found to contain high BAT remems effiuent reduction
sulfide control. Substantial concentrations of toxic pollutants. These capability. Effluent limitations for the
concentrations of organic toxic concentrations are significantly reduced petroleum refming industry are
.. - 11utants, metals. and cyanide were at direct discharging refmeries which expressed as mass limitations, i.e.,
found in the refinery wastes being use biological treatment. restrictions on the total quantity of
arged to P01Ws. The costs of applymg these pollutants which may be discharged.
,o~J Control Technolo1ies Considered technologies were developed through Since the total mass of most pollutants
for Use in This Industry. EPA identiled compilation of cost data supplied by in an effluent stream depends on both
171
Federal Register I Vo£. 44, No. 247 I Friday, December 21. 1979 I Proposed Rules. 759~
the total· ernuent flow- and the- percent would be requ1red throughout (generally containing chromium and
concentration of pollutants in that ffow, the industry. zinc) would be reduced. Removal· oi
the-lix options considered for BAT Although precise costs have not yet organic toxic pollutants in the- biorogiea
include various combinations of flow been calculated for this option, EPA has treatment system may be increased'
reduction and' improved performance· of concluded, based on its teclmological since the wastewater·would not be
waste· treatmenr technology. evaluation of the industry. that the costs diluted wtth· cooling· tower wat'er priol"t'l7
(a) BAT options conszdered. {1) for Option-Two approximate those treatment. -
Option One-Require effluent projected for Option three below. For EPA has not made a detailed cosr
Umita.Uons based on an average flow the 165 direct discharging refineries analysis for th1s option. Whlle the cost
reduction o£ Z7 percent achieved througlr affected by this regulation, 5113.0 of metals treatment can be estimated•.
greater reuse and recycle- of wastewater. million additional investment would be the cost of segregating cooling tower
This option would not require additional• required w1th an annual. cost of $48.7 blowdown from other process- streams
end-of-pipe treatment since limitation& m11lion including interest and cannot be esbmated Wlth.avallable-
would be based upon the performance depreCUltion. Th1s amounts. to 5.0002 per data. The engineerin~rsurvey, desctibed!
of BPT end-of-pipe technology. phenol gallon of product. No closures would b~ above (See Option 2) wilt also be used
(4AAP)llmitations, liowever, would lle expected. Refming capacity and to collect data on the technical
based 011: a long term achievable consumpbon would remain unaffected. requirements and cost of cooling. water
concentration of19 11-g/1 (See discussion In order to confirm its assessment of segregation.
under SAl' S'efection and Decision costs EPA intends to conduct an (5) Option Five-Require effluent
Criteria below). ECDuent limitations on engineering field survey of the costs limitations based on Option One flow-
ammonia. sulfide, COD' and pH. would associated with O'ption Two. This reductions plus the addition of granular
be set at BPT levels. survey will be completed and a report activated carbon (GAC) to control.
The level of Oow for this optio11. is prepared pnor to final promulgation of res1dual toxic orgao1c pollutants
now achieved· by SO percent of the: these regulations. EPA will publish a dissolved' in the wastewater. discharged.
fac1lities i..11 the industry. The. notice in the Federal Regis tel: when the from Option 1 technology.
Development Document contains a· fuller. report is available to the public-. While GAC is not a demonstrated
discussion of the manner in. which Comments on the cost approximation for technology Ill the. petroleum reflDing
figure& were dedved. Since treatment of Option Two-are requested (see
mdustry, 1t has been used in other
pH. ammonia, and. sulfide is based on solicitation of Comments section below).
{3} Option Three-Require effluent mdustnes and in treating municipal
process changes-orin-plant controls. no. water supplies. EPA conducted puol
furthec reduction. from BPT level& would: limitations based on a combination of
OPTION. ONE now reduction and "treatability" tests at SlX. refineries.
be achieved by a reduction in final during the. data gathering effort. SeveraL.
effluent Oow.EPA: does not have improved' end-of-pipe treatment.
Improved end-of-pipe treatment was technical articles have been published.
sufficient data to conclude that the comparing GAC wtth other technolog1e!
concentration o£ COD in treated effluent evaluated with the use of powdered
Ill treating refinery· wastes. Although.
activated carbon (PAC]. Several pLiot
remal.Cls constant as Oow is reduced.. rll!sults of the Agency study were
Consequently. COD, pH. ammoma, and studies have- demonstrated this
technology: it &as been· used at full scale inconclusive, it can be generally. stated.
sulfide limitations. are· being- mamtained that toxic. pollutant removalmcrease•
at BPT levels. (See Summa'"! of Public. by one plant in the industry. This
combination oftreahnentproduces mass with the use of GAC. This removal..
Participation), however, appears to be only. marginally
limitations equivalent to those produced
For the-16! direct discharging by flow reduction alone under Option better than with PAC (Option Two) and.
refmeries affected by this regulatiorr. Two~ the cost of GAC IS much greater than
S19.3 million. additional investment For the 165 direct dischargmg PAC.
would. be required wtth· an annual cost refineries affected· by th1s regulation, EPA e.valuated.the econom1c impact.
of $7.7 IDllliom including interest and $113.0 aullion additional investment of th1s option dunng the prevtous round
depreciation. This amounts. to s:oooos would be required with an annual cost of guidelines (See Prior EPA Regulat1on.s
per gallon of product No closures would of $48.7 m11lion including:irrteresl' and discussion above). Wlule EPA did not
be expected.. Refining capaClt'y and. depreciation. This amounts to S.0002 per reevaluate the econouuc impact of tlus.
consumptioll! would remam una£fected. gallon of product. No closures would be option, the earlier econom1c unpact
{2) Optioa Two-Require effluent expected. Refining capacit:y, and analysis. predicted that some refineries:
limitatfoas. based oa an. average 5Z' consumption would remain unaffected. could be expected to clos•lf. this. optio111
Plm:mlt flawmdnctfon adueved t!uough. (4) Option Four.-Requ1re masS" were adopted.
greater reD5e. and recycle of wastewater;. limitations based on Option Two plus (6) Option Six-Require zero
T~ option would! not require addi tiona!' segregation and separate treatment of discharge from ex1stmg refineries. This
end-of-pipe treatment since limitations cooling tower blowdown. Cooling tower could be achieved by further reuse- and
would be based on the performance- of blowdown would be treated for metals recycle. evaporation, and/or subsurface·
BPT end-of-pipe technology. In-plant (reduction of liexavarent chromium· to reinjection of wastewaters. Fifty-five
side stre~~m treatment may be- required· trivalent chromium. pH adjustment, existing refineries are· now at zero
in· a small: number of facilities. to re-move precipitation and clarification). dischargr.
corrosive or scale- forming constituents. Limitations fi:Jr other process streams Tlus is a demonstrated technology,
Mass Umitations on 4AAPphenol would would ~e based on treatmanl' in ex1sting but costs were not calculated for thi&
be based on the 19 11-g/l currently BPT trea1ment systems. option. Wh1le additional costs for·
achiaved by industry. Effluent Treatment of segregated streams may bwlding a new refinery to ach1eve zero
limitations on ammGnia. sulfide. COD result in the removal of more toxic& than discharge can be calculated (See N'ew
and pH would be set at BPT levels. would use of b1ological treatment on a Sou,rce Performance Standards belowL
The level of now for this option is. combined, more dilute. waste-stream. the costs of retrofitting art existing
now achieved by 34 percenr of the Potenttal contamination of biological refinery are highly site spec11ic. Costs~
industry. an average reduction of 52 sludges by cooling tower bioc1des however, would be s1gn1ficantly lugher
172
75934 Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 247 I Friday, December 21. 1979 I Proposed Rules
.... <~n costs for applying any of the other Three) and because the cast of CAC is technology. Based on these figures. the
1nS. considerably higher than the cost of cost to pollutant reduction rat1o for
} BAT !election and decision PAC. Option Two is S1.00 per pound of BOD
.... teria-EPA has selected Option Two Option Six was nat selected because, and TSS removed (compared to a
as the basis for proposed effluent in the Agency's judgment, the costs of POTW cost of $1.18 per pound of BOD
limitations. This option was selected retrofitting for zero discharge on a and TSS). Therefor&\ EPA proposes: Bcr
because it was best supported by uniform national basis would be effluent limitations at the proposed BAT
ava1lable data and because it affords sigruficantly higher than the selected (Option Two) level. BCT 10vestment,
further reduction in total pollutant option and may result in a substantial annualized costs, and economic impact
dischlll'8es through the use of proven number of plant closures. Nevertheless, are included in the BAT analyses.
technology. ll provides reasonable this option still remains a serious
further progress towards the Clean candidate for·any subsequent revisions X. New Sourco Performance Standards
Water Act's goal of the elimination of of BAT limitations, especially for certain (NSPS)
the discharge of pollutants. Further, sizes and/or types of plants. The basis for new source performance
these limitations are also standards (NSPS) under section 308 of
technologically and economically IX. BCT Effluent IJmitations the Act is the best available
. achievable through the use of Option The 1977 amendments added section demonstrated technology. New plants
Three. Thus. all facilities have several 301(b)(4)(E) to the Act. establishing have the opportunity to design the best
ways to achieve this lim1tation. They "best conventional pollutant control and most effic1ent petroleum refining
may meet It totaUy through flow technology" (BCT) Cor discharges of processes and wastewater treatment
reduction or through a combination of conventional pollutants from existing technologies: Congress. therefore,
flow reduction and improved treatment industrial point sources. Conventional directed EPA to consider the best
Avadable data show that exisung pollutants are those defined in secuon demonstrated process changes, in-plant
treatment is reducing the concentration 304{b)(4)-BOD. TSS, fecal coliform and controls, and end-of·p•pe treatment
of 4AAP phenols to 19 ~g/1 (See data pH-and any additional pollutants technologies capable of reducmg
gathering effort section above). defmed by the Administrator as polluuon to the maxinlum extent
Consequently mass limitations on "conventional." On July 30! 1978. EPA feas1ble.
phenols will be based on that designated oU and grease as a (a} NSPS Options Cons1dered. (1)
achievable concentration. In order to conventional pollutant (44 FR 44501). Option One-Require performance
validate this decision. EPA is presently BCT is not an additionalli.mltation: standards based on the same technology
requesting, under section 308 of the Act, rather it replaces BAT for the control of proposed for BAT, including wastewater
that 37 refmeries believed to have conventional pollutants. BCT reqwres flow control by recycle and reuse of
;.,11talled BPT model technology send that limitations for conventional wastewaters after BPT treatment. As
· to EPA for further evaluation of · pollutants be assessed in light of a new discussed under DAT Opllon Two,
I constitutes a proper achievable "cost-reasonableness" test which application of this technology will
.•centration of 4AAP phenols based involves a comparison of the cost and ensure a h1gh degree of removal of toxic
on BPT treatment technology. That data level of reduction of convenuonal pollutants. Sinular reducllons in
will also allow EPA to make a pollutants from the discharge of publicly pollutant mass discharge can be
determination of whether the variability owned treatment works (POTW) to the achieved by BAT Option Three. This
factors used to determine dally and cost and level of reducUon of such level of treatment is similar to current
monthly fluctuations should be changed pollutants from a class or category of NSPS. and no additional expenditures
· as a result of the lower concentrations. mdustrial sources. As a part of 1ts are required due to these revised
Mass limilallons on all other pollutants rev1ew of BAT for certain "secondary" standards.
are based on those final concentrations industries. the Agency has promulgated (2) Option Two-Require performance
already part of the BPT limitations. a methodology for th1s cost test. (See 44 standards based on grandular activated
EPA does not have complete data on FR 50732. Aug. 29, 1979). The Agency carbon (BAT Option Five). As discussed
the cost of achievmg these limitations compares industry costs w1th that of an under BAT Option Five, CAC allows
· solely through the use of flow reduction "average" POTW w1th a flow of 2 mgd somewhat better pollutant removals
and requests comments on this mauer. and costs (1977 dollars) of $1.18 per than NSPS Option One. but is
Further. EPA spec1fically requests pound of pollutant removal (BOD and considerably more expens1ve.
comments and data regarding the TSS). (3) Opt1on Three-Require a
proposed change in the achievable EPA applied this methodology to the performance standard af zero discharge.
concentration·of 4AAP phenol (see casts for removing conventional Unlike BAT Option Six. there is no cost
Solicitation of Comments section pollutants in the petroleum refin1ng of retrofitting to come mto compliance
below). 10dustry and concluded that BCT wtth a zero discharge requirement. Zero
Option Four still remains a serious limitations based on a 52 percent discharge of refinery wastes is a
candidate for the basis of final reduchon in total effluent flow by demonstrated technology: fifty-five
regulations. EPA has data establishing greater recycle and reuse of refineries have been identified by EPA
that greater quantibes of metals and wastewaters (Option Two) or a 52 which are currently ach1eving no
tox1c organics can be removed when percent reduction 1n pollutants discharge of wastewaters to U.S. waters.
introduced into separate treatment discharged by a combmation of flow The American Petroleum Institute (API)
systems at higher concentrations. EPA reduction and powdered activated has published a technical report wh1ch
has only limited data on the costs carbon enhancement of activated makes a detailed evaluation of the
required to segregate flows from cooling sludges (Option Three) are reasonable. technologies capable of achievmg no
towers. This matter is presently under At this level. the total annualized cost discharge of refinery wastes. The report
1y and comments are requested.
for BCT technology 1s $48.7 mdlion and also calculates the costs to be expected
Jtion Five was not telected because EPA projects that48.7 million pounds of 1f those technologies were designed 1010
-~ allows only slightly better BOD and TSS w1ll be removed a new refinery (i.e .. w1thout the need to
pollutant removal than PAC (Option throughout the industry by Option Two retrofit exisung equipment). This opt1on ·
173
Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 247 I Friday, December 21, 19~9 f Proposed Rules 75935:
would require new source of the size employed by the POTW. In general. One. since there are no POTWs whic!r
and configuratiorr likely to be built 1n the mare pollutants wtll pass through or have been granted waJVers under
1980's to incur additional investment of interfere with a POTW employtng Section 301(h). Costs were developed,
$9.5 million with an annual cost of $3.5 primary treatment (usually phys1cal however, for seven indirect discharging
million including interest and separ'ation by settling] than one which refineries to install biolog1caltreatment.
depreciation. U a level of pnce has installed secondary treatment These costs are presented in th1r
protection is instituted tJ\at maintains. (settling plus biolog1cal stabilization). Development Document
industry capacity at current levels. these Sect1on 301(b)(l)(B) of the Act (b) Selection of pretreatment
regulations will essentially have no requires most POTWs to have installed technology and decision cn"tena-EPA
effecr. since new-refineries will not be secondary treatment by July I. 1977. has selected Opt1oa Two as the basis for:
entering the industry in the foreseeable There are, however. two groups of pretreatment standards. Based on 1ts
future. U a level of price protection is P01Ws which have not yet met this sampling and analy.sis program. EPA
instituted that allows for growth .n requirement. One group remains subject has determined that pollutants found in.
refmery capacil'y proportional to growth to the obligation and contains POTWs petroleum refining wastes after presenr
in consumption. the cost of compliance which are scheduled to install PSES treatment do not pass through
of $.001 a gallon will be reflected· in secondary treatment within· the next few secondary POTWs and that only metals
higher p110duct prices of the same years. A second group of POTWs wilf be limit the POTW sludge management
amounL exempt from the requuement to install alternatives. Consequently. for metals
(b) NSPS Selection and Dec1si'on secondary treatment. Under Section only, EPA is proposing addit1onal
Criteria-EPA has selected Option 301(h) of the Act. POTWa which pretreatment standards for indirect
Three a& the basis for proposed new discharge into marine waters may. dischargers. whose wastes go to POTWs '
source performance standards. Zero under certain circumstances. receive a employing secondary treatment.
discharge is a demonstrated technology waiver from this reqwrement. EPA has The Agency additionally proposes
in the: petroleum. refining industry and. promulgated regulations dealing with that this limitation apply to those
based on available data, cau be the issuance of section 301(h) waivers. indirect dischargers whose wastes go to
economically achieved. Consequently, (44 FR 34784, June 15, 1979). a primary POTW which is scheduled tQ.
EPA believes that the· Act requires that (a) Pretreatment Options Cons1dered. install secondary treatment. Although
Option Three be the basis for NSPS. (1) Option One-Establish pretreatment EPA has detennmed that petroleum
EPA. however; solicits other data- which for all refineries which requires metals refinmg wastes pass through pnmary
would support or refute. the assumption (chromium) removal (pH adjustment, POTWs, the Agency believes. that it
that zero discharge is an achievable: preClpttation and clarification) and woud be improper to requU"e industria!
technology fOE a.aw sources on a existing PSES controls of ammonia and sources dischargmg into such POTWs to
nationwide basis. Additionally, EPA ou and grease. Metals removal would be install treatment systems wh1ch wtll be
solicits comments on the other options required only for cooling tower · unnecessary when the POTWs come
suBSested. (See solicitation of comments blowdown. since that is the maJor into compliance wtth the requirement of
section belQw.) source of the heavy metals of concern- secondary treatment.
XL Pretreatment SlaDdards chromium and zinc. Under this ophon, EPA is. however. proposing specific
organic priority pollutants would pass pretreatment standards based on
Section 307(&] o£ the Act requires EPA through primary POTWs which have not application of BAT technology for those
to promulgate. pretreatment standards yet complied wtth Section 301(b)(1)(B) of indirect dischargers whose wastes go to
for both existing sources (PSES} and the Act and those POTWs wluch are POTWs with 301{h) wa1vers. SiJu:e
new sources (PSNS) of pollution which granted w&vers under Section JOl(h}. POTWs wtth 301(h) waivers wlil temairr
discharge their wastes- mto publicly For the 53 mdirect dischargmg at pnmary treatment. only specific
owned treatment works (POTWs). refmeries affected by this regulation sg..e. limitations on indirect dischargers wtll
These pretreatment standards are million additional mvestment would be- ensure that their wastes do not pass
designed to prevent the discharge of required wtth annual costs of $5.Z through into waters of the Umted States,
pollutants whiclt pass through. mterfere million mcluding interest and Such standards•. however, will apply
. with, or are otherwise incampauble wtth depreciation. No closures would be only where a valid 301(h) waiver has
the operation of POTWs.In addition, the expected. A new indirect dischargmg been granted. Those sources discharging
Clean Water Act of 1977 adds a new refmery of the size and configuration into a POTW which has a pending
dimension to these standards by likely to be built in the 1980's would application for a 301(h) wa1ver wtll be
requiring pretreatment of pollutants. incur additional investment of $0.3 subject to the generally less stnngeal
such as heavy metals. that lim1t POTW million with annual costs of $0.2 million. pretreatment standards. based on
sludge management alternatives. Thtr including interest and depreciation. secondary treatment in the POTW until
legislative history of the Act indicates Refining capacity and domestic such ume as the wa1ver is finall~
that pretreatment standards are to be consumption would be· unaffected by approved. The Agency requests
technology based and. wtth respect to this regulation. comments on the approach. it has
toxic pollutants, analogous to BAT. The (2) Option Twa-Establish two adopted for determining which.
Agency has promulgated general pretreatment standards. Pretreatment pollutants must be regulated through
pretreatment regulations wh1c!r for those refineries discharging into pretreatment standards. (See
establish a &amework for the POTWs which have been granted Solicitation. of comments section below.).
unplementation of these statutory waivers under Section 301(h) would be
requU"ements: (See 43 FR 27736, June 2&, based on concentrations achievable XII. Regulated Pollutants
1978). after application of BPT technology. The basis upon wh1ch the controlled
A determination.ofwh1ch pollutants Pretreatment for other indirect pollutants were selected 1s set out 1n
may pass through or be-incompatibht dischargmg refmenes would contain the Section VI of the De.velopment
wtth POTW operahons. and thus be limitations identified irr Option One. DocwnenL
subject to pretreatment- standards, At this time the econom1c effects Cor (a) BAT. EPA has selected two tox1c
depends on the lever of treatment this option. are the same as for Option pollutants for control of toxic discharges
174
7593& F.ederal Register I Vol. 44. No. 247 / Fridoy. December 21, 1979 I Proposed Rules
in the petroleum rdning industry. limitations in this regulation. (See (b) Pretreatment Standards. On the
·ific effluent limitations are being relationship to NPDES perrruts section). basis of sampling at six refineries which
11ished for total phenol (4AAP) and (a) BAT Limitations. Paragraph practice mdirect discharge amltwo
JDUum (both total chromium and B(a)(iii) of the Revised Settlement POTWs. the Agency concludes that the
hexavalent chromium). These pollutants Agreement allows the Administrator to organic prionty pollutants listed in
are subject to limitations expressed in exclude Cram regulation toxic pollutants Appendix F discharged by refineries in
kilograms per 1000 cubic meters of raw not detectable by Section 304(h) compliance with existing PSES do not
matenal. analytical methods or other state-of;the- pass through or interfere with a
Pollutants which have the same art methods. Data collected by EPA. the secondary POTW. The Agency proposes
requirement under BPT and BAT include American Petroleum Institute, and - in this notice to require pretreatment
· COD. ammonia and sulfide. individual companies were used in standards which limit the same
(b) BCT. The pollutants selected for making decisions not to regulate specific pollutants at the same concentrations as
control by BCT technology are those toxic pollutants. Eighty-five toxic interim final PSES. The pollutants
pollutants limited by BPT which have pollutants were not found at any of the limited under PSES include o1l and
been classified as conventional seventeen rermeries sampled. These grease and ammonia. Additionally, EPA
pollutants-BOOS, TSS. and oil and pollutants are excluded. therefore. from establishes a standard for total
grease-. These pollutants are subject to regulation and are listed in Appendix B chromium based on inter1m fmal PSES
limitations expressed in kilograms per to this notice. gu1dance. As w1th BAT. EPA will
1000 cubic meters of raw material. Paragraph S(a)(iii) of the Revised continue to study methods for reducmg
Additionally, a BCT Umitation for pH is Settlement Agreement also allows the the discharge of cyanides.
set at BPT levels. Administrator to exclude from This standard. however. only applies
(c) Pretreatment Standards. In regulation toxic pollutants detected in to those rermeries which discharge into
establishmg existing PSES. EPA found the emuent from a small number of a POTW which is requ~red by the Act to
that ammonia and oil and grease sources and uniquely related to those achieve effluent lim1tat1ons based on
interfere with the operation of POTWs sources. Appendix C lists the 1 toxic secondary treatment. Appendix G is a
at levels which may be discharged by pollutants which satisfy this critenon. list of those priority pollutants wh1cb
indirect dischargers in the petroleum Although certain other pollutants were were found to pass through POTWs
refining industry. Although the existing' found m the treated effluent at only one which only apply primary treatment.
PSES also contain a technology based refinery, their presence in the untreated Therefore. the Agency concludes that
limitation for chromium. this limitation effluent of a number of facilibes indicate eXIsting regulations cannot be used to
was included only as guidance to those that they are not uniquely related to that exclude these pollutants from regulation
POTWs which found it necessary or source. when a POTW bas been granted an
desirable to limit chromium. The Agency Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the Revised exemption under section 301(h) of the
.,oses that the chromium limitation Act Cram the requirement to achieve
be adopted as a mandatory Settlement Agreement also allows the
:eatment standard since EPA bas Administrator to exclude from effluent limitations based on secondary
lound that chrom1um accumulates in regulation toxic materials which were treatment. As discussed above
POTW sludges and will limit the sludge detected but for which no treatment (Regulated pollutants section) the
management alternatives of the POTW. technology is known to the Agency proposes to limit the toxic
The same pollutants (chromium. oil and Administrator that Wlll reduce pollutant total phenol (4AAP). As in the
grease. and ammorua) are also selected discharges of the pollutant. Cyan1de is case of BAT. the Agency believes that
for control in PSNS. The pretreatment discharged in significant amounts by the the technology upon which pretreatment
standards are expressed as maximum petroleum refmmg industry (see Section standards for phenol (4AAP) and
daily concentrations (milligrams per VI of the Development Document) but chromium are based will effectively
liter). Inionnational mass limitabons are EPA is not aware of any end-of-pipe control the other organics and metals
also provided for those POTWs which technology which w1ll reduce cyanide listed in Appendix F.
find it necessary or desirable to limit discharges beyond those presently XIV. Non-Water Quality Aspects of
total mass discharge of pollutants. discharged by the petroleum refmmg
Pollution Control
(d) NSPS. Since the new source industry. Based on the available data,
performance standard is zero discharges EPA is not able to detennine which The elimination or reduction of one
all pollutants are regulated. processes generate cyanide found in the form of pollution may aggravate other
untreated waste. EPA. however. plans to env1ronmental problems. Therefore.
XIIl. PoUutaats Not Regulated continue study of this problem to sections 304(b) and 306 of the Act
The Settlement Agreement contained determine whether cyanide discharges require EPA to consider the non-water
provisions authorizing the exclusion can be reduced by in-plant control. quality environmental impacts
from regulation. in certain instances. of Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the Revised (including energy requirements) of
toxic pollutants and industry Settlement Agreement also allows the certam regulations. In compliance with
subcategories. These provisions have Administrator to exclude from these proviSions, EPA has considered
been re-written in a Revised Settlement regulation toxic pollutants which will be the effect of these regulations on a1r
Agreement which was approved by the effectively controlled by the technology pollution, solid waste generation. and
District Court for the District of upon which are based other effluent energy consumption. This proposal was
Columbia on March 9. 1919. limitations. The Agency believes that circulated to and reviewed by EPA
It should be noted that the limitations the technology upon which BAT effluent personnel respons1ble for non-water
in tlus regulation bas been developed to limitations for phenol (4AAP) and quality environmental programs. While
cover the general case for this jndustry chromium are based will effectively it is difficult to balance pollution
'·-:ategory.ln speclfic cases. it may be control the organic and metallic tox1c problems against each other and agamst
1sary for the NPDES permitting pollutants listed in Appendix D. The energy ut1lization. EPA is proposmg
.Jrity to establish pemut limits on toxic pollutants listed in Appendix 0 regulations wb1ch 1t believes best serve
tuJUC pollutants which are not subject to are, therefore. excluded from regulation. often competing national goals.
175
..
Federal Register / Vol. 44. No. 247 / Friday. December 21, 1979 / Proposed Rules 75937
The following are the non-water The proposed regulations for the than the unit costs of compliance, it is
quality environmental impacts petroleum refimng industry do not meet not considered a potent1al closure.
(including energy requirements) the proposed criteria for a formal For new sources. EPA consider& thE
associated with the proposed- Regula!ory Analysis. Nonetheless. tlus impact of the regulations on the cos-ts
regulations: proposed rulemalung satisfies. the fonnal production of new capacity. The
Air Pollution--Imposition of BAT, Regulatory Analysis reqmements. Department of Energy has predicted that
BCT, NSPS, and pretreatment standards EPA's econom1c impact. assessment is during the penod form 1985 to 2000 most'
will not create any additional all" set forth in Economic Analys1s of of the growth. of petroleum product
pollution problems. Proposed Rev1sed Effluent Standards consumption wtll be in gasoline,
Solid Waste-A study by EPA's and Limitations for the Petroleum· distillate fuels, and petrochemical•
Office o£Air Quality and Standards Re{imns Industry November 1979, EPA feedstocks. In keeping wtth this
shows that considerable. amounts- of 440/ 2_7g....o27. This report details the prediction, the econom1c analysis for
solid wastes are already being investment and annual costs for the new sources was based on a 190,000
generated by the petroleum refinmg barrel a day refinery w1th a
Industry. Some of this solid waste IS industry as a whole and for individual configuration appropriate for
generated by C111T8nt wastewater plants covered by the proposed emphasizing production of these
treatment equipment. but the majonty is petroleum refirung regulations. The data products.
generated by-other sources such as underlymg the analys1s were obtamed Of the 285 domesti~: refineries: 218 ere
process sources, storage tank bottoms. from the "Estimation of Costs expected to incur addillonal cos~ to
etc. Proposed BAT and PSES wtll Associated with the Application of BAT comply with these regulations. The
increase these wastes by as much as Urmtations for the Petroleum Refining mvestment' required would be 5132.2"
15.000 mebic tons- per year beyond BPT Po1nt Source Category on a Plant-by- million w1th·an annual cost of553.9
levels. Moat of this amount will be Plant Basis ... March, 1979 and million including intetest and
additional sludge from the use of supplements, publicly available depreciabon. No refinery closures would
powdered activated carbon. if used economic infonnation, and data from the be expected due to these regulations
[BAT OPTION TiiREEl as an alternative Agency survey of the industry. The and the equivalent of610 jobs to operate
to some of the now reduction in BAT report assesses the impact of pollution control equipment would.be
OPTION TWO. These sludges wtD compliance costs in terms of plant added to current industry emplo:tment
con tam additional organic toxic closures, production. changes, price of 160,000. Other econotmc effects would
pollutants and some additional metals. changes, employment changes, local depend. on the course of public policy
On th.r other !rand, EPA estimates that · community impacts. and balance of regarding refineries and are discussed'
implementation of proposed trade effects~ below.
pretreatment standards will result in Refined petroleum products hold.,uch, Scenario One-The first econonuc
POTW sludges haVUJg lesser quantities economic unportanc.r in our soc1ety that scenano assumes tanffs on. unported'
and concentrations of toxic pollutan<s. price fluctuations tend to have serious goods are set u1.a manner thalgives l
POTW sl11dges wtll become more consequence: as a result. the U.S. mdustry a relatively low level of
amenab!e to a wt~er-~nge o.f disposal government stringently controls the protection from imported produc:s. As a.
altemat1ves, poss1bl~ Including industry. Some of the major economic result. current refimng. capac1L'y is ·
benefictal use on- agnculturallands. controls on. the industry are crude o11 main tamed and no new sources enter
Energy R~quirements-EPA esumates pr1ce controls, product pnce controls. the industry. Price !eves are unaffected:
that the achievement of proposed BAT and price- protection from. imported by these proposed regulations, and: the
~nd B~ effluent _lim1tati~ns will result refined products. The econoiiUC' analysts average pollution control cost of 5.0002 a
m a net m_crease m ele~trical energy assumes that crude 011 and product price gallon 1s absorbed by the refinenes .. The
con~umption of approxunately 28.4 controls- wlll be essentially eliminated. proposed regulations- would not affect
nulhon kdowatr-hours per year. by the time these regulauons require refining capac1ty, domestic
Proposed pretreatment standard~ ar~ compliance, but considers two scenanos consumption. or the balance of trade.
proJected to add another 1.9 million of price protection. The first scenario 1. BAT/BCT-EPA est1mates that 165
kuowatt-hours to electncal energy . directly dischargmg refinenes would
cons t' ~ 'sting.· d' t assumes a level of pnce protection for
diach':;ie:" or exJ m tree domestic refmeries that maintains the incur additional costs to meet these
· · current capacity. The second scenano requirements. Additlonal investment
XV. Costs, Effluent Reduction Benefits. assumes a level of price protection such would be 5113.0 m1llion with annual
aad Economic Impact that capacity increases parallel to the. costs of $48.1 mulion includmg interest
and depceciation. These costs would be
Executive Order 1204f requireS" EPA increase in total domestic conswnpt1on. absorbed' by the refmer1es rather. than.
and other agenc1es to perform The economic 1mpacts. of the passed on as pr1ce increases. None. of
Regulatory Analysis of certam regulations, including refinery closangs. the refineries would be expected. to
regulationa. 43 FR 12661 (March 23, are discussed separately for each of close due to these regulations and
1978). EPA's proposed regulations for these scenarios. A mora complete refinery capac1ty. would remain
implementing Execullve Order 12044 discussi'on of poss1ble future scenarios unchanged.
require a Regulatory Analysis for ma 1or and the selection of these two is 2. PSES-Approximately 53 indirecr
s1gn1ficant regulations mvolving annual presented.in the Economic Analysts. discharging refinenes would mcur
compliance costs of 5100 million or Refinery closures are evaluated on an additional costs to meet these
meeting other specified critena. 43 FR indivtdual refinery basis. Refinenes with reqwrements. Additional investment
29891 Uuly 11. 1978). Where these costs of more than S.OOl per gallon are would be 59.6 million w1th annual costs
criteria ant met. the proposed analyzed m deta1l including a of $5.2 million including interest and
regulations require EPA to prepare a comparison of the estimated cash Bow depreciation. These coats would be
format Regulatory Analysis, including per unit of production With umt costs of absorbed by the refineries rather thar
an economic impact analysis and an complying with the regulations. [f the passed on as price increases. :"lone of
evaluation of regulatory altemabves. refmery generates a cash Bow greater these refmenes would have compliance
176
75938 Federal Register I Vol. 44. No. 247 I Friday. December 21. 1979 I Proposed Rules
c,.••a of $.001 or more per gallon of to PSNS. The additional costs and certain refineries cease using corrosion
o:t. None of the refinenes would be resulting price increases are based on a inhibitors which contain zinc and
.ed to close due to the regulation 190.000 barrel a day refmery configured chromium and use alternate
~ .efmery capacity would remain to emphasize products for which organophosphate corrosion inhib1tors or
unchanged. Since prices would be additional capacity is most needed. U other alternates. Additionally, EPA may
unaffected. domestic consumption and this new refinery would discharge to a promulgate BMPs requiring chk.es, curbs,
the balance of trade would also remain municipal ~atment system, an or other measures to contam leaks and
unchanged by these regulations. additional $0.3 million investment would sp11ls of toxic pollutants not controlled
3. NSPS/PSNs-5ince refmery be required with annual costs of $0.2 under section 311(j)(l)(c) of the Act.
capacity is held at current levels for this million including interest and
scenario, no major new capacity is depreciation. This would amount to XVU. Upset and Bypass Provisions
constructed. These new source $.0001 per gallon. Price increases would An issue ofrecurrent concern has
requirements then have no economic be no more than $.0001 a gallon due to been whether industry guidelines should
effects. PSNS. U this refinery is at an acceptable include provisions authorizing
Scenario Two-The second economic site from which it could not discharge to noncompliance with effluent limitations
scenario allows for a level of industry a municipal treatment system, the during periods of "upset" or "bypass."
price protection such that refining refmery would have to achieve zero An upset, sometimes called an
capacity grows at the same rate as discharge to be in compliance with "excursion," is unintentional
domestic consumption. In other words, NSPS. Additional investment of $9.5 noncompliance occurnng for reasons
domestic refinenes retain the same m1Uion with annual costs of $3.5 million beyond the reasonable control of the
share of the domestic market as they do including interest and depreciation permittee. It has been argued that an
now. In this scenario the price level is would be required as compared to the upset provision in EPA's effluent
set high enough to attract new refmeries, costs of meeting current NSPS. This lim1tauons guidelines is necessary
wtth new source pollution control would amount to $.001 per gallon. because such upsets wtll inevttably
equipment, into the industry. These causing price increases of up to $0.001 a occur due to limitations in even properly
proposed regulations increase the cost gallon. Depending on sites avauable for operated control equipment. Because
of production at new refineries by $.0001 new refinenes. prices would increase technology-based lmutations are to
to $.001 a gallon of product, and raise from $.0001 to $.001 per gallon. require only what technology can
the industry-wide price level by the achieve. it is claimed that liabLlity for
same amount. Effluent Reduction Benefits such Situations is improper. When
1. BAT/BCT-EPA estimates 185 EPA estimates that achievement of confronted with this issue. courts have
direct discharging refmeriea would incur BAT effiuent limitations will remove divided on the question of whether an
additional coats to meet these approximately 123,300 pounds per year explicit upset or excursion exemption 1s
·ements. Additional investment of chromium, 86,180 pounds per year of necessary or whether upset or excurs1on
be 5113.0 million with an annual phenols (total-4AAP), and substantial exemption IS necessary or whether ·
,f 548.7 auUion including interest quantities of other toxic pollutants. EPA upset or excurs1on inc1dents may be
and depreciation. None of this cost is estimates that achievement of BCT handled through EPA's exerc1se of
absorbed by the refineries. however, effluent limitations will remove enforcement discretion. Compare
since the price level is set high enough approximately 48.7 million pounds per Marathon Oil Co. v. EPA. 564 F. 2d 1253
to attract new refmeries. Existing year of conventional pollutants. (9th Cir. 1977) with Weyerhaeuser v.
refmeries would be in a much more Cost/e. supra. and Corn Refiners
XVI. Best Management Practices
favorable finanCJal situation compared Association. et ai: v. CostJe, No. 78-1069
to Scenario One because of the elevated Section 304(e) of the Clean Water Act (8th Cir., April 2. 1979). See also
price levels necessary to attract new authorizes the AdmiJustrator to Amencan Petroleum Institute v. EPA,
refineries to the industry. No closures prescribe "best management practices" 540 F. 2d 1023 (lOth Cir. 1978): CPC
would be expected, and capacity, ("BMPs"), descnbed under Authority International, Inc. v. Train. 540 F. 2d
domestic consumption, and the balance and Background. EPA intends to 1320 (8th Cir. 1976): FMC Corp. v. Train.
of trade would be unchanged by these develop BMPs wh1ch fre: (1) applicable 539 F. 2d 973 (4th Cir. 1976).
SAT /BCT regulations. to aU industrial sites: (Z) applicable to While an upset IS an unmtentional
Z. PSEs-Approxunately 53 indirect an designated industrial category: and ep1sode dunng which effluent linuts are
discharging refmeries would incur (3) capable of guiding pennll authorities exceeded. a bypass is an act of
additional costs to meet these in establishing BMPs requl.l'ed by UDique intentional noncompliance during which
requirements. Additional investment circumstances at a given plant. waste treatment facilities are
would be $9.8 million with annual costs EPA is considering promulgating Circumvented in emergency situations.
of 55.2 million including interest and BMPs spec1fic to the petroleum refining Bypass provisions have. in the past.
depreciation. As with direct dischargers, mdustry at some lime in the future. One been Included in NPDES perm1ts.
Q..one of this cost is absorbed by the area of concern is the potential for leaks EPA has determmed that both upset
refmeries. No closures would be and sp11ls of toxic pollutants stored in and bypass provisions should be
expected. and capacity, domestic on-site facilities and not subJect to included in NPDES penruts and has
consumption, and the balance of trade controls under section 31l(J)(l)(c) of the recently promulgated NPDES regulations
would remain unchanged by these PSES. Act. Another process which m1ght be wh1ch include upset and bypass perm1t
3. New Sources--In econom1c controlled by BMPs is cooling tower prov1s1ons 44 FR 3285. Uune 7, 1979). The
Scenario Two, refinery capacity grows blowdown. It 1s poss1ble that refineries upset prov1sion establishes an upset as
at the same rate as domesbc could be requ1red to mon1tor for an affirmative defense to presecuuon for
consumption, encouraged by pnce chromium and zinc in both cooling v1olat1on of technology-based effluent
·eses due to higher tanffs. New tower blowdown and in effluent limitation. The bypass provision
1ty brought on stream 1s e1ther a discharge. In the event of persistently authorizes bypass1ng to prevent loss of
Jischarge facility (s1nce NSPS high discharges of these compounds, the life. personal inJury or severe property
auows no discharge) or a faCJlity subject pennitbng author1ty may reqwre that damage. Consequently, although
177
Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 247 I Friday, December 21. 1979 I Proposed Rules 75939
permittees in the petroleum refining modifications from national limitations. hmatations must be applied by the
industry will be entitled to upset end but there are other issues relahng to the permil·issuing authonty.
bypass provisions in NPDES permits. inter3ction of these regulations and With respect to momtoring
these proposed regulations do not NPDES pennits. One matter whach has requirements, the Agency antends ta
addresa these issues. been 'subje<:t to different judicial views establish a regulation requiring
is the scope of NPDES permat permittees to conduct additional
XVJU. Variances and Modificatioas proceedings in the absence of effluent monitormg when they violate permit.
Both BAT and Bcr effluent limatations guadelines and standards. limitations. The provisions of such
limitations are subject to EPA's Under currently applicable EPA monitoring requtrements will be specific.
"fundamentally diHerent factors" regulations. states and EPA Reg1ons for each permittee and may include
variance. See E. l du Pont de Nemours assutng NPDES permits pnor to analysis for some or all of th& toxic
and Co. v. Train. 430 U.S. 112 (1977); promulgation of these regulations must pollutants or the use of biomorutoring
Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Castle, supra. This include a "re-opener clause," providing techntques. The addittonal monitoring is
variance recognizes factors concerning a for permits to be modified to incorporate destgned to determane the cause o{ the
particular discharger which are "taxies" regulations when they are violation. necessary correctJve
fundamentally diHerent from the factors promulgated. See 43 FR 22159 (May 23, measures. and the idenbty and quaatlty
considered in this rulemaking. Although 1978). To avoid cumbersome of toXIc pollutants discharged. Each
this variance clause was aet forth iD. modification procedures. EPA has violation will be evaluated on a case-by-
EPA's 1973-1976 industry regulations adopted a policy ol issuing short-term C3se bas1a by the pemultang monitoring.
and will not be included in the permits, with a view toward isswag contained in the permit is necessary. A
petroleum rerming or other industry long-term pemuts only after more lengthy discussaon of this
regulations. See the final NPDES promulgation of these and other BAT requirement appears at 44 FR 34407,
regulahons at 44 FR 32854. 32950 Uune 7, regulations. The Agency baa published Uune 14, 1979).
1979), for the rext and explanation of the rules designed to encourage &tales to do One additional top1c that warrants
"Fundamentally different factors'' the same. See 43 FR 5806U (Dec. 11. discuss1on is the operation of EPA's
vanance. Final NPDES resuJations will 1978). However, m the event that EPA NPDES enforcement program. many
be promulgated shortly. findsitnecessarytoissuelongterm aspects of which have been consadered ·
Pretreatment standards for f:X,isbng perrru ts pnor to promulgation of BAT in developing these regulations. The
sources are subject to the regulations, EPA and states wdl follow Agency washes to emphasize thaL
"fundamentally different factors'" essentially the same procedures utilized although the Clean Water Act is a str1ct
variance and credits Cor pollutants in many cases of inlual permit issuance. liabality statute, the initiation of ..
removed by POlW's. See 40 CFR 403.7, The appropnate technology levels and enforcement proceedings by EPA is
403.13: 43 FR 27'738 U\Ule 28. 1978). limatationa w1ll be assessed by the discretionary.· EPA has exercsed and
Pretreabnent standards Cor new sources pennat 1ssuer on a case-by-case basis, antends to exercise that discretion m a
are .subject only to the credits proviSion on consideration of the statutory £actors. manner wluch recognizes and promotes
in 40 CFR 403.7. New source See U.S. Steel Corp. v. Train, 556 F. 2d good faath compliance efforts and
performance standards are not subject 822. 844. 854 (7th Cir. 197ij. In these conserves enforcement resources for
to modification through EPA's SltuatJons. EPA documents and droit those who fad to make good faith efforts
"fundamentally diHerent factors'' documents (including tbe!e proposed to comply with the AcL
variance or any statutory or regulatory regulations and supportL.'18 documents)
modifications. See duPont v. Traln. are relevant'evtdence, but not binding, XX. Summary of Public Participation
supra. in NPDES pemut proceedlZlgs. See 44 FR On Apnl Z1. 1978, EPA circulated a
32854 (Juae 7, 1979). - draft technacaJ development document
XlX. Relatioaship to NPDES Permits Another noteworthY- top1c is the effect to interested parties. including the
The BAT. BCT, and NSPS limitations of these regulations on the power of American Petroleum Institute (API), the.
in these regulations will be applied to NPDES permit issuing aull-nnties. The Natural Resources Defense Councd
individual petroleum refining plants promulgation of these re~Ju:arions does (NRDC), and affected state and local
through NPDES permits issued by EPA not restrict the power of any permit- authonties. That document did not
or approved state agencies, under issuing authonty to act m any manner mclude recommendations for spec1fic
section 402 of the AcL Upon the not inconsistent with law or thr.se or effluent linutallons and pretreatment
promulgation of rmal regulations, the any other EPA regulatiors. gwdelines or standards. Instead at presented the
numerical effluent limitations must be policy. For example, the faC"t that these techrucal basts for these proposed
applied in all federal NPDES pennils regulations do not control a particular regulahons. A public meetmg was held
thereafter issued to petroleum refining pollutant does not preclude the permit on June 1. 1978 for presentatton and
direct discharsers. Permits assued by assuer from limiting such pollutant on a discussion of comments by Interested
Slates with NPDES authority may case-by-case basis, when necessary to part1es. A brief summary of major
contain more strmgent limitations than carry out the purposes of the Act. In comments as presented below. The
those proposed here. In addition, on addition, to the extent that state water Agency rece1ved a number of comments
promulgation, the pretreatment quality standards or other provis1ons of relahng to specafic techn1cal infonnatiorr
lima lations are directly applicable to state or Federal law require limitation o{ 1n the Development Document. These
indirect dischargers. pollutants not covered by these have not been summarized here but
The previous section discussed the regulations (or require more stringent ·· • have been consadered in revismg the
avallability of vanances and limatataons on covered pollutants), such Development Document.
178
75940 Federal Register I Vol. 44. No. 247 I Friday. December 21: 1979 I Proposed Rules
11 I Comment-A number of is proposing a stepwise approach for uncontrollable variations in pollutant

~pants expressed concem about toward higher recycle rates for existing concentrations. The Agency believes
nited amount of data available to refineries and zero discharge of that where variations can be controlled
. 4'\gency for establishing BAT pollutants only for new sources (see with available technology, these sources
limitations and pretreatment standards, discussion under Option Two of Best oi variation should be controlled. A
especially for toxic pollutants. Available Technology Economically large part of the variation in effluent
Response-FJ'A recosnizes that the Achievable and Option Three of New now (about 75" of the variation) is
data base for toxic pollutants is Umited. Source Performance Standards). attiibutable to variations in amount of
Data limitations result from a history of {4} Comment-Numerous comments crude oil processed. This variation will
infrequent monitoring or resulation. and were received stating that the now be considered by the establishment of
the hish costs. sophistication, time model presented in the Draft limitations based on the mass pollutant
delays, and limited laboratory Development Document was invalid for discharged per unit of crude oil
availability for toxic pollutant analyses. a number of statistical and technical processed (kg of pollutant/1.000 cubic
The Agency has sought and utilized all reasons. The comments also stated that meters of cn:.de throughput).
available data. except to the extent that• some of the data used in the model were Technology Is available to control the
it has not required mandatory sampling aot correcL remaining variation In effluent now.
and analyses under Section 308 of the Response-EPA hes mailed to each That technology Is equalization-
AcL EPA solicits additional voluntary refinery which responded to the original providing a large storage volume for the
data sub.missioaa. questionnaires a printout of important effiuent and controlling the rate of
{2} Comment-Reductions in now information which EPA used to discharge. Equalization was considered
have not been documented to result in characterize their refinery and bas as a part of BPT technology, and costs
reductions in pollutant discharge, asked them to verify or correct the and economic Impacts for equaliza lion
particularly for Chemical Oxygen information. Considerable additional were calculated when BPT was ·
Demand. now modeling effort has also been promulgated. Based on the use of
Response-As stated in the section expended with the result that a much equalization, no variability factors were
Available Waste Water Control and improved flow model represents the used for flow variations in establishing
Treatment Technology, the Agency has • basis for these proposed resulatioas. BPT limitations, and the Agency
concluded that effiueat coacentraton EPA will continue its now modeling believes that none are necessary in
from a given size treatment system will efforts, and any impravement will be these resulaftons if available BPT
not change as emuent now is decreased. reflected in the final resulatioas. technology is used.
EPA has recognized that Chemical (5} Comment-All major sources of
Oxygen Demand may be an exception wastewater are not represented as XXI. Solicitation of Comments
and is not regula tins COD until variables in the now model. EPA invites and encourages public
-:ient information is available to Response-The intent of the flow participation in this rulemaking. The
lish the relationship between model is not to identify and quantify Agency asks that any deficiencies in the
.eat COD concentration and now each source, or even major source, of record of this proposal be pointed to
reduction. A technical paper is wastewater in the refinery. The wtth speci.fic1ty and that susaested
referenced in the Development variables contained in the model are not revisions or corrections be supported by
Document describing measurements necessarily the major coatnbutors of data.
made at one refinery which signi1icantly wastewater (cooling tower blowdown. EPA is particularly interested in
decreased emuent now (increased for example, although generally one of receiving additional comments and data
reuse/recycle of wastewaters). That the largest contributors to wastewater on the following issues:
refinery reported that effiueat now is not a variable). The intent Is to (1) The Agency is reviewing the
coacentratioas of all pollutants determine, if possible, the total refinery sampling and analytical methods used
remained constant after the now effluent now by usingoe number of to determine the presence and
reductions except COD. Total COD process or other variables. By magnitude of toxic pollutants. and
discharged was reduced but not in direct considering the variables in the model solicits comments on the data produced
proportion to the now reduction. (49 processes in 4 groups), the model by these methods, and the methods
(3} Comment-Wastewater reduction does predict the effluent Oow within themselves.
and reuse may require extensive statistical acceptability. (2) The Agency is considering the
additional treatment before it can be {6} Comment-Efilueat limitations are possibility of establishing numerical
used for some applications. In areas obtained by multiplying achievable effluent limitations for toxic pollutants
where there is a scarcity of suitable raw values of three parameters-{1) other than phenol and chromium. The
water, exteasive treatment of wastewater now, (2) pollutant Agency IS considering mass linutations
wastewater for reuse may be concentration. and (3) a variability for the following additional toxic
economically justified. However, there factor to account for short term pollutants: ethylbenzene. 50 ,u.g/1:
is a point considerably short of total fluctuations in pollutant concentration. naphtalene, 50 ,u.g/1: 2.4 dimethylphenol,
recycle where it becomes uneconomical Wastewater now rates also vary and an SO ,u.g/1: benzene, 50 ,u.g/1: toluene, 50
to treat wastewater for reuse. additional vanability factor should be ,u.g/1. The concentrations being
Response-FJ'A recosnizes that the used to account for nuctuations in considered are thirty day average
establishment of BAT and NSPS wastewater now. concentrations. Mass linutations would
considers factors such as coat and that Response-Pollutant concentrations be calculated by multiplying the
zero discharge while technically feasible . in rmal wastewater now will vary concentrations by the achievable flow
(some refineries have already achieved. somewhat even with good operation of for the selected option. Daily maXImum
it) may require very high costs the treatment system. Additional limitations would be calculated by
"iculariy retrofit costs for existing variability will occur in poorly operated multiplying the tlurty day limitallon by a
ries). EPA has carefully considered treatment systems. The variability variability factor to account for daily
, of technology options in selecting factors used to establish these proposed fluctuations in pollutant concentration.
BAT and NSPS technologies. Thus. EPA regulations are intended to account only The technical bases for these limitations
179
Federal Register I Vol. 44." No. 247 I Friday, December 21, 1979 I Proposed Rules 75941
are presented in the development treatment for discharge to U.S. waters: Best Management Practices). EPA
documenL .EPA requests comments on fifty-five existins refmeries already requests comments on the clarity,
these Umitations and their bases." practice zero discharge. EPA specifically specificity, and practicability of these
(3) In recogn.ition of the limits of soUcits coUDDents and data which would BMPs, as well as information and
available data and the expense of support or refute the achievability of no sussestions concernins additional BMPs
monitorins for the toxic pollutants listed discharge on a nationwide basis for new wruch may be appropriate.
in solicitation of comment (2) above, refineries. Comments on :he other {9) EPA has obtained from the
EPA is also considerins the possibility options identified for new source Industry a substantial data base for the
of resulatins those toxic pollutants with standards are also soUcited. control and treatment technologies
limitations on "Indicator'' pollutants (5) As stated in the section Data which serve as the basis for the
rather than or as an alternative to Catherina Ef!orts, EPA found that the proposed resuiations. Plants which have·
limitations on the specific toxJc seventeen refineries sampled during the not submitted data, or which have
pollutants discussed above. The data sathering effort were achieving a compiled data more recent than that
samplins and analysis data (see Data sisnificantly lower effluent already submitted, are requested to
Catherina Efforts section above) show concentration of total phenol {4AAP) forward these data to EPA. These data
that when concentrations of certain than that assumed in establishins BPT should be individual data points, not
traditional pollutants are reduced. limitations. Other technical studies have averages or other summary data,
concentrations of toxic pollutants are reached the same conclusion. Therefore. including flow, production. and all
also reduced. While relationships the Agency is proposins to use 19 p.g/1 pollutant parameters for which analyses
between "indicator" pollutants and as the achievable long term were run. Please submit any
toxic pollutants may not be quantifiable concentration for total phenol (4AAP). qualifications to the data. such as
on a one-to-one basis. control of the EPA requests comments and data which descriptions of facility design, operating
"indicator" would reasonably assure would e1ther verify or refute the procedures, and upset problems during
control of taxies with similar physical assumption that a lower concentration spec1fied periods.
and chemical properties responsive to of total phenol (4AAP) is achievable In {10) .EPA requests that POTWs which
similar treatment mechanisms (e.a.: 2.4 petroleum refmeries. receive wastewaters from petroleum
dimethyl phenol is treated by (6) EPA assumes that POTWs hava refming plants submit data which would
biodesradation and could be controlled installed secondary treatment in document the occurrence of interference
with BODS as an "Indicator" of decidins whether pollutants pass with collection system and treatment
biodesradation performance). This throush or are incompatible with plant operations, permit violations,
method of taxies resulation could POTWs. .EPA makes this assumption sludge disposal difficulties, or other
obviate the difficulties, hish costs, and regardless of whether a refinery is incidents attributable to the pollutants
delays of ~ponitorins and analysis that actually discharging into a POTW with contamed in POTW influenL
could result from limitations solely on secondary treatmenL The only
exception to"this assumption would be if · Dated: November 27, 1979.
the toxic pollutants. Specifically, EPA is Douglas M. Coatla.
considerins limitations on oil and a refmery discharges into a POTW
which is not required by the Clean Administrator.
srease. total suspended solids,
biochemical oxysen demand. and total Water Act to achieve effluent Appeadix A '-Abbrevialloas. Acronyms and.
organic carbon as "Indicator'" pollutants. limitations based on secondary Oilier Tanaa Used iD this Notic:a
Limitations would be based on treatmenL These are refmerie:; Act-The Clean Water Act.
"indicator'' pollutant concentrations and discharging into a POTW which has Agency-The U.S. Eaviroameutal Protection
nows achievable with technologies received a waiver under section 301{h) Agency.
identified as BAT and BACT (See Best of the AcL (See discussion under BAT-The best avauable technology
Available TechnoloSY Economically Pretreatment Standards above). EPA econom1cally acmevabla, under Section
solic1ts comments on this approach to 304(b)(2)(B) of the AcL
Achievable and New Source BCT-The best convenbonal pollutant
Performance Standards sections above). selecting pollutants for control by
pretreatment stapdards. control tec.bnology, under Section 304(b)(4).
It is the Asency's pos1tion that when (7) Possible underestimation of control oftha AcL
used as "indicator'' pollutants, BAT technoloSY costs was an issue raised BMP-Best management practices under
limitations may be established for Section 304(e) of the AcL
during the public comment meeting and BPT-The best practicable control technology
conventional pollutants without resard in written comments.. In order to perform
to the BCT cost teaL Moreover, when currently avBllable, under Section 304(b)(l)
a meaninsfu.l comparison of EPA cost oftha Act.
non-toxic. non-conventional pollutants data and industry cost data. .EPA Clean Water Act-The Federal Water
(such as total organic carbon) are used . requests detailed information on salient Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
as "indicator" pollutants, it is the desisn and operatins characteristics: (33 U.S.C. 1251 111 seq.), as amended by the
Asency's position that such limitations actual installed cost (not estimates of Clean Water Act of 1977 (Pub. L. ~Zli').
are not subject to Section 301(c) or • replacement costs) for each unit Direct discharsel'-A facility which
Section 301(g) modifications. EPA discharges or may discharge pollutanta iato
treatment operation or piece of waters of the Uruted States.
requests comments on the use of specific equipment. the date of installation and
limitations on the discharge of Indirect discharger-A facility which
the amount of installation labor discharges or may dlscharge pollutants into.
"indicator'' pollutants as an alternative proVIded by plant personnel: and the a pubUcly owned treatment works.
to limitations on the toxic pollutants actual cost for operation and· NPDES pemut-A National Pollutant
described above in this section. maintenance, broken down into units of Discharge Elimmataon System pennit
(4) A study by an Industry trade usage and cost for energy (kilowatt issued under secbon 402 of the AcL
association (the American Petroleum NS~New source performance standards,
hours or equivalent), chemicals. and under section 306 of the AcL
Institute) (API) concludes that for new labor (work-years or equivalent). POTW-Publicly owned treatment worka.
refineries total recycle (no discharge) is (8) The Agency is considering best
not only technically feasible, but may be manasement practices (BMPs) for 1
Appendix A lhrau&h H wtU aat appear 1.a the
economically more favorable than specific appUcation in this industry (see Code of Federal Regulsllolllo
180
75942 Federal Register I Vol. 44. No. 247 I Friday, December 21. 1979 I Proposed Rules
D~:RS-Pratreatment standards far exfstfDs 4.4'-DDD 2.Metals
FC8S of indirect discharps. UDder a-endosulfan-Aipha antimony (total)
Ctfoa 307(b) of the Ac:L b-eadoaulfan-Beta arsenic (total)
PSNs-Pretreatmant atandarda for new endorrulfaa rrulfate beryllium (total)
• IO\II'C81 of direc:t diachlll"pS. 11Dder 118Cticm eadriD cadmium (total)
307(b) and (c) of the Acl. endrln aldehyde copper (total)
RCRA-Resource Conservation and. heptachlor cyamde (total)
Recovery Act (PL 94-680) of 1978. heptachlor epoxide lead (total)
Ameadmanta 1o SoUd Wute Dlaposal Act. a·BHC.Aipba mercury (total)
Appeadix &-Toxic PoUutaata Not Datecled b-BHCBeta mckel (total)
Ill Tnatad EfD1181118 (Dirac:t Dlsc:lwp) r-BHC-Gamma selenium (total)
a·BHC·Delta salver
Orsanit:!l PCB-1242 thallium (total)
acrolefD PCB-1254 zinc (total)
acrylonitrile Olhtmt
chlorobenzene Appendix £-Toxic PoUutaata Not Detected
1.1,1·1richloroetlame ubestoa (6broua) ID Dlac:biU'Ia ta Parwa (Indirect Dlacharge)
1.1-dlchloroetbaae Appendix c-TOJdc PoDutanta Foud in Oa.ly z. Orsanic.
l.l.Z·Irichloroethue Oae Reftaery Effluent (at Coacentratfana
chloroethane acrolein
Hlpu 1!laa Those Fouad ID the Intake acrylonitrile
2-c:hloroethylviDyl ether Water) and WbJch Are Uniquely Related to
chloroform carbon tetrachloride-
tbe Re&aery at Wbic:b i& Wu Detected (Dinlcl 1.1-dlchloroethaae
methyl chloride Dllcharae)
methyl bromide 1.1.Z·trlchloroetbane
bromoform t. 01JaniCII 1.1.2.2-tetrachloroetbaaa
lrichloroOuoromethane chloroethane
Carbon tetrachloride z.chloroethylvfnyl ether
dichlarocbfluoromethane 1,1-dlchloroethylene
chlorodibromomethane 1,1-dlchloroethylene
1.2-dlchloropropaae 1.Z·trane.dfchloroetbylena
vtayL chloride
1.Z.dfchloropropylene 1.2-dlchloropropane
acmaphtheu 2.4-clichlorophenol
benzidine t.z.dichloropropyleae
di·a-butyl phthalala methyl chloride
1.2.4-trichlorobeuzeae
climetbyl phthalate methyl bromide
hexachlorobBDZme
hexachloroetllaae 2. Peslicida bromoform
bla(chloromethyl) ether dichlorobromametbaae
Noaa trichlorofiuorometbaae
~ .. r2-c:hloroethyl) elhar
'oroaaphthalme 3. Metals dlchlorodlfiuoromethaae
tnchloropheaol chlorodibromomethaae
None trichloroethylene
..Joropheaol
1.z.dfchlorobeuzeae 4. Olhert~ vinyl chloride
1.3-dlchlorobeazeae benzuiine
None
Lt-dlchlorobeazeae 1.2.4-trlchlorobeazeaa
3.3".dfchlorobeuzfdflle Appendix D-Toxic PoUutaata Detected in bexacblorobeDZeDe
2.4-dimtrotolueae Traated EDluenta ol Mora Than Oaa Refinery hexachloroethane
2.6-dlDftrotoluena or Detec:tad in tbe Treated Emueats of Oaa bia(chloromethyl) ether
1.2-dlpheaylhydraziDe Refinery But Not Uniquely Related to the bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
~oropheaylphenylethar Refinery at Whlc:b it Was Detected (Direct 2-chloronaphthalene
4-bromopheayl phenyl ether Dlsc:b.rpt Z.f.B-trichlompheaol
bia(2-chlorolsopropyl) ether parachlorometa cresol
bla(2-chloroethoxy) methue L O,.,aniCII 2-c:hloropbenol
hexachlorobutadlene Benzene 1.2-dlchloropbenol
hexachlorocyclopeatadieaa t.Z-dichloroetbue parachlorometa cresol
lsophorone 1.1.Z.Z.tetrachloroethane 2-ch.loraphenol
nitrobenzene parachlorometa cresol 1.2-dlchlorobenzene
Z·aitropheaol 1.Z·lr'an8-dichloroethylene 1.3-dlchlorobeuzeae
2.4-nitropheaol 2.4-dimethylpbmol 1.4-clichlorobeuzeae
4.1kllaitro-cM:resol ethylbenzena 3.3'-dichlorobeDZJdiae
N·nitroaodimethylamine Ouoraatheae 2.4-clichlorophenal
N·Ditrosodiphenylamme methylene chloride 2.8-dlnltrotoluene
N·nitrosodi-a-propylamlntt dichlorobromamethane Ouorenthene
pentachlorophenol naphthalene 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
butyl benzyl phthalate 4-nitrophenol 4-bromopbenyl phenyl ether
dl·n-octyl phthalate N-natrosodl·a-propylelnine bls(2-c:hloroaaopropyl) ether
3.4-beazofiuoranthene bis(2·ethylhexyl) phthalata bla(Z-chloroethoxy) methane
benzo(k) Ouaraathana dlethyl phthalate hexachlorobutadiene
aCeDapbthylena benzo(a)aathracene hexachlorocyciopentadieae
dlbaazo(a.h)anthracane beazo(a)pyrene mtrobenzeae
ideno(1,ac;d')pyrene cbryseae 2·nltrophenol
2.3.7_.tetrochloroclibaazo.p.dfoxia (.TCDD) anthracene 4-rutrophenol
benzo(glu)perylena 2.4-dlnitropheaol
Peslit:ida fluorene 4,8-di.aitra-o-cresol
"'in phenanthrene N·rutrosodlphenylamiae
ria pyrene N-aitrosocli·n·propylamine
dane tetrachloroethylene bis(2-ethylhexyl) pb&balate
••• &JDT toluene dimethyl phthalate
4.4'-DDB trichloroethylene benzo(a)pyrene
181
Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 247 I Friday, December 21, 1979 I Proposed Rules 75943
3,4-benzolluoranthena 4. Others (Asbestos, 4AAP Phtmol} PART 419-PETROLEUM REFINING

benzo(k)lluoranthena Not analyzed POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
acanaphthylene
benzo(Sbi)perylene Appeadix G-Toxic Pollutants Fouad to Pua General Provisions
dibenzo(a.h)antbracana Tbrou&,h POTW witb Only PrimarJ
Treatament (IDdlrect Discharge) Sec.
ldano(1,Z.3-c:d)pyrena 419.10 Applicability.
2.3,7,8-tatrac:hlora-dibenzo-p-dioxln(TCDD) t. Organics_ 419.11 General Defmitiona.
a. Pestit:ida benzene BPT Limitations
dieldrin s·BHC·Delta 1.2-dlchloroethane
chlordane PCB-1242 1.1.1-trlchloroethane Subpart A-Topping Subcategory
4,4'·DDD PCB-12.'54 chloroform 419.20 Applicability: description of the
a-endosulfan·Alpha PCB-1221 ethyl benzene· toppins subcatesory.
b-endosulfan·Beta PCB-1232 methylene chloride 419.21 Effiuent lirrutallons represenbns the
endosulfan sulfate PCB-1248 tetrachloroethylene desree of effluent reduction attamable by
endrin PCB-1280 toluene the application of the best practicable
endrin aldehyde PCB-1018 Z.4-dlmathylphenol control technoloSY currendy available
heptachlor toxapheua naphthalene (BPT),
4-BHCGamma phenol
butyl benzyl phthalate Subpart a-cracking Subcategory
.:&. Metals dl·n-butyl-phthalate
dl·n-octyl phthalate 419.30 Applicability: description of the
antimony (total) silver (total)
diethyl phthalate crac:kins subcategory.
beryllium (total) thallium (total) 419.31 Effluent limitations representing the
cadmium (total) Z. Pesticides desree of effluent reduction attainable by
4. Othen (IUbesi/JB, 4AAP Phenol} 4.4'-DDT a-BHC-Aipha the appllcabon of the best practicable
Not analyzed 4,4' -DOE b-BHC-Beta controltechnoloSY currendy avaLlable
3.Meta/s (BPT).
Appendix F-Toxic PoUutants Detected In
Dlacharaes to POTW (ladirect Dischaqe) arsenic (total) mercury (total)
chromium (total) nickel (total) Subpart c-Petrachemlcat Subcategoi'Y
t. Orranics copper (total) selenium (total) 419.40 Applicabtlity: descriphon of the
benzene lead (total) zane (total) petrochemical subcatesory.
chlorobenzene 4. Othen (IUbestos, 4AAP PhentJI} 419.41 Effluent limitations representing the
1.rdic:hloroethane degree of effluent reduction attainable by
Not analyzed the application of the best pracbcable
1.1.1·llichloroethane
chloroform AppeadixH control tachn.oloSY currendy available
ethylbenzene (BPT).
The followins denvation presents the
methylene chlroade development of mass hmitattana for phenol, Subpart D-Lube Subcategory
tetrachloroethylene based upon Opt1on 2. from the flow model
toluene 419.50 Applicability: description of the lube
discussed in Section V. subcatesory.
acenaphthene (1) Mass-Flaw x concentration x variabality
Z.4-dimethylphenol 419.51 Effiuant limitations representfns the
(equation 1) degree of effluent reduction attainable by
Z.4-diDitortoluene BAT Mass=.48 x Mass (based on averase
1.2-diphenylhydrazine the application of the best practicable
1978 industry Oow) control techn.oloSY currendy available
isophorone (2) Flow Model (See Section IV of the
naphthalene (BPT).
Development Document)=0.004C +
N-nitrosodiphenylamine 0.048K + 0.48(A+L) (equation 2) Subpart E-lntegrated Subcategory
pentachlorophenol Where:
phenol 419.80 Applicability: description of the
butyl benzyl phthalate Flow=mdlion sallona per day/1000 barrels of integrated subcategory.
di-n-butyl phthalate petroleum Uqu1d and natural sas liqwda 419.81 Eflluentllnutauons representlns the
dl-n-octyl phthalate Casummatioa of the crude 011 and fed degree of efOuent reducuon attamable by
natural saa liquids to the atmospheric the application of the best practicable
diathyl phthalate dlattllation. vacuum disbUatfon. crude
benzo(a)anthracane control technoloSY currently avaLlabla
chrysena desalbns (in uruts of1.000 bbla/day) (BPT).
K=-summallon of the petroleum liqu1ds fed to
anthracene the catalytic crac:klns processes (i.a unit BAT, BCT IJmitatloaa and New Source and
Ouorena of 1.000 bbla/day) Pretreatment Stendarda
phenanthrene A""summatlon of the petroleum liquids fed to
pyrene Subpart F-Petroleum Refining Point
the asphalt processes (In un.ata of 1.000 Source Category
a. PestiCides bbls/day)
419.70 Applicability; description of the
aldrin hepatachlor epoxida L•aummalion of the petroleum liquids led to
the lube processes (In UDila of 1.000 bbls/ patroleum reflnins subcategory.
4.4'-DDT a-BHCAipha 419.71 Effiuent limitations suidelines
4.4'-DDE b·BHC.Bata day)
(3) Concentration and variability factor representlns the desree of effluent
3. Metals Phenol=t9 1'8/1 (concentration) reduction attainable by the apphcation of
t.7 (variability !actor Cor 30 day averases) the best available technology
arsenic (total) mercury (total) economically achievable (BAT).
chromaum (total) nickel (total) (4) Sample Calculation
Masa=Fiow x concentration x vanabdity 419.72 Effluent lim.ttatians su1dehnes
copper (total) selen1um (total)
lead (total) zinc (total) factor x .48= (.004C + 048 K + .048 representlns the desree of effluent
(A +L)) X .019 mg/1 X 1.7 X 8.34 X .48 reduction attamable by the application of
Mass (lba of the best conventional pollutant control
Phenol)=O.OOOSC+0.0060K+O.OOB2(A+ technoiOSY (BCT),
L) 419.73 New source performance standards
(NSPS).
Part 419 Is revised to read as set forth 419.74 PretreabD.ent standards for new and
bela~ exiallns sources.
182
75944 Federal Register I Vol. 44. No. 241 I Friday, December 21, 1979 I Proposed Rules
419.71 Pretreatmmt standanfa far fadlitJea unit tables) or 1,000 cubic meters/day best practicable control technology
dlscharaiDI lata certalll publicly awaecl (whe.n uams the metric unit tables). currently available:
treatment works witb oaly primary (I) The term "asphalt and lube
lraatmeDL processes" means asphalt production.
Appaadix-8ample calculatJaa of pheaol asphalt oXidizing. asphalt emulsifying.
emuent UmitatJaaa far a typical refiDeJT. hydrofining. hydrofinishing,lube
Authority: Sectf.aaa 301. 304(b), (cJ. (e), aad
(8). 308(b) aad (c), 307(b) aad (c). and sot of bydrofi.ni.ng. white oil manufacturing,
the Cleaa Water Act (the Federal Water propane dewaxing, propane
PoUutJaa Coatrol Act Ameadmeata of 1972. deaspbaltiug, propane fractioniDg~
as ameaded by the Cleaa Watu Act of 1917). propane deresiDing. Duo Sol solvent
(the "Act"}: 33 United StataL 1311.1314(b), treating, solvent extraction. duotreating.
(c), (e), and (g), 13t8(b) and (c),1317(b) aad solvent dewaxing, solvent deasphalting. 8006.'--- 22.7 12.11
(c), and 1381: 88 StaL 818, Pub.l..sz....&~Xt 91 lube vacuum tower, oil fractionation. TSS:~--- 15& 10.1
StaL 1587,Pilb. I.~. batch still (naphta strip). bright stack cco•---
OIIIIId~
117
u
811.3
~7
treating. centrifuge and chilling MEK. PINnallc:
Geaeral Provisloas CIIIIIIIIIUIIII- 188 .G78
dewaxing. butane dewaxing, MEK- Amlnanlau~ 2.81 1.D
f41L10 Appllcallmty. Toluene dewaxing, deoiling (wax). Sulllde~-:-- .1.&8 088
This part.appUes ta any petroleum naphthellic lube production. .....,.,.
TOIIII Clllallllum- .345 »
. refinery which dischU~es or may S02extraction. wax pressing. wax plant c:nramluiii-
dischiU'Ie pollutants to waters of the (with neutral separation), furfural IIH----
United States or which introduces or extracting, clay contacting-percolation.
may Introduce pollutants into a publicly wax sweating. acid treat. phenol
owned treatment works.. extraction. lube and fuel additives.
sulfanate plant. MIBK. wax slabbing. BOOS•--- so ~
§411.11 General definitions. rust preventives, petrolatum oxidation. :~.--- 58
., 2
3.8
21.3'
IlL addition. to the definiticms set fartb. grease manufacture processes. These Oilllld Q l ' l a . - 2.5 1.3
In 40 CFR Part 401, the following. PIIenallo
processes are described in more detail ClllftiiCIUIIII- 060 J¥D
definitions apply to this part: in Sections IV and V of the development Ainnauu~ 99 •.s
(a) The tenD. "ballast" means the Oow documenL Sulftde_--- 053 024
Tallll Cllnlnluni- .122 Jl7't
of waters. Crom a ship, which ia treated UJ The term ''process wastewater" H.-..nt
at the refilluy.
(b) The term "feedstock'" mean& the
means all the wastewater from the
refinery with exception to storm water, IIH·----
c:llniiNn - -
w11111n .n.,.,. s.a ra ao
0.10 ~
crude aU and natural gas liquids fed to ballast water, sanitary wastewater. and 1 1n.an,-., Wllldllllll apgloean1 Cllll denalanllll 111111
the topping units. noncootact once through coolina water. 11111 c:lllonde 1an canmmraaan ., 11111 •""-" .,..... 1.000
(c) The term "once-through cooling mg/1 (1,000 11111111. IIIII AIIIPIINI Acllaantar may llllll1riUI8
(k) The following abbrevtaticms sball TOC a 1 .,.,_.. n beu of COD. Ellluan1 lm~ IDr
water" means those waters dischiU'Ied mean: (1) "bbl" means barrel (on& barrel TCC 811&1 be OU8d an em... dalll flam 111e p&an& ~
that are used for the purpose of heal equals 42 gallons), and (ZJ "R" means ~TCCIDSOD£
II In ln. judglnMI al IIIII A8Qianaf Admnillratar, ldiQul..
removal and do DOt come IDto direct
contact wi1b any raw material.
the ratio of cooling tower blowdown _....Dan data - IIIII _ , . _ .mu.nlllmlla1lanlo far
ln.
al :U 10 1 ID IIIII IIPDac.
now to total emuent 1low. TCC lflall be aiiiiiiiiiMiclll I ,_
iDtermediate, GZ' &uished product. '* ~ llrn1allana an 800S
(d) The term "crude throughput" or BPT Umltatlons (b) The limits set forth in paragraph
"C" meaa.a. the summation of the crude (a) of this section are to be multiplied by
oU and natural gas Uquid& fed to the Subpart A-Topping Subcategory the following factors to calculate the
crude processes iD. unit o£1.000 bbl/day maximum for any one day and
(when usina the Eagliali unit tables) 01: 1419.20 Appllcablllly; Description of the maximum average of dally values for
topping subcategory.
1.000 cubic meters/ day (when. using: the thirty consecutive days.
metric unit tables). The provisions of this subpart are (1) Size factor.
(e) The term '"crude processes'" means appUcable to discharges from any $/»
atmospheric distillation. vacuum facility which produces petroleum 1,000 IIIII al flledltocll per III'Um dQ: IM:II7
distillation BDd crude desalti.Ds products by the use of Iappin& and L8sl111811 2U
zs.o 1D . , 8
1 02
1.08
processes. catalytic reforming whether or not the 50.00 1D 7..8 1.18
facility includes any other process in 75.0 ta aa 1.211
(f) The term "cracking throughput" or 1001D1248 138
'T' means the summa bon of the addition to topping and catalytic 1251D 1488 1 so
petroleum liquids fed to the cracking reforming. The provisions of this subpart "ISO 01 grater 1.51
processes in unit ort.ooo bbl/day (when are not applicable to facilities which (Z) Process factor.
uafn& the English unit tables} or 1.000 include thermal processes (coking.
vtsbreakins. etc.) or catalytic cracking.
,_
cubic meters/day (when. uaing tha . . . _ . CCIIIIIQinlla& fCllr
metric unit tables). Leu 1111111 2..&8 082
I 419.21 Effluent limitations guidelines 2.5 1D 3.4S 0.87
(g) The term "cracking processaa•• representing the degree of effluent 3.510.48 o.ao
meBDI bydrocracking, visbrealdng, reduction attainable by the application of UID5.49 a. as
5.5 1D 5.118
thermal craclciDg, fluid catalytic
cracking and moving bed catalytic:
the beat practicable control technology
currently available.
1.01D6AS
1.5108.118
""
1.17
127
70 1D 7.48 138
crac:Icing processes. (a) The following limitations establish 7510 798 1.51
(h) The term "asphalt and lube the quantity or quality of pollutants or 8.01DU8 184
8.51D 8.98
throughput" or "AJ." meaDS the pollutant properties, controlled by this a.o ra a•a
1.711
1.95
summation of the petroleum Uquids fad paragraph. which may be discharged by 8.51D888 2.12
to the asphalt and lube processes In unit a point source subject to the provtsions 2.31
2.51
of 1,000 bbl/day (when uaq the English of this subpart after application of the 10.510
11.0 1D 1
11 •0 88========
.&8:: 2.7'3
183
Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 247 I Friday. December 21, 1979 I Proposed Rules 75945
§ 419.31 Effluent llmltaUona guidelines (3) See the comprehensive example

,.._~
represenUng the degree of effluent Subpart D § 419.Sl(b)(3)
reduction attainable by the application of
IZ.O
IUID ID IZ..e the best pracUcable control technology
(c) The provisions of I 419.Zl(c)(1)
II13.0
SID1D 1
II·========
12.81
3.'1------- currenUy available (BPT). apply to discharses of process waste
IUID01.,....__
14.00 1 3 . 8_
8_--
_ -_
- -_
- _- (a) The following limitations establish water pollutants attributable to ballast
the quantity or quality of pollutants or water by a point source subject to the
(3) See the comprehensive example pollutant properties, controlled by this provisions of this subpart.
Subpart D § 419.51(b)(3). paragraph. which may be discharged by (d) The quantity an-i quality of
(c) The following allocations a point source subject to the provisions pollutants or pollutant properties
constitute the quantity and quality of of this subpart after application of the controlled by this paragraph.
pollutants or pollutant properties best practicable control technology attributable to once-through cooling
controlled by this paragraph and currency available: water, are excluded from the discharge
attributable to ballast. which may be allowed by paragraph (b) of this section.
dfacharged after the application of best Once-through cooling water may be
practicable control technology currently discharged a total organic carbon
available, by a point source subject to concentration not to exceed 5 mg/1.
tbe provisions of this subpart. in
addition to the discharae allowed by Subpart c-Petrochemlcal
paragraph (b) of this section: Subcategory
(1) BallasL The allocation allowed for
ballast water Dow, as kg/cum [lb/M § 419.40 Applicability; descrtpUon of the
gal), shaD be based on those ballast petrochemical subcategory.
~'---
2112 15.1
11.5 12.1
waters treated at the refmery.
COO----
011 and G!UM-
PIIenalc
210
...
101
u
The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to all discharges from any
~1 facility which produces petroleum
.--u,._
CCIIIIIICIUndl-
11.1
11
10
1.5
Jl82
products by the use of topping, cracking
Sultlde---
..........
To'-1 CllromUII- A3
035
-25
.011
and petrochemical operations, whether
or not the facility includes any process
c:IWaii!UII- -
""~--- WltNn 1M,... 1.0 1D 1.0 in addition to topping, cracking and
petrochemical operations. The
provisions of this subpart shall not be
applicable however, to fae1lities which
QJM8 0.028
TSS~-- 033 021 BOO Ill 5.5 include the 'processes specified in
1SS u
CAOD---
Olllld.--
•7
015
1.0 ID 9 0
24
008 coo 7• ''u
314
Subparts D or E of this parL
IIH----
..
Wrltm U. ..... Oil mil~- 3.0
Pllw.olic § 419.41 EHiuent limitations guidelines
.._ ,._
CXIftiiiOUIICII- 07•
88
o:ll
3.1
representing the degree of effluent
raducUon attainable by the appllcaUon of
Sulftde 085 021
1100~·-=-- CIAO 0.21

,._.....
Total CllromUII- .15 • 0111 the best pracUcable control technology
currently available (BPT).
TS~S----
CCO----
pH _ _ __
OIIIId...--
:u
.28
121
z.o
17
.D87
pH
CllromUII--
Wll lm 012
t11e 8 11.0
rano• o•
01151
(a) The following limitations establish
Will*! tile ...,.e.o 1D !" 0 (b) The limits set forth in paragraph
the quantity or quality of pollutant or
pollutants properties, controlled by this
(a) of tlus section are to be mulllplied by paragraph. which may be discharged by
(d) The quantity and quality of the following factors to calculate the
pollutants or pollutant properties a point source subject to the provisions
maximum for any one day and of this subpart after application of the
controlled by this paragraph, maximum average of daJ.ly values for
attributable to once-through cooling best practicable control technology
thirty consecutive days. currently available:
water, are excluded from the- discharge (1) Size factor.
allowed by paragraph (b) of this section.
Once-through cooling water may be 1.000 11111 olltledslac:lll* saam day: ,_
sn
discharged with a total organic carbon 2411'-------
LAsa 111111 091
095
concentration not to exceed 5 mg/1. HOID411!:::::::::::::::
500 1D 74
750111999 113
104
Subpart B-CrackJng Subcategory 1000 1D12411-------

12501D ~-·-------
1.23
1:15
150.001~"------- 141
§ 419.30 Apptlcablllty; descrtpUon ol the u.tc untta(klloQr-• P• 1,000 m1 ol
cracking subcategory. (2) Process factor. IMCIIIOCk)
The provisions of this subpart are " ' - ' confiC)UI'adcln:

"'DD::tu
fetrlr
. aOos 348 II.'
applicable to all discharges from any Lna Ulan Z . 4 1 - - - - - - - 0.58 TSS. 23.• 14.8
ceo
facility which produces petroleum 2.51D3.49-------- 083
0.74 - 011anc1 ar-- 210
111
101
5JI
products by the use of topping and
cracking, whether or not the facility
includes any process in addition to
topping and cracking. The provisions of
451D549
3.UID
51D 5119
4411:============
IOIDI.41~~~~~~~~~
85101.99
70 1D HI
0.88
100
1.01
1.11
Ul
Pllenolc
"""'-
SulliiM
. ,._
CllfiiiiCIUIIdl-
23.•
25
22
120
10.8
.0&
this subpart are not applicable however, 1.0 .....________
751DP119 141
1.53
Teal CllromUII-
H--..
.52 :X
to facilities which Include the processes

specified in Subparts C. D. or E of this II.OIDI.41--------
151DIII9--------
gnlllt•-------
1.5 01
1.87
112
1.81
CllromUII-
pH Will*!
048
1M rang• 1.0 1D 1.0 Ol
part.
184
75946 Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 247 I Friday. December 21. 1919 I Proposed Rules
....
ctwa:Miillll
whether or not the facility includes any
process in addition to topping, cracking
and lube oil manufacturing processe~
The provisions of this subpart are not
applicable however, to facilities which
(1) Size factor:
1,000 IIIII al la.c181ac11 p a r - dar.
111M .•. .19========

500 1D 74 9-
Leu
75010881·~-------
,_
sa
0.71
0.~4
081
include the processes. specified in 100010 1 2 4 1 - - - - - - - 088
125.0 1D 1 4 8 1 - - - - - - - Q.87
Subparts C and E of this part.
176.9~=======
I OS
175.0 1D 199 9
BOO.:J.S--- 1~1 u § 419.51 Effluent llmltaUons guidelines 150.0 1D grau.
200.0 01
1.14'
1.18
u· represenUng the degree of effluent
TSS~===
5.25
74 reduction attainable by th& appllcaUort of {2) Process factor.
gm-.,~
3&4
"*'aal:
Cllllllllllllld-
1.8
0111'
2.1
JM2S.
the beat pracUcable control technology
currenUy available (BPT). Placna conflguralklnl ..,
Auc:a8
8.o.•4~9======- '""
Sullde---
Anllnlril .. fL-.
TCic.l~-
HDa.....
1.25
.1178
.183
:u
.03!1
.1G7
(a) The following limitations establish
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
Ulllllan
1510 ,.,_
7~10788·----------
a.o ID 8 . 4 8 · - - - - - - - -
0.88
100
109
pollutant properties. controlled by this 8.5108.88--------- flll-
~-
IIH---- paragraph. which may be discharged by
a pomt source subject to the provisions
8.0 1D 8 . 4 8 , - - - - - - - - -
11510888--------
1.2&
1.41
153
(b) The limits set forth in paragraph
(a) of this section are to be multiplied by
of this subpart after application of the
best practicable control technology
1001o
1101011•9to•e~~~~
lOS 1D 10.99
11.5 10 1199
187
182
1118
the following factors to calculate the currently available: · 12.0 12.49
1D
12.5 10 12.98
2.2.:1415
maximum for auy one day and t30argratw: 2.44
maximum average of daily-values for (3) Example of the application of the
thirty consecutive days. above factors.
(1) Siza factor..
a. Calculation of tile Prac:eu ConflgureUon
1,CIOOIIIIIfi/I._,.IJir~ 11/t:W
Laa 111111 Zii114UII•o------- 0.73
Zl0-48ii~~~~~~~~
0.71
5D..G 1D 74 083
75.01D. Q.81 BOOS,_ _ _.._
10Q.CJID 124.1 0.!18 50.1 25.8 t
125.CIID 1 4 8 B - - - - - - -
15D..GCI'~-------
1.01
1.13 :::,~--- 35.8
360
22.7
117
Oland g r a M - 11.2 1.5 8
,,) Process factor: Pllanalc
..~_ .. N _ _ ..38 .11M
Zl4 1058
~~---_- 33
77
1.0
.48
Laa . . 4.48 0.73 H...-.nt
UIIS. 080
U ID 5.811 0.81 c:flnlnlum - - 088 .G30 13
pH Wotllln lila range 8.0 1D 9.0
&D ID 8.48 0.811
1.5 1D U9 1.08 12
7.0. 7.48 117
7.5 1D 7 18 1.211-
LO 1D 8.48 1.:19
1.5 ID 8.88 1.51 BOD.f 19.8 9.1
8.0 IDIAI IllS TSS 12.5 8.0 (c) The provisions of§ 419.21{c){1}
uar...- t.72 coo 127 88 apply to discharges of process waste
OdandgraiM_ S.7 3.11
(3) See the comprehensive example Ptl8naloa water pollutants attributable to point
Subpart D § 419.S1(b)(3). camoauncls-- 133 .aas source subject to the provisions of
Alnmana u ,..___ &3 3.8
(c) The provisions of § 419.21(c)(1) 111
ballast water by this subpart.
---
Sulftde .053
apply to discharge!t of process waste TCIIal c:llnlmUII- ..273 .180 (d) The quantity and quality of
water poUutant~r attributable to ballast lfeqval....
024
pollutants or pollutant properties
.011
water by a point source subject to the pH Wdlln llle range 8.0 1D 8 0' controlled by this paragraph.
provisions of this subpart. attributable to once-through cooling
(d) Tb& quantity and quality of (bJ The limits set forth in paragraph water, are excluded from the discharge
pollutants ar pollutant properties (a) of this section are to be mulbplied by allowed by paragraph (b) of this section.
controJied by this paragraph. the following factors to calculate the Once-through cooling water may be
attributable to once-through cooling max1mum for any one day and discharged with a total organic carbon
water, are excluded from the disclosure maximum average of daiJy values lor concentration not to exceed 5 mg/1.
allowed by paragrapf1 (b) of this section. thirty consecutive days.
Once-through cooling water may be
discharged with a total organic carbon Example.-Lube ReRnllfY 125,000 biJI per Stream Day T'hrDug/lput
concentration not be exceed 5 mg/1.
SUbpart D-Lube Subcategory
§ 419.50 AppllcabWty; description of the
lube subcategory.
~e provisions of this subpart are
icable to all discharges from 110¥
125
eo
125
1'
I
...
..Uty which produces petroleum
products by thB' as& of topping, cracking TOIII------------- --- 2.48' X' f •
and lube oil manufacturing processes,
185
Federal Register I Vol. 44. No. 247 I Friday. December 21. 1979 I Proposed Rules 75947
(c) The provisions of§ 419.21(c)(1)

apply to discharges of process waste
water pollutants attributable to ballast
water by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart.
.3211 (d) The quantity and quality of
"
211 .180 pollutants of pollutant properties
controlled by this paragraph.
8 •
~.~T~~====================
ol88 X :t83 attnbutable to once-through cooling
...
53
•o
1142
032
.o:J9
water, are exduded from the discharge
allowed by paragraph (b) of this section.
.113 X 13 • U7
•.o .G:I2 X 12 • .38 discharged with a total organic
concentration not to exceed 5 mg/L
7.21
BAT, BCT Limitations and New Sourca
NOTU and Pretreatment Standards
S.lllll• f 4t9.421!1KZJ lar ~ fadar. "--1-=r•O 88.
S.. . _ f411.~111)1ar sai8Ciarlar 125.000 IIIII per III'Uift clly _,_ rdn8ry Slaiii:IDI'•O!I3. Subpart F-Petroleum Refining Point
To QJcullte 1M illnll lar eao:ll ...,._,.,. multiply Ill• lirrll I •11.62(8lllr tlaCII h pracau IICIGr IIIII 111ft fll:lar Source Subcategory
IICC$Iirllt ~ lar., I •)•17.9X0.88XOJI3•1 ..81D. pw1.000 IIIII Off~
§419.70 Applicability; description of the
Subpart E-lntegrated Subcategory petroleum refining subcategory.
§419.60 AppllcabiOty; description of the This subpart applies to discharges to
Integrated subcategory. waters of the Umted States. and
introductions of pollutants Into publicly
The provisions of this subpart are owned treatment works from any
appUcable to all discharges resulting petroleum refinery.
from any facility which produces
petroleum products by the use of § 419.71 Effluent limitations guidelines
topping, cracking, lube oil manufacturiJ1a 8001' 19.2 102
processes. and petrochemical reduction attainable by the appllcaUan of
~t=:::;:::=
13.2 ...
138 70 the best available technology economically
operations, whether or not the facility Ollnll~ 1.0 3.2 achievable (BAT).
indudes any process in addition to l'llllncMoc
ClllftPOUIIdi- I. 068 Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.3()
topping, cracking, lube oil manufacturing Ammani&UH- L3 3.8
processes and petrochemical operations. Sulllcle---- 124 058 125.32. any eXJsting pomt source subjet..
Tolal Cllramun- .29 .17 to this subpart must achieve the
~
f 411.81 EmUent DmltaUona guidelines 1125 .an following effluent limitations
IIH----
CIVOnlllm - -
Wllllalllle lllllgiii.O 10 9.0 representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the application
the best practicable control technology (b) The limits set forth in paragraph of the best available lechnology
C\lrrently available (BPT). (a) of this section are to be multiplied by economically achievable (BAT]:
(a] The following limitations establish the following factors to calculate the (a) The quantity of pollutants
the quantity or quality or pollutants or maximum for any one day and the discharged from process wastewater
pollutant properties. controUed by this maximum average of daLly values for shall not exceed the sum of the
paragraph. which may be discharged by thirty consecutive days. allocations specified below (3C means 3
(1) Size factor:
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart after application of the
best practicable control technology
currently available: .
1.000 bill Of·~
125.0 10 1
150010 17494 8_
_
par---
L.au 111811124 9 ' - - - - - - -
.8_-_-_- -_
- _- -
Sizrl
fa:tt1l
O.T.J
0.78
multiplied by C):
(1)
Subpart F
083
175.0 Ia 1 ! 1 1 . 8 - - - - - - - 091
21111..0 10 2 2 4 . 1 - - - - - - - 0.98
225~~------------
tO.
(2) Process factor:

..._
~-.- l«::t1r
L.au 111811 ...., 0.75
11.510 749 082
751a799 0.92 Pllenai--- 00031C OOOtSC
80101.69 100 TOIIIellramun- 0.0332C O.OUMC:
85108!11 LW
II(IM su Zl8 Hltuvalenl
TSS,----
000•----
37:1
3811
23.7
1.
80101.49
85108.118
120
130 =-- Q.CI028C Q.0013C
10010 10.48 Uil
Odlllld..-- 17.1 1.1
10.5 10 10.99 I S.
PIWIIIIIa 110101141 188
Cllftllllllllld- .40 1112
"-•"-- lOA 11.5 Ia 11 II 1.83 PP'IIdOI--- O.OOIIC o.oaosac:
...
2:U 12.0 10 12.49 1 119
SWIIde~- .a .158 Tolillcllnllnun- 0.0118C o.aoeac:
..........
TOIII Cllrllmun-
c:nra.-_
.a 12.510 12.119
13.0 ~ gru!W
:t17
2.118
~
CllnllnUIII- O.OOIOC O.Q
IIH---- (3) See the comprehensive example

Subpart D § 419.51(b)(3).
186
75948 Federal Register I Vol. 44, No. 247 I Friday, December Zl. 1979 I Proposed Rules
(2} allocations specified below (3C means 3 pollutants from process wastewaters to
multiplied by C): the waters of the United Stales.
(1) (b) The limitations for ballast water
SubpartP and once through coaling water are the
same as those specified in § § 419.21,
419.31, 419.41, 419.51, and 419.61.
Muunum § 419.74 Pretreatment standards far new
lenny and ulstlng sources.
, day
Any point source subject to this
PMnai---
Taa.~
D.03511C
CI.3812JC
D.0170K
Cl223'IC
MaiJic unla ~par day) subpart which introduces pollutants into
HaavaMnr
Z.I95C 1186C
a publicly owned treatment works
cllniiiiUII- OJmiK D.01471C
T'SS>---- 1.S09C 0.9601C which has not been granted a waiver
Oollllliera-- 0888C 0386C from achieving effiuent limitations
based on secondary treatment under
Englllll - (IICiunlil par day)
---
"'-1111 OJII23K Q.II060IC' section 301(h) of the Act must achieve
TCIIII~- 0.13311f 0.01115JC' the following pretreatment standards (in
8005 0.7891C O.o&088C
Hlllla¥alanl TSS 05289C Q.3385C
CLG114K o.aoss o.acoc addition to complying with 40 CFRPart
Oollftd~-- 0.128C
403 in the case of new sources and
(3) except as provided in 40 CFR Parf 403'.13
(2)
SubpartF SUbputP in the case of existing sources):
(a) The roUowing standards apply to
---,. ......
the- total refinery Bow contnbu:t.ion to
.............
Pllftnanl,.
BAT . . . . IIIII Iuiie allccalleln
,.., Menlgeclelallr
. . . . . . 30
~
Palllanlc.
--IIRIII8IIt
acT -'dna IIIICc:allln
Manlum
far any
AvaniiJ& cl d811y
vaJua fer 30
the POTW.
SullpartF
1 dlly -daya
llllllla ..... (1oiloplnll par day) Metric: Ulllla (ldJQQruns par day)
"'-1111 0.03UAC. C1.0177AL 11005
--
25.2•K 13A11C.
..._....
TCIIII'm-- CUII15AL. o.zJ32AL. TSS
Oi IIIII Qni&U-
1735K
789K
II.O.K
4..21K
Q,034QAI, Q.G154AL OD and a r - - 100
Engllsll undl (IIGuncls par dayt AlllmOna--.. soa
£nglilll 1111111 (pQunlla par day)
BOOS 8S.5K 4.1991C.
"'-1111 0.0128AL CUIOI2AL. TSS 8.081K :1.870.. (b) The following standard is applied'
Qilllld ~PUM- to the cooling tower blowdown portion
...........
TCIIII CflnlnUII-
CllrciiMft-
D.IXJAL
OJitiiiAL.
O.OSI7AL
CIJIII54AL
Z.76K 1.411C.
of the refinery flow to the POTW or mall
(31 be applied to the. total refinery flow by
SullputF multiplying the standard by the ratio of
(b) The limitations !or COD. ammonia
the cooling tower blowndowu Dow ta
(as N), sulfide and TOC are the same as the totalrefinery Dow t.othePO'IW.
those specified in §§ 419.%1, 419.31,
419.41, 419.St, and· 419.81. Avwage of dallr SUIIpart P"
..._rar3D
(c) The UmitationS' forballastwarer -•cSava
and cmce through cooling water are th~r
same as those specified in § § 41!Ul, MeDic 1111111 (lu1ocJrams par d9ay)
419.31. 419.41, 419.51. and 419.81.
rss._
S OD _!_
- -_- 2S.33AL 13.99AL
NotL--8ea Appendix lo this regulalioa Cor 18.1CIAL IT SIAL
QIIIIICI . , . . _ _ anAL •39AL
sampla c:alculaliall a£ a.BA'I efD.u.ea1
limitaUoa
(c) Informational mass limitations are
§ 419.72 Effluent llmltatfans guide Ones BOD'
rss, _ _ __ 11.229AL. as. follows:.
representmg the degree of affluent 8.~
redue!Jan attainable by tbe &~~pllcatlan. at 0111111 graau- 2.18AL

the best canvantlanal pollutant control
technology (BeT). (b) the pH shall be within the. range. of PNIIIIIIIII8111 llllldarCI-
& to 9. Munun lcr an, I Clay
: Except as provided in 40 CFR.125.3D-
125.32. any existmg point source sabjec~ (c) The limitations ror ballast water
to this subpart must achieve the · and once through cooling walerare the
followins efiluentlimitations same as those specified in § § 419.21, Oolandgt1818- 1!17C+ 109 52K + tt• :JOAL
419.31, 419.41, 419.51. and 419.81. Atnlllclnla-- 9.57C+ 109 52K+ n• 30AL
represemiDg the degree of effiuenl Tctalcnramlum- AXI0.0857C+I 0952K+1.1430AL)
reduction attainable by the application § 419.73 New source performance
·,a best conventional pollutant standards (NSPS).
:ol technology (BCT]: Any new source subject to this 3.35C+38.35K+40 02AL
,a) The quantity of pollutantS' subpart mast achieve the following new ~38.35K+4002AL
discharged from process wastewater source performance standards (NSPS): AX(00335C+0.3835K+0.4002AL)
shall not exceed the sum of the (a) There shall be no discharge of
187
Federal Register / Vol. 44. No. 247 I Frtday. December 21. 1979 I Proposed Rules 75949
1 ·U9.75 Pretreatment standards for (3)

taclllttes dlsctlarvlng Into certain publicly
owned treatment wortca wlttl only primary
treatment.
Any point source subject to th1s
subpart which iritroduces pollutants mto
a publicly owned treatment works
-
l or any
I day
which has been granted a wa1ver from

achieving emuent limitations based on I'Mnai--- 003$5AL 00177AL
secondary treatment under sect1on
301(h) of the Act must achieve the
following pretreatment standards (in
a:ddition to complying with 40 CFR Part
403 in the case of new sou.rces and
----
..........
TCIWI---- 0.317~L
003oi0AL
On:IZAL
0.01$6AL
---
I'Mnai--- 00128AL 00082AL.
except as provided in 40 CFR 403.13 for TCIWI-- 0.13113AL 00817AL
Existing Sou.rces): HaaWIMII
00119AL
Sullp8rt,
Appendix-Sample Calculation
- ....
A~al_..,
The following example presents the
...... tar30, derivation of a BAT phenol effluent
limitation for a typical refinery
Refinery X Y Z
I'Mnall _ __
0017 OOCII
.........,.
TCIIIII-- 0.725 0.425
~-- 0.08
(b) Information mass limitations are

CI.03
~-....._..
v----------
_____ 100
7!1
as follows: ~~----------- 50
(1} TCIIII- . . - I C I I - - - -
FCC
~wadrlng _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 25
20
TCMI cndllng ..-.-o<)·----
flllenai--- ooo:nc 00015C

...........
~~~------- 5
3
1
TCMI--
"--
~-
00332C
o.oozsc
0.011MC
0.001:11:
•
loilamNy --ve pMnall -.rae (lllsl
_,_0.0005(225)+4.0080(o&5)+6.ZX
to·'IB)-o ...
Pllenal _ __
---
00011C 0.00052C
TCIIIII~ 001UIC o.OOIIIIIC lFR Doc. ,.__u F'llonl ~ a.•s ami
~
0.0010C OOOO!IC
(2)
---
PIWNII--- 003!111( 001701(
TOWI--- 0 38121( 0.22311(
~
003281C
PIWNII--- 001231C 000801(

.......,_
TOIII Clnnllunt- 0 133111C 0071131C
~-- O.OO!IZIC
188
Monday
October 18, 1982
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
Category Effluent Limitations Guidelines,
Pretreatment Standards and New Source
Performance Standards; Final Rule
189
46.134 Federal Register I Vol. 4i, No. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1982 I RulP.s and Regulations
ENVIRONMENT 4L PROTE.r.TION Under Section 509(b)(1] of the Clean X. Best MHnagPment Pracuces
AGENCY Water Act judicial revii!W of these XI. Upset and Bypass Provts1nns
regulations is available only by filing a XII. Variances and ModJficallons
40 CFR Part 419 petition fqr rev1ew m the Umted States XIII. Relallonshtp to NPDES Perm1ts
Court of Appeals wtthin nmety days XIV Puultc Parllc•pat1on
[WH-FRL 2203-31 XV. Small Buamess Admm1s1ratton (SBA)
after these regula lions are considered Financtal Assistance
issued for purpose of judicial revtew. XVI. Ava1labdity of Techmcsl Assistance
Under Section 509(b](2) of the Clean XVII. Appendices
Category Effluent Umitatlons
Water Act. these requlJ'ements of the A. Pnonly Pollutants Not Detected in
Guidelines, Pretreatment Standards,
regulations may not be challenged later Treated Effluents Discharged Directly.
and New Source Performance
Standards
m civil or crimmal proceedings brought and Excluded from Regulation
by EPA to enforce these reqmrements. B. Pnorty Pollutanls Not Detected in
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Those portions of the ex1sling Eff1uent11 Discharged to POTWa, and
Agency (EPA). petroleum refining efnuent gu1delines Excluded from Regulation
C. Prtonty Pollutants Detected m Treated
ACTION: Final rule. limitations and standards that are not
Effluents Dtscharged Dtrectly. but
substantively amended by th1s not1ce Excluded from Regulation
SUMMARY: These regulations lim1t the are not subject to judic1al review nor is D. Pnonty Pollutants Detccled m Effluents
discharge of pollutants mto nav1gable the1r effectiveness allered by th1s notice. DI&Chdrged to POTWs. but Excluded
waters and mlo publicly owned These regulations are BPT and NSPS. from Regulauon
tre"tment works [POTW) by ex1sting ADORESSES: The record for this E. Abbrevtut1ons. Acronyms, and Other
and new sources in the petroleum rulemaki.ng will be ava1lable for public T.erms Used m th1s Notsce
refimng industry. The Clean Water Act rev1ew wtthm four weeks after the date I. Legal Authority
and a consent decree require EPA to of publication in EPA's Public
iSiiue these regulations. These lnformalion Reference Unat. Room 2004 These regulations are being
regulations provide fmal effluent (Rear) (EPA l.Jbrary], 401 M Street. S.W .• promulgated under the author1ty of
lirrutations guidelines for "best avaalable Washington, D.C. The EPA Information Secttons 301, 304. 306. 307. and 501 of the
technology economacally acluevable" regulation (40 CFR Part 2) provtdes that Clean Water Act (the Federal Water
(BAT), and establishes final a reasonable fee may be charged for Pollution Control Act Amendments of
pretreatment standards for ex1stmg copymg. 1972. 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., as amended
sources (PSES) and for new sources Technical information may be by the Clean Water Act of 1977, Pub. L.
{PSNS). The Agency has dec1ded to obtained by writing to William A. 95-217) also called the "Act". These
retain its previously promulgated "new TelJiard, Effluent Gu1delines Div1s1on regulations are also bemg promulgated
source performance standards" (NSPS) [WH-552), EPA. 401 M Street. S. W., in response to the Settlement Agreement
for th1s industry. Effluent limitations Washington. D.C. 20460. or by calling in Natural Resources Defense Council.
gu1delines for "best practicable control (202) 426-4617. Cop1es of the techn1cal Inc. v. Trow. 8 ERC 2120 (D.O. C. 1976).
technology currently available" (BPT) development and econom1c documents modz,f1ed. 12 ERC 1833 (D.O.C. 1979).
were not modified by EPA in this can be obtained from the Nattonal
II. Scope of this Rulemaking
rulemaking. The Agency is reserving Techmcallnformation Service.
coverage of "best conventional poHutant Spnngfield. Virginia 22161 (703/487- The petroleum refimng mdustry is
control technology" (BCT) effluent 6000). included w1thin the U.S. Department of
limltahons gwdeh.nes because the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Commerce. Bureau of the Census,
methodology to assess the cost Denms Ruddy, (202) 382-7165. Standard Industnal €lasslflcallon (SIC)
reasonableness of BCT has not yet been SUPPLEMENTARY INFOAMAnON: 2911. A d~taded overv1ew of the
established. The Agency is withdraWUlg petroleum refimng mdustry can be found
storm water runoff limitations Orsallizatioa of thia Notice m the proposed regula nons of December
promulgated on May 9,1974 (39 FR I. Legal Authonty 21, 1979 for th1s mdustry (44 FR 75926).
16560) for BPT. BAT. and NSPS. because 11. Scope of th11 Rulemakms
Ill Summ:1ry of Legal Backsround
The most 1mportant pollutants or
these limatations were remanded by the pollutant parampters 1n petroleum
IV. Pnor Reg~.;lallona and MethodoloSY and
court m American Petroleum Institute v. Data Cathenq Efforts refinery wastewaters are: (d)toxlc
EPA. 540 F. 2d 1023 (10th Cir. 1976). V. Control Treatment Opllons and pollutants (chrom1umj; (b) conventional
DATI!S: In accordance wtth 40 CFR Technology Baaas for Ragulauona pollutants (TSS, 01l and Grease. BODS.
100.01 (45 FR 26048], the regulations A. Final BAT L1mlla11ons and pH): and (c) nonconvent1onal
developed in thas rulemak1ng shall be D. New Source Performance Slandards pollutants (phenohc compounds (4-
consadered issued for purposes of (NSPSJ AAP), COD. sulfide and ammoma).
judietal review at 1.00 p.m. Eastern hme C. Final Pretrealmenl Sldndards for EPA's 1973 to 1976 rulemakmg efforts
E.•u111mg Source11 (PSES)
on November 1. 1982. D. Final Prelrealmenl Standards for New emphasizC!d the achievement of best
These regulations shall become Sources (PSNSJ practu:ublu control technology currently
effective December 1. 1982. VI. Costs and Econom1c Impacts ava1laule (BPT) by July 1. 1977. In
The compliance date for the newly VII. Non-Water Quahty En~1ronmentsl general, BPT represents the average of
issued PSNS regulation 1s the date that Impacts the best ex•st1ng performances of well-
the new source commences d1scharge. A. Aar Pollu11on known technolog1es for control of
The compliance date £or PSES is the B. Sohd Waste traditional (i.e .• "class1cal") pollutants.
same as the compliance date for the C. Consumpllve Water l..uss
D. Energy Requ1rements In cont:-ast. this round of rulemak1ng
intenm final PSES for this mdustry a1ms .for the dCbJevement by July 1. 1984.
VIIJ. Pollulartts and Subcalegones Nol
promulgated on March 23. 1977. (See 42 Regulated of the best ava1lable technology
FR 15684). The PSES promulgated today A. Exclu1110n of Pollu1an1s econom1cally ach1evabie (BAT) that w11l
is no more stnngent than the 1nterim B. Excluaton of Subcategones result m reasonable further progress
final PSES. IX. Responses to Ma1or Comments toward the natiOnal goal of elimmatmg
190
Federal Register t Vol. 47. No. 201 I Mcnday. October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulations 46435
the discharge of all pollutants. At a supporting these regulations. The American Paper lnst1tute v. EPA, 660
minimum. BAT represents the best followmg is a br1ef summary: F2d 954 (4th Cir. 1981 ). The first test
economically achievable performance m 1. Best Practicable Control compares the cost for private industry to
any industrial category or subcategory. Techualogy (BPTJ. BPT limitations are reduce its conventional pollutants w1th
Moreover. as a result of the Clean Water generally based on the·average of the the costs to publicly owned treatment
Act of 1971. the emphasis of EPA's best ex1sting performance by plants of works for similar levels of reduction in
program has shifted from "class1cal" var1ous s1zes. ages. and umt processes their discharge of these pollutants. The
pollutants to the control of a lengthy list withm the mdustry or subcategory. second test exammes the cost-
of toxic pollutants. In establishmg BPT lim1tat1ons. EPA effectiveness of add1honal mdustrial
EPA is promulgating BAT. PSES. and considers the total cost of applymg the treatment beyond BPT. EPA must fmd
PSNS for each of the five subcategories technology m relat1on to the effluent that limitations are "reasonable" under
established for th1s industry. BPT. BAT reduction der1ved. the age of equ1pment both tests before establishing them as
and NSPS effluent limitations for storm and fac1lit1es mvolved. the process BCT. In no case may BCT be less
water runoff for all direct dischargers employed. the engmeenng aspects of stnngent than BPT.
and all BCT requirements. mcluding control technologies. process changes. EPA published 1ts methodology for
stonn water runoff. are being reserved and non-water-quality environmental carrying out the BCT analys1s on August
for future rulemaking. 1mpacts (mcluding energy requuements). 29. 1979 (44 FR 50732). In the case
The total cost of applymg the technology mentioned above. the Court of Appeals·
III. Summary of Legal Background is balanced against the effluent ordered EPA to correct data errors ·
The Federal Water Pollution Control reduction. EPA promulgated BPT for the underlying EPA's calculauon of the first
Act Amendments of 1972 established a petroleum refinutg pomt source category test, and to apply the second cost test.
comprehensive program to "restore and on May 9, 1974 (39 FR 16560) and (EPA had argued that a second cost test
maintain the chemica!. phys1cal. and amended the regulations on May 20. was not requ1red). The Agency is
biological integrity of the Nation's 1975 (40 FR 21939). BPT IS pnnted m th1s reserving BCT effluent limitat1ons
waters" (Section 101(a)). To Implement £inal rule for the sake of completeness to gu1delines because the methodology to
the Act. EPA was to issue effluent the reader. assess the cost reasonableness of BCT
standards, pretreatment standards. and 2. Best A valfable Technology (BAT]. has not yet been established.
new source performance standards for BAT limitations. m general. represent 4. New Source Performance Standards
industry dischargers. the best ex1sting performance of (NSPS}. NSPS are based on the best
technology 1n the mdustnal subcategory
The Act included a timetable for or category. The Act establishes BAT as available demonstrated technology.
issuing these standards. However. EPA the principal national means of New plants have the opportumty to
was unable to meet many of the controlling the direct discharge of tox1c install the best and most efficient
deadlines and. as a result, m 1976. 11 was and nonconvenuonal pollutants to produchon procQsses and wastewater
sued by several em.-ironmental groups. nav1gable waters. treatment technologies. EPA
In settling th1s lawsu1t. EPA and the In arrav1ng at BAT. the Agency promulgated NSPS for the petroleum
plaintiffs executed a court-approved considers the age of the equ1pment and refimng pomt source category on May 9,
"Settlement Agreement". Th1s fac1lilies mvolved. the process 1974 (39 FR 16560) and amended the
Agreement required EPA to develop a employed. the engineermg aspects of regulation on May 20. 1975 (40 FR 21939).
program and adhere to a schedule 1n control technologies. process changes. NSPS IS pnnted m this final rule for the
promulgating effluent limitations the cost of ach1evmg such effluent sake of completeness to the reader.
gu1delines and standards for 65 reduction. and non-water quahty 5. Pretreatment Standards for Existmg
"pnority" pollutants and classes of environmental Impacts. The Sources (PSES}. PSES are des1gned to
pollutants for 21 major industries. See Administrator retains considerable prevent the discharge of pollutants that
Natural Resources Defense Council. Inc. discretion 10 ass1gnmg the we1ght to be pass through. interfere w1th, or are
v. Train, 8 ERC 2120 (D.O.C. 1976), accorded these factors. otherw1sa mcompat1ble with the
modified. 12 ERC 1833 (D.O.C. 1979). See 3. Best Conventional Pollutant Control operation of a pubhcly owned treatment
also: 43 FR 4108: 46 FR. 2266: 46 FR. 10723. Technology (BCT}. The 1977 works (POTW). They must be ach1eved
Many or the baSIC elements of this Amendments added Section 301(b)(2)(E) w1thm three years of promulgation. The
Settlement Agreement program were to the Act establishmg "best Clean Water Act of 1977 requ1res
Incorporated mto the Clean Water Act conventional pollutant control pretreatment for tox1c pollutants that
of 1977. Like the Agreement. the Act technology" (BCT) for d1scharge of pass through the POTW m amounts that
stressed control of toxic pollutants conventional pollutants from ex1stmg would violate direct discharger effluent
mcluding the 65 "pnor1ty" pollutants. In mdustr1al pomt sources. Conventional lim1tations or mterfere w1th the POTW's
addition. to strengthen the tox1c control pollutants are those defined m Secuon treatment process or chosen sludge
program. Section 304(e) of the Act 304(aj(4) (biochemical oxygen disposal method. The leg1slatJve h1story
authorizes the Adnunsstrator to dt=mandmg pollutants (BODS}, total of the 1977 Act indicates that
prescr1be "best management pr:act1ces'' suspended solids (TSS), fcc:al cohform prctreatntent standards are to be
(BMPs) to prevent the release of tox1c and pHJ, and any add1llonal pollutants technology-based. analogous to the best
and hazardous pollutants from plant site defined by the Adm1n1strator as ava1lable technology for removal of ·
runoff. spillage or leaks. sludge or waste "conventional" [o1l and grease, 44 FR tOXIC pollutants. EPA has generally
disposal. and dramage from raw 44501, July 30. 1979J. determmed that there IS pass through of
matenal storage associated with. or BCT is not an additonallimltat1on but pollutants if the percent of pollutants
anctllary to. the manufactunng of replaces BAT for the control of removed by a well-operated POTW
treatment proces~t. conventional pollutants. In addilon to ach1evmg secondary treatment IS less
Under the Act. the EPA program 1s to other factors spec1fied in sect1on than the percent rentoved by the BAT
set a number of different kinds of 304(b)(4)(B). the Act requ1res the BCT model treatment system. The general
effiuent liDUtations. These are discussed lim1tations be assessed m hght of a two pretreatment regulallons. wh1ch served
in detail in the Development Document part "cost-reasonableness" test. as the framework for the categoncal
191
46436 Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 201 I Monday, October 18, 1982 I Rules and Regulations
pretreatment regulations are found at 40 Agency's regulations in today's treatment of cooling tower blowdown.
CFR P11rt 403 (43 FR 27736. June 26, 1978: rule making. Cooling tower blowdown treatment for
48 FR 9482 January 28. 1981). V. Control Treatment Options and
metals removal includes reduchon of
8. Pretreatment Standards for New
Technology .Basis for Regulations hexavalent chromium to trivalent
Sources (PSNS). Like PSES. PSNS are to chrom1um, pH adjustment, precipitation.
prevent the discharge of pollutants A. Final BAT Lim1tat1ons and settling or clarificallon.
which pass through. interfere wtth. or EPA is promulgatmg BAT limitations Opt1on 5-Discharge tlow reduction of
are otherwise incompatible with the which are equ1valent to the BPT level of 27 percent from the proposed model
operation of the POTW. PSNS·are to be control (Opllon 9 discussed below). flow per Option 1. in addition to BPT
issued at the same time as NSPS. New These lim1talions are based on both an- treatment plus granular acttvated
indirect dischargers, like new direct plant and end-of-pipe technolog1es. carbon treatment to reduce res1dual
dischargers. have the opportunity to mcluding sour water str1ppmg to control toxic orgari1c pollutants.
incorporate the best available ammonia and sulfide. water use Option &-A "no discharge of
demonstrated technologies. The Agency management, sewer segregation. wastewater pollutants" (i.e .• zero
considers the same factors in wastewater. flow equalization. initial o1l discharge) standard based upon reuse,
promulgating PSNS as It considers in and solids removal (API separators or recycle. evaporatton. or reinJection of
promuJaating PSES. baffle plate separators), advanced 011 wastewaters.
IV. Prior Regulatioas and Methodology and solids removal (clanfiers. d1ssolved Option 7-Discharge tlow reduction of
and Data Gatherina Efforts a1r flotat1on. or filters). b1olog1cal 37.5 percPnt from reVISed model now
treatmenL and filtration or other achieved through greater reuse and
A. Prior Petroleum Refining Regulations "polishing" steps. The flow model and recycle of wastewaters, m addihon to
EPA promulgated BPT. BAT. NSPS. subcategonzation scheme upon wh1ch BPT treatment.
and PSNS for the petroleum refining these limitations are based are the same Option &-Discharge flow reduct1on of
pomt source category on May 9. 1974 (39 as those used for developmg the BPT approximately 20 percent from revtsed
FR 16560). The BPT, BAT. and NSPS effluent lim1tat1ons. BPT removes 96 model flow achieved through greater
regulations were challenged by the percent of the toxic pollutants from raw reuse and recycle of wastewaters. m
Amencan Petroleum Institute (API) and wastewaters discharged by the' addition to BPT treatment.
others in the United States Court of petroleum refimng mdustry. Option 9-Flow equalization. 1mhal
Appeals for the Tenth CircuiL Both BPT 1. Control Treatment Opt1ons for SAT. oil .md solids removal. advanced o1l and
and NSPS were upheld by the Court. The control and treatment technology solids removal. biological treatment. and
with the exception of limitations for opttons that EPA investigated for use in filtration or other final "polishing" steps.
storm water runoff wluch were th1s 1ndustry for BAT are presented Th1s option is the bas1s of the eXJsting
remanded for further consideration. below. Opt1ons 1 through 6 were regula t1ons.
BAT. includingliautations for storm considered in formulatmg the proposed 2. Technology Basis for the Final SAT
water runoff. was remanded for further rule. Optton 7. a modification of Option Resulallon. (a) Final BAT L1m1ts: EPA is
cons1dera1Jon. A"mel'lcan Petroleum 2. and Option 8. a modificatiOn or promulgatmg BAT lim1tat1ons based on
Institute v. EPA. 540 F.2d 1023 (lOth Cir. Option 1. were developed on the bas1s Option 9 which is equivalent to the BPT
1976). Interim final PSES was of information available at the t1me of level of control. Regulated pollutants for
promulgated on March 23. 1977 (42 FR the 1979 proposal. mod1fied as a result B~T are (1) nonconvent1onal pollutants:
15684) m response to the Settlement of information collected by EPA after Chemical oxygen demand (COD), total
Agreement. the proposed rule was published. as well phenols (4AAP). ammoma(N), and
BAT and BCT were proposed on as from public comments rece1ved on sulfides: and (2) tox1c pollutants: total
December 21. 1979 (44 FR 75926). At the the proposed rule. Opt1on 9, the BPT chromium. and hexavalent chrom1um.
same time. the Agency proposed to level of control. was recons1dered after (b) Changes From Proposal: The
rev1se NSPS. PSNS, and PSES. publication of the proposed rule. as a opt1ons cons1dered m formulating the
result of public comments rece1ved. proposed rules were based on var1ous
S. Methodology and Data Gathering Opt1on 1-Discharge flow reduction of combinations of wastewater flow
Effot13 27 percent from the proposed model reduction and improved performance of
The methodology and data gathermg tlow. ach1eved through greater reuse wastewater treatment technology. A
efforts used in developing the proposed and recycle of wastewaters. in addition flow modeling approach was used for
regulations were swnmanzed tn the to BPT treatment. regulatory purposes to define the
preamble to the proposed petroleum Option 2-Discharge flow reduction of mdustry's current wastewater
refinmg regulations published on 52 percent from the proposed model generat1on and to correlate effluent now
December 21, 1979 (44 FR 75926). flow, achteved through greater reuse w1th process vanables. The proposed
EPA has prepared the followmg and recvr:le of wastewaters. 1n addihon 1979 now model was developed to
reports concerning data 11 has acqu1red to BPT ireatment. This was the control establish the average wastewater flow
on this industry smce the December treatment option selected m the 1979 that can be expected from refineries
1979 proposed regulations were proposal. w1th s1mdar process configurations. The
published: (1) a report enlltled Optton 3-Dtscharge flow reduchon of proposed flow model was also used to
Petroleum Refinmg Industry. 27 percent from the proposed model determine spec1fic effluent hm1tat1ons
Refinements to 1979 Proposed Flow flow per Ophon 1. plus enhanced BPT for the prescr1bed levels of flow
Model; and (2) a report entitled treatment wtth powdered activated reduct1on in Opt1ons 1 through 5.
Petroleum Refinmg Industry, Surrogate carbon to reduce residual tox1c organ1c The proposed regulat1on was based
Sampling Program. The Agency has pollutants. on the Opt1on 2 level of control. Th1s
:-ejected the options which ut1lized the Optton 4-Discharge flow reduction of opt1on proposed to regulate chemtcal
data and conclusions from these reports 52 percent from the proposed model oxygen demand (COD). total phenols
in this rulemaking: therefore. the results flow per Option 2. in additton to BPT (4AAP), ammon1a(N), sulfide. total
were not used by EPA as bases for the treatment plus segregallon and separate chrom1um, and hexavalent chrom1um.
192
Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulations 46437
The Agency determined that, based upon data submitted by used to establish Opt1on 3 are rotatmg
regardless of the amount of flow commenters and the "Flow Model" biologicnl contactors (RBC) and
reduction. the levels of ammoma. study performed by EPA after the powdered activated carbon (PAC)
sulfide. and COD would not measurably proposal (See Section IV), the proposed treatment At the lime of the Agency's
change compared to the BPT level of 1979 flow model was mod1fied. The data collection efForts m 1976-1979,
control. The control of ammonia and techmcal pomts ra1sed by some of the there were seven fac11ities usmg these
sulfide is ach1eved through steam commenters were of cons1derable technologies. The Agency determined
stnpping, an in-plant control techmque. assistance in the flow model refinement that, upon analysis of avadable data,
No technologically feasible process process. The main emphas1s of the there are s1gn1ficant operational
changes or in-plant controls beyond comments concerned the statisllcal (mechanical) problems with RBC
those presently in use in th1s industry deficiencies of the proposed model. the technology. The Agency also found that
were identified to further reduce choice of model variables. and aspects full-scale expenence w1th PAC
ammonia and sulfide. The Agency's of the resulting model fiL The structure technology was mixed. i.e .. some
attempts"to quantify or predict changes of the model and the process variables fac11ities exper1enced consistently
in COD levels w1th 1mplementat10n of to be included were reexammed and measurable pollutant reductions as
flow reduction/water reuse technolo81eS modified accordingly. This refinement mtended, wh1le others experienced
were inconclusive. process resulted In the revised 1979 now mconsistent or no measurable effluent
The proposed regulation would have model whach was more representative of reductions. Because of these operational
tim1ted total phenols at a mass the current wastewater generat1on 1n the proulcms observed in full-scale
equivalent of 19 ,...g/1. The Agency industry. Thus. Optaon 2 has been facahlles, there was lim1ted performllllce
received a number of comments on th1s rejected because 11 was based on the information available. Wh1le both of
issue stating that the proposal to lim1t proposed flow model that has been these technologies appear prom1sing, the
total phenols at 19J,Lg/1 was too modified. (See discussion of Option 7 Agency beheves there 1s not enough
stringent because technology is not below). performance information available at
avadable to consistently ach1eve such a Other Options Cons;dered th1s 11me upon wh1ch to base nat1onal
level. Additional1nformation on phenol regulation for th1s mdustry.
was collected by EPA in the "Long Term Because BAT Option 1 relies on the
same technology as BAT Option 2. Option 4 was predicated on
Data Collection Survey" and the ammonia, sulfide, and COD levels industryw1de ab11ity to segregate.
"Surrogate Sampling Program" (See would not be measurably changed by collect, and separately treat cooling
Sections IV and XVI) subsequent to the tower blowdown, the major source of
December 1919 proposal. Information implementing Opt1on 1. The total
phenols lim1lation for this option was chrom1um for th1s industry. The
collected 1ncluded effluent data from 37 based upon the sai]Je 19 ,...g/1 wastewater recycle/reuse study (See
refineries for calendar year 1979. concentration level as was used for Section IV], completed after the
Analysis of the data collected dunng Option 2. However. as previOusly publication of the proposed regulation.
these two studies concluded that d1scussed. BPT end-of-p1pe treatment concluded that. for ex1stmg sources. 1t 1s
existmg BPT treatment systems are not has not been shown to be capable of extremely difficult m many mstances to
ach1eving the proposed 19 ,...g/1 level on ach1ev1ng th1s concentration level on a segregate cooling tower blowdown for
a long term basis. However. the results long term basis. chrom1um treatment. Cooling tower
do show that such systems are capable The Agency's analys1s of ava1lable recirculation and blowdown IS typically
of achiev1ng the 100 ,...g/1 level of control data shows that implementation of practiced at numerous locat1ons
previously established for determmmg Option 1 wauld remove an add1t10nal1 throughout a refmery. Extens1ve
BPT mass limitations. percent beyond BPT treatment levels of collection systems would be necessary
The preamble to the 1979 proposal (44 toxac pollutants that are presenl1n raw at many refmer1es to collect all
FR 75938) staled that1mplementat1on of wastewaters. This translates mto an blowdown streams for separate
Option Z would result in the removal of additional removal beyond BPT of treatment. [n addition. not all cooling
approximately 123.000 pounds of approximately 1.3 pounds of tox1 tower blowdown streams are collectible.
chrom1um per year, at an incremental pollutants per day. per d1rect d1scharge For mstance. cooling water when used
(beyond BPT] annual cost of 562 m1llion refinery. The proposed 1979 regulat1on as makeup for refinel'y processmg
and a capital cost of S138 rrulhon (1979 would require S23 5 m1llion add1tional commangles w1th process water and
dollars). Th1s 123. 000 pounds of cap1talmvestment at an annual cost of cannot be traced or segregated,
chromium per year represents the S9.3 million (1979 dollars) to Implement espec1ally 1n older refineries. Therefore.
incremental removal from the BPT level Opt1on 1 for th1s mdustry. The capatal the Agency has determmed that 11 would
to the BAT Option Z level. However. costs, to a considerable extent. not be proper to base DAT effluent
based upon reevaluation of the effluent represent retrofit costs. Th1s opt1on WdS lim11a110ns gu1dchnes on th1s technology
data base. the Agency has found 1h1s ru1ected because il was based on the opt1on.
figure was overstated because the proposed 1979 now model, which. dS The Hllemallvc fur add1tionua
observed chromium discharge of discussed above. has been mod1fied. chromium removal beyond DPT is to
refinenes with BPT level treatment was (See discuss1on of Opt1on 8 below). treat the combmed final effluent.
considerably less than that allowable by The Agency's analys1s or ava1lable However. further end-of-pape treatment
the BPT chrom1um limitations. The data shows that Implementation of for chrom1um 1n comb1ned final effluent
actual amount of chromium which Opt1on 3 would remove an add1lional1,5 after BPT treatment would result m
would have been removed under th1s percent (beyond BPT treatment) levels lim1ted. 1£ any, measurable effluent
option is approximately 32.000 pounds of beyond BPT treatment levels. Thas reduction benefits. Th1s 1s because the
per year. The capital costs, to a translates 1nto an additional removal chrom1um levelm combmed final
considerable extent. represent retrofit beyond BPT of approximately two effluent (115 ,...g/1 observed average)
costs. pounds of tox1c pollutants per day. per approxamates the level ach1evable by
BAT Option Z was developed usmg direct discharge refinery. The two end· any further treatment of thas type of
the proposed 1979 flow model. However. of-p1pe treatment technolog1es that were wastewater. For the foregomg reasons,
193
46438 Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regul:ltions
the Asency rejected Option 4 for this involved do not warrant selection of currently 1n effect The Agency is
Industry. Option 7 for thts industry. retaining the existing NSPS.
BAT Option 5 was predicated on BAT Opt1on 8 IS a revtsed version of 1. Control Treatment Opt1ons for
industry's ability to install and operate Option 1 reduction of 20 percent from NSPS. The control and treatment
granular activated carbon (CAC) the revised 1979 model flow. The technology opt1ons that EPA
treatment as an end-of-pipe technology. Agency has not performed a deta1led anvesligated for use m this industry for
In tbe preamble to the 1979 proposal (44 cost analysis for Optaon 8 but rather has NSPS are presented below. Opt1ons 1
FR 75933), the Agency stated that eshmated such costs based upon the through 3 were cons1dered m
costing procedure developed for Option formulatmg the proposed rule and were
granular activated carbon (GAC)
7. (Option 7 is the revision of the based upon the 1979 flow model. Option
treatment is not a demonstrated regulatory Option 2 selected in the 1979
technology in this industry. The Agency 4. the elusting NSPS level of control.
proposal). The Agency's analysas of was reconsidered after publica lion of
also stated that toxic pollutant removal avaalable data shows that
generally increases wtth the use of GAC. the proposed rule as a result of the
implementation of Option 8 would public comments and is based. upon the
However. because the levels of toxic remove an additional 80.000 pounds of
pollutants alter BPT treatment ~e so 1974 flow model.
toxic pollutants annually beyond BPT Option 1-0ischarge flow reduction of
low. additional pollutant reduction treatment levels. which would be an
across CAC treatment would be 52 percent from model flow, ach1eved
additional one percent (beyond BPT through greater reuse and recycle of
mmimal. Difficulties in quantifymg treatment levels) of toxic pollutants
pollutant reductions were expenenced wal'ltewaters. m addition to BPT
from raw wastewaters at a cap1tal cost treatment. Th1s option is equivalent to
when the Age.ncy conducted sax pilot of $77 mallion dollars and an annual cost
plant treatability studies using GAC on BAT Opt1on 2.
of $25 million (1919 dollars). Th1s Option 2-0ischarge flow 11!duction of
BPT-treated wastewaters in thJs translates into an addibonal removal
industry. See 44 FR 75930. EPA 1s not 27 percent from model flow. ach1eved
beyond BPT of 1.3 ·pounds of tox1c through greater reuse and recycle of
· aware of any petroleum refinery pollutants per day. per duect discharge
· presently usmg this technology. wastewaters in addition to BPT
refinery. The Agency believes that g1ven treatment. plus use of granular act1vated
Although this technology is used in all these factors. the costs involved do
other industries, EPA bas no adequate carbon to reduce residual orgaruc tox1c
not warrant selection of Opt1on 8 £or pollutants. Th1s opt1on is equ1valent to
data to mdicate that this technology 1s this mdustry.
capable of being transferred to the BAT Option 5.
Option 9 is based upon the same flow
petroleum refining industry. For the Option 3-Zero discharge of
model and subcategonzation scheme wastewater pollutants.
foregomg reasons the Agency reJected that were used for developing the BPT
Option 5 for thJs industry. regulations promulgated by the Agency Option 4-0ischarge flow reduction of
in 1974. A process class1ficahon system
from 25 percent to 50 percent of average
The Agency rejected BAT Option 6. a BPT flow, depending upon subcategory,
zero discharge requirement: (1) Because was used to divide the 1ndustry mto five
subcategones. A procedure was achieved through greater reuse and
of 1ts high capital and operating costs. recycle of wastewaters m add1hon to
including s1gruficant retrofit developea to establish effluent
limatations for each subcategory. The BPT treatment. Th1s ophon. wh1ch 1s
expenditures: and (2) because analys1s based upon the 1974 now model and
oi the zero discharse technolog1es resulting li.rruts were defined m terms of
a quantity of pollutant per umt of 1974 subcategorizat1on scheme. IS the
revealed that sigruficant non-water existmg NSPS.
quality impacts would result from the1r feedstock (mass allocation), and were
denved by mult1plymg a pred1cted 2. Technology Bos1s for the NSPS
use. These non-water quality unpacts Regulot1on. (a) NSPS L.im1ts: EPA 1s
include generataon of large amounts of waStewater flow per umt of production
t1mes an achievable effluent retammg the exishng NSPS wh1ch are
solid waste and very high energy based on recycle and reuse technology
consumption. concentration for each pollutant. A flow
modeling approach. ga'Sed on process resulting in pollutant reductions that
BAT Option 1 is the revision of range from 25 to 50 percent beyond BPT
configuration. was used to predict
regulatory Option 2. and is based upon a expected wastewater flow for an removals, depending upon the
discharge flow rsduction of 37 5 percent individual refinery, and 1s referred to as subcategory. Regulated pollutants for
"from the reVIsed 1979 model flow. The the "BPT flow model". NSPS are BODS. total suspended solids.
Agency revised the costs to implement Option 9 was selected by the Agency chem1cal oxygen demand. 01l and
Opt1on 7 recycle and reuse technologies. as the basis for the final BAT grease. total phenols (4AAP), ammoma
An ntimated capital cost of 5112 million regulations. Considenng the limited (N), sulfide. total chromium. hexavalent
dollars and $37 million dollars annually pollutant reduction benefits assoc1ated chromaum. and pH.
would be required For refiners to comply with Opuons 1 through 8. the mability to · (b) Changes from Proposal: The
with Opt1on 7 (1979 dollars). The quanufy nonconvenllonal pollutant proposf'd NSPS reguh1llon was bnsed on
Agency's analysis of ava1lable data reduction v1a Opt1ons l through B. the Opuon 3. Upon reevaluation of the
shows that implementation of Option 7 costs mvolved of gomg beyond the BPT exisllng data base and evaluation of
would remove 110.000 pounds of tox1c level of control. and the 96 percent cumments received on the proposed
pollutants annually beyond BPT reduction 1n toxic pollutant loadings regulation. EPA has dec1ded not to
treatment levels. which IS equavalent to ach1eved by BPT. the Agency has rev1se the ex1shng NSPS.
an additlonal1.5 percent (beyond BPT determmed that the BAT should be Option 3, zero discharge. was reJected
treatment levels] of toxic pollutants equivalent to the BPT level of control for for the rollowing reasons. First. 1t
from raw wastewaters. This translates th1s industry. generales s1gmficant adverse non-water
into an additional removal beyond BPT quality envtronmentallmpacts.
ol approximately two pounds of toxic B. New Source Performance Slandords 1ncludmg the product1on of large
pollutants per day, per direct discharge (NSPS} amounts of solid waste and h1gh energy
refinery. The Agency believes. that NSPS were promulgated by EPA on consumplaon. Second. EPA est1mates
g1ven aU of these factors. the costs May 9, 1974 (29 FR 16560) and are that the annual coals of ach1ev1ng zero
194
Feaeral Register I Vol. ~7. No. 201 I Monday. October 18, 1982 I Rules and Regulations 46439
discharge are extremely h1gh. especially subcategory. For the reasons discussed result from water brought into direct
1n geographical areas of low dbove. after careful consideration of the contact w1th a hydrocarbon stream. and
evapotransp1rallon wh1ch requ1res opt1ons proposed in 1919. together Wllh contain sulfides. ammoma and phenols.
energy intensive forced evaporation the public comments rece1ved, the The Agency developed an alternative
techntques. It would cost an estimated Agency finds no reason for rev1smg mass limitation for ammoma in response
$4.6 m1llion (1979 dollars) annually for a current NSPS. Accordingly. the ex1stmg to public comments received on the
150.000 barrels per day new source of level of NSPS. Option 4, as retamed. proposed regulat1on. Several
refinery m the crackmg subcategory to C. Final Pretreatment Standards far commenters ind1cated that. when the
comply w1th a zero discharge Existing Sources (PSES} refinery discharge to the POTW cons1sts
requ1rement. Third. only marginal solely of sour waters. the achievement
additional water pollution reducllon Inter1m final PSES was promulgated of the 100 mg/1 ammoma concentration
benefits would be ach1eved beyond the by the Agency on March 23. 1977 (42 FR lim1tahon IS often not passable. Th1s IS
ex1stmg NSPS requirement. The 15684) and is currently in effect. because steam str1ppmg technology, the
quant1t1es of pollutants that would be Regulated pollutants are oil and grease basis for the lim1tat1ons, cannot
removed dally are 2.46 pounds of total (100 mgll) and ammania-N (100 mg/1) consistently reduce ammoma an sour
phenols (4AAP), 3.9 pounds of each on a daaly max1mum basis. EPA as water streams to the 100 mglllevel.
hexavalent chrom1um, 6 pounds of total retammg the ex1sling PSES regulation. Thus. an equ1valent mass lim1tation for
chromium, 308 pounds of total w1th one modification. An alternative ammoma was developed by the Agency.
suspended solids. and 381 pounds of mass lim1lat1on for ammoniA(N) IS 2. TechnoloJ:y Daszs for the Final
BODS. EPA believes that the h1gh costs provided for those indirect dischargers PSES Optzons. (a) Final PSES Limits:
of implementing such requirements whose discharge to the POTW cons1sts EPA is retainmg the ex1stmg PSES
would ra1se senous bamers to any solelv of sour waters. regulation. Regulated pollutants are 01!
deciSion mvolvmg construction of a new 1. Control Treatment Opt1cns
and grease and ammoma(N), each
source refinery. Conszdered. The control and treatment
ophons that EPA mveshgated for PSES hm1ted at 100 mg/1 on a da1ly maximum
Other Optzons Considered in th1s mdustry are presented below. bas1s. An altemallve mass hm1tation for
Opt1ons 1 and 2 were considered 10 ammoma-N as also prov1ded as
NSPS Option 1 1s equivalent to described above.
proposed BAT Opt1on 2. The technology formulating the proposed rule. Opt1on 3.
for th1s opt1on IS the same as that for the the ex1stmg PSES level of control. was (b) Changes from Proposal: The
exunmg NSPS regulations-wastewater reconsidered after publicauon of the proposed regulation was based on
recycle and reuse technologies. m proposed rule as a result of pubhc Opt1on 2 for the PSES control level. EPA
addition to BPT end-of-p1pe treatment. comments rece1ved on it. As a result of has reJected Option 2 because at now
The Agency coQlpared effluent public comments, Option 3 also contains believes that 11 is not feas1ble anp that 11
reductions achievable by existing NSPS · an alternative mass lim1tat1on for would be inappropriate to establish
and this option. The analysiS was ammonia(N). national pretreatment standards that
performed on a model greenfield new Opt1on 1-Chrom1um reducuon by pH take mto account whether a d1scharger
source refinery (190.000 bbl/day), whach adJustment, prec1p1tation and uses a POTW wh1ch has rece1ved a
IS class1fied as a "Subcategory B'' clar1ficat1on technologies applied to 301(h) waaver. Rather. the need for more
refinery as defined by the existmg segregated cooling lower blowdown, ngorous pretreatment controls should be
regulahon ("crackmg"'). This model plus control of o1l and grease and resolved on a case-by-case bas1s durmg
refinery was configured to correspond ammon1a at the ex1stmg PSES level of the Sect1on 301(h) waaver process. This
w1th demand growth forecasts published control. is because the level of treatment
by the Department of Energy (See the Option 2-Establash two sets of proposed by Secllon 301(h) apphcants
Econom1c Analysas document.) Th1s pretrealmt!nt standards. The first would var:es considerably. and the Sechon 301
companson concluded that efnuent be Opllon 1 control for refinenes (h) process entaals the consaderahon of
reductions resulting from ex1sting NSPS dischargmg to POTW ~1th ex1stmg or S1te-spec1fic toxac pollutant problems.
and this ophon are comparable. The planned secondary treatment. The Opt1ons 1 and 2 as proposed dlso
costs to 1mplement th1s optiOn are second would be Option 1 control plus would have established a chrom1um
comparable to the ex1sting NSPS. Non- treatment for total phenols based on hm1tahon for PSES. Th1s hm11a11on was
water quality envuonmental1mpacts biological treatment for those refmeries proposed to avoad concentrahon of
and energy requirements are also dischargmg to a POTW that has been chrom1um an POTW sludge. AI the time
comparable to ex1stmg NSPS. granted a wa1ver from secondary of proposal. the Agency beheved such
Accordingly, there would be no benefit treatment requuements under SectiOn concentrations would hm1l a POTW's
in rev1sing the ex1st1ng NSPS opt1on. 301(h) of the Act. EPA's proposed use or management altemahves of the
NSPS Option 2 1s equ1valent to pretreatment standards for ex1stmg sludge. Based upon rev1ew of ex1stmg
proposed BAT Opuon 5. which 1s based sources were based on th1s option. For a mformation and analys1s of public
on granular activated carbon (GACl further d1scuss1on see the 1979 proposed comments on the proposal. EPA has
treatment as an end-of-pipe technology. petroleum refimng regulation at 44 FR determmed that th1s rat1onale as not
For the reasons stated in the above 75935. vahd on a nalionwade bas1s. For this
discussion on BAT Option 5. the Agency Opt1on 3-Reductlon of o1l and grease mdustry, chromaum levels 10 sludge from
believes that GAC treatment as not a and ammon1a based on oallwater POTW receav10g petroluem refinery
demonstrated lechnololl)' for th1s separation and steam stnppmg wastes generally do not ampact on
mdustry. Accordingly. the Agency technologies. This option as the bas1s for sludge dispos1hon or alternatives for
rejected Option 2 for this mdustry. the ex1stmg mter1m final PSES use. There are no Sechon 405 sludge
NSPS Opt1on 4. is the ex1stmg NSPS regula non. An eltematJve mass standards d1rected at concentrations uf
level of control. It cons1sts of recycle limitation for ammoma(N) is mcluded chrom1um m the sludge. Accordingly.
and reuse technolog1es to achieve flow for those mdirect dischargers whose EPA has determmed that the better
reduction of from 25 to 50 percent of discharge to the POTW consasts solely approach IS to leave 11 to :he POTW to
average BPT flow, depending upon the of "'sour"' waters. Sour waters generally establish chrom1um pretreatment
195
46~0 Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1982 I Rules and R~gulalions
standards for eXJsting sources if refinery toxicity and amount of incompatible Pretreatment coats for a typ1cal new
waste would limit the1r sludge disposal pollutants are ms1gmficant. source refinery arc es11mateu to be
alternatives. The general pretreatment The poJiutants hsted 1n Part III of $260.000 in cap1tal costs and 5190.000 1n
regulations specifically provide POTW's AppPndix D are excluded for several annual costs (1979 dollars].
w1th this authonly. (See 40 CFR 403.5]. reasons m accordance w1th Paragraph 8 VI. Costs and Economic Impacts
EPA has investigated whether tox1c of the Settlement Agreement. First. there
pollutants "pass through" a POTW. The 1s s1gn1ficant removal of some of these Executive Order 12291 requ1res EPA
Agency generally cons1ders that there 1s pollutants by the ex1s11ng 01!/water and other agenc1es to prov1de regulatory
pass through of a pollutant if the percent separahon technology used to comply 1mpact analyses for rules that result m
of the pollutant removal by a well- w1th the pretreatment standard for o1l an annual cost to the economy of 100
operated POTW ach1eving secondary and grease. Second. there is sigruficant m111ion dollars or more or that meet
treatment 1s less than the percent removal of these pollutants by the other economic impact crtterta. In
removed by the BAT model treatment POTW treatment processes by a1r audition. the Clean Water Act spec1fies
technology. Under this approach. strtppmg and b1odegredat10n. Third, the that the Agency should cons1der the
chromium passes through a POTW. The amount and toxictty of these pollutants costs dnd econom1c 1mpacts m
Agency's BAT model treatment system does not just1fy developmg national establishing effluent lim1tallons and
remoYes 86 percent of the chromium pretreatment standards. standards. The Agency does not
while a well-operated POTW ach1eving cons1der th1s f1nal regulahon to be a
D. Final Pretreatment Standards for major rule. Th1a rulemakmg sat1sfics the
secondary treatment removes 65 percent New Sources (PSNS)
of the chromium. In addihon. under th1s requirements of the Executtve Order for
approach the toxic poJiutants identified PSNS was pro mulga ted bv the Agency a non-major rule.
in Appendix 0-Parts II/III of th1s on May 9. 1974 (39 FR 16560) and is The economiC impact assessmP.nt IS
Federal Register notice may pass currently m effect. Pretreatment presented 1n Econom1c Impact Analysis
through a POTW. Standards for mcompattble pollutants of Proposed Rev1sed Effluent
As discussed under BAT Option 4 dre equiValent to NSPS. Lim1taf1ons for the Petroleum Refmmg
above. the Agency found iltnfeastble m 1. Control Treatment Options Industry (EPA]. Cop1es of the analys1s
many instances to segregate cooling Cons1dered. The control and treatment can be obtamed by contactmg the
tower blowdown for chrom1um opllons that EPA mvesltgated for PSNS Nattonal Techmcallnformatton Servtce.
treatment on an industrywtde basis. in this industry are the same as those 5282 Port Royal Road. Sprmgfield. VA
Accordingly. EPA has determmed that presented for PSES. as descrtbed above. 22161 (703/487-4600).
implementation of Ophon 1 for PSES is Option 1 was selected as the basas for
not ach1evable on an mdustry-wtde PSNS. As a result of public comment. BAT/PSES
bas1s. As an alternative. treatment of the final PSNS con tams an altemat1ve EPA IS mak1ng substantial changes to
the comb1ned refinery wnste stream for mass lim1lallon for ammoma(N}. the regulations Wtat we1e propo&ed m
chrom1um removal ""ould require Opt1on 1-Chromtum reductiOn by pH December 1979. The hm1tahons
ins&allat1on of most 1f not aJI of the BPT adjustment. prec1p1tatton and promulgated today for extstmg sourcP.s
treatment tram. Installation of such clarificatiOn technolog1es applied to do not reflect any treatment
treatment for all indirect dischargers segregated cooling tower blowdown. requ1rcments beyond BPT for e"<IStmg
would cost an est1mated 5110 m1llion m pius control of 011 and grease and dtrect dischargers. For mdtrect
cap1tal costs. w1th a total annual cost of ammoma to 100 mg/1 each. dischargers the PSES promulgated toduy
542 m1llion m (19i9 dollars). The Agency Chon 2-Establish t\\.O sets of IS no more strmgent thun ex1sUng
did not propose requmng mstallallon of pretreatment standards as for PSES pretrea"tment stundards already m
BPT-type treatment on an mdustrv-wtde Opt1on 2. effect. Accordmgly. EPA expects no
basts for mdirect dischargers. EPA d1d 2. Technology Bas1s for the Fmal mcremental costs or Impacts for ex1stmg
not receive any commeonts durmg the PSNS. (a) Final PSNS L1m1ts: EPA 1s plants from this nalemakmg.
public comment pen; d suggestmg such promulgatmg PSNS equ11.:alent to Option
a requirement. For th~ forego1ng 1. Regulated pollutants are 011 and NSPS
combinahon of reasc.ns. and g1ven the grease and ammoma(N}. each lim1ted at EPA IS not 1mposmg any more
costs mvol\'ed. EPA does not believe 100 mg/1. on a daaly max1mum bas1s. strmgent NSPS by toda)·"s achon.
insta1lat1on of the BPT treatment tram and total chrommm at the equivalent or Accordmgly. today"s action w11l not
for chromium removal for md1rect 1 mg/1 for the roohng tO\\er discharge affect the rule of entry of new refmer1es
dischargers is warranted. part of the total refinery flow to the mto the mdustrv. Moreover. EPA doE's
The toxic pollutants listed m POTW. An alternative mass lim1tat1on not expect the NSPS promulgated m
Appendix 0 of th1s preamble were for ammon1a(N) 1s also provtded. as 19i4 to change the rate of entry or
detected m petroleum refinery waste descr1bed above for PSES. growth of the mt.lustry. The Agency
streams that are discharged to POTWs. (u) Changes from Proposal: The final expN:ts that 1f 11 firm dectdes to llr1ng d
The Agency has decided not to establish PSNS hm1ts are equal to Opllon 1. the nuw refinery on linu. the control costs
PSES for these tox1c pollutants m thas ophon seiected at proposal. Chrom1um that w11l be requ1red to meet these
mdustry for the lollowtng reasons: was selected for regulat1on for PSNS standards are relat1vely small comp11red
The poJiutants listed in Part l and Part because: (1) It was determ1ned to "pass to the total cost requ1red to start a
11 of Appendix D are excluded frorn through" POTWs as descnbed above; greenfteld opera hun. The current
national regulation m accordance wtth (2) treatment technology 1s avatlable econom1c analysts was based on a
Paragraph 8 of the Settlement and demonstrated; and (3) there are no 190.000 barrel per day refinery w1th a
Agreement because e1ther they were retrofit problems or retroOt costs configurahon appropriate for product1on
found to be suscepllble to treatment by mvolved wtth 1mplemenhng Option 1. of gasoline. dastllidte fuels and
the POTW and do not interfere w1th. Alternahve mass lim1lattons for petrochemical feedstocks. There would
pass through. or are not otherwtse ammoma{N] are also prov1ded. as essentially be no addillonalmvestment
incompallble wtth the POTW. or the discussed prevtously requ1red for meetmg the current
196
Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulations 46441
standard beyond the BPT level of requirements) of certain regulations. In those sources: and (e) those that wdl be
control. This ts because the ""add-on" compliance w1th these prov1sions. we effectively controlled by the
recycle technology for the ex1sting NSPS cons1dered the effect of this regulation technolog~es on which other effluent
can be incorporated 1n the water supply, on a1r pollution. solid waste generation. limitations and standards are based.
use, and treatment systems dunng water scarcity, and energy consumption. The toxic pollutants excluded from
planning and construction of the new This regulation was circulated to and regulation in all subcategories because
source. Therefore. th1s regulation ts rev1ewed by EPA personnel respons1ble they were not detectable by Secuon
expected to have neglig1ble econom1c for non-wale~ quality programs. While it 304(h) analytical methods or other state·
effects on the industry. 1s difficult to balance pollution problems of-the-art methods are listed Ill
Due to significant changes in the against each other and against energy Appendix A for direct dischargers and
world market for refined petroleum use. we believe that this regulation w11l Appendix 8 for indirect dischargers
products. however. the Agency does not best serve often competing national The toxic pollutants that wdl be
anticipate any new sources w1thm the goals. effectively controlled by the
pettoleum refining category through The following non-water quality lechnologtes on which other effluent
1990. A refinery can be a new source il it envuonmental1mpacts (including energy limitations and standards are based are
is a ""greenfield stle" or if modification requirements) are assoc1ated with the listed m Appendix C for d1rect
of aq extsting plant is extensiVe enough final regulation. The Adman1strator has dischargers.
to be "substantially independent"" ~fan determ1ned that the 1mpacts 1dentified
existing source. (See 45 FR 59343. below are just1fied by the benefits B. Exclusion of Subcateyones
September 9. 1980.) The Agency expects associated w1th compliance w1th the Paragraph S(b) of the Settlement
that in the latter case the control costs limttations and standards. Agreement authoriZes the AdmmiStrator
that would be requ1red to meet these to exclude from regulation a category 1f:
standards would be less than the cost 1n A. A1r Pollution (i) 95 percent or more of all pomt
the case of a greenfield operallon. The petroleum refinmg regulations sources m the subcategory mtroduce
PSNS w1U not result in any additional a1r mto POTWs only pollutants wh1ch are
quality impacts beyond those from susceptible to treatment by the POTW
EPA believes that for 1ndirect compliance with existing regulations. and whtch do not interfere w1th, do not
dischargers the PSNS promulgated pass through. or are not otherwtse
today is no more stnngent than existing B. Solid Waste
mcompalible w1th such treatment
PSNS. Under the existmg PSNS The petroleum refining regulahons works: or (ii) the toxiclly and amount of
chromium was subject to regulation on a wdl not result in any additional solid the Incompatible pollutants mtroduced
case-by-case bas1s along w1th other waste 1mpacts beyond those from by such point sources 1nto POTWs IS so
pollutants. The Agency expects that tf a compliance with ex1stmg re~ulallons. msigmficant as not to JUStify developmg
firm deetdes to bnng a new indirect a pretreatment regulation. The
discharger on hne. the control cost that C. Consumptive Water Loss
pollutants excluded under Paragraphs
will be reqwred to meet these standards The petroleum refinmg regulations B(b)(i), B(b)(ii), and B(a) are hsted m
are relatively manor compared to the will not result in any additional water Appendix D for mdirect d1scharger1t.
total invesbnent cost for a new refinery consumption beyond that from
and would not pose a bamer to entry. compliance with existing regulations. IX. Responses to Major Comments
The Agency believes that where an Th1s section contams responses to
existing refinery 1s mod1fied so that 1l1s D. Energy Requ1rements
those 1ssues ra1sed in a large number of
considered a new source, the costs for The petroleum refimng regulations the comments rece1ved and wh1ch affect
chrorruwn treatment would not be wdl not result in any additional energy all subcategones. The anginal
greater than the costs for a greenfield requ1rements beyond those for comments and a summary of the
refinery and the cost of chrom1um compliance with ex1sting regulations. comments rece1ved and our deta1led
treatment would not be a Slgmficant
responses to all comments are included
factor in the dec1s1on to modtfy that Vlll. Pollutants aad Subcategories Not m a report ""Responses to Public
refinery. Regulated Comments, Proposed Petroleum Refimng
Public Law 9~54 reqwres that a The Settlement Agreement contains Effluent Gu1dehnes and Standards".
Regulatory FleXJb11ity Analys1s (RFA) be prov1s1ons authorizing the exclusion wh1ch 1s mcluded in the public record
prepared for regulauons proposed after from regulation. 1n certam for this regulat1on.
January 1. 1981 that have a s1gn1ficant Circumstances. of toxic pollutants and Most of the commenters cnt1c1zed the
effect on a substantial nwnber of small mdustry categones and subcategor1es. need for further control beyond ex1stmg
enlilles. Tlus regulation was proposed BPT and NSPS and the alleged techmcal
on December 21. 1979. Therefore, a A. Exclus1on of Pollutants
madequacy of data to support the
Regulatory Flextbility Analysts is not Paragraph S(a)(iii) of the Selllement proposed regulations. Since the Agency
required. The Agency does not believe Agreement authortzes the Administrator has dec1ded to promulgate BAT
that this regulation wtll have a to exclude the followmg toxic pollutants equiValent to BPT retatn the exi:Jimg ~ ·
s1gnificant 1mpact on a substantial from regulat1on: {a) Those not detectable NSPS and retain the ex1shng PSES
number of small entJtJes by SectJon 304(h) analytical methods or regulation (w1tb an al~ematJve mass
other state-of-the-art methods: (b) those limttat1on prov1ded for ammoma (N)},
VII. Noa-Water Quality Environmental present m amounts too small to be
1mpacta EPA beheves it unnecessary to address
effecllvely reduced by ava1lable an deta1l many of the comments m th1s
ElimiDabng or reducmg one form of technologies: (c) those present only m preamble. A bnef summary of
pollution may cause other trace amounts and ne1ther causmg nor s1gntficant comments rece1ved by the
environmental problems. Sections 304(b) likely to cause tox1c effects: (d) those Agency, together w1th the Agency's
and 308 of the Act requ1re EPA to detected tn the effluent from only a responses. IS set forth below:
consider the non-water quality small mumber of sources w1thin a A. Regulation Beyond the BPT Level
environmental1mpacts (including energy subcategory and unzquely related to Many oi the commenters mdicated
197
,..;&1-12 . Federal Regisl£r I Vol. 47. Nu. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulalil•ns
that further control beyond BPT is two-tier pretreatment requirement. compounds. Thus. it is di£ficult to
unwarranted smce BPT technology Added expenence w1ll enable the determine the amounts discharged by
already reduces sigruficant quanhhes or Agency to decide whether control of refinery operat1ons. Ethylbenzene.
IOXICS. tox1cs shoul,d be effectuated through naphthalene, 2.4-dimethylphenol.
The Agency agrees w1th the req1nrements imposed on POTW dunng benzene. toluene. and carbon
commenters that SPT techno logy the § 301{h) wa1ver process or by tetrachloride were e1ther nol detected"
alrP.ady removes s1gn1ncant quantities of re\•ised pretreatme~t standards. BPT.treated wastewaters.or were
toxic and other pollutants and is thus C. PretrPatment Stanr::.'ards for Hydrogen present at average conce~trations that
promulgating BAT equal to BPT. One of Sulfide and Mercaptans were at or less than the level of
the many factors considered in A few commenters indicated that quant1ficat1on, wh1ch is nommaJJy 10
formulating the final rule are the very hydrogen sulfide and mercaptans can ppb.
low pollutant levels 1n BPT effluents and cause damage to thP wastewater F. Indicator and Surrogate Pollutants.
the overall effectiveness and effic1ency collect1on systems and can cause
of the treatment systems already in Comments were received from
s1gn1ficant odor problems at the industry and private cillzens on tbe.
place in removing toXIC and other treatment plant1f not removed.
pollutants. poss1ble use of indicator or surrogate
Pretreatment standards were pollutant limltallons. Most of the
Other commenters argued for BAT to recommended. comments were not favorable. The
be promulgated at the proposed BAT Pretl'eatment standards adopted today Industry commenters arsued that
level or a more stringent level. including hmit ammonia to 100 ms/1. The tndicator limrtat1ons. 1f necessary.
zero discharge or separate treatment of technology for control of ammoma is should be developed on a case-by-case
cooling water discharges. The reasons steam stnppmg. the same technology bas1s. Industry also queslloned the use
for not adophng levels of treatment are requ1red for sulfide removal. The of total organ1c carbon (TOC). chem1cal
discussed lD Section V above. Asency therefore believes that the oxygen demand {COD). and BPT·hm1ted
The proposed requ1rement for technology for control of ammonia wrU pollutant parameters as indicators for
separate treatment of cooling tower also control sulfide and therefore that1t toluc pollutants because the
blowdown for exJStmg dischargers was is not necessary to establish separate concentrallon of tox1cs are several
not adopted as 11 result of public pretreatment standards for sulfide.
Mercaptans were not found to be a orders of magmtude smaller than that of
comments received. In addition. the such traditional pollutants. The priVate
Agency performed a study which problem warrantmg nahonai regulation.
Any POTW experiencmg problems c1hzens felt that the Agency should lim1t
evaluated the cost and feas1bility or the tox1cs directly instead of rely1ng on
implementing recycle and reuse caused by mercaptans should impose
the appropriate pretreatment standards mdicators. Add!tlonally, many
technolog1es. The study [Rec}•c(eiReuse commenters pomted out the difficulty m
Study referenced in Section IV) on a case-by-case bBs1s.
usrniJ the BPT pollutant parameters as
utdicated that the collecuon of all the D. Total Phenol {4AAP) indicators of tox1c pollutants..
cooling tower water is 1nfeas1ble m Se .. eral Commenters Indicated that In the Sohc1tat1on of Comments
many ex1sllng refinenes because or EPA has incorrectly assumed that total ser.t1on of the preamble to the 1979
leaks 11nd auxdiary uses and thus phenols as determmed by the 4- proposal (40 FR 45941), the Agency
supports the Agency's dec1s1on nol to arnmoantlpyrine method (4AAP)IS a requested comments on the poss1bciity
impose th1s requirement. tox1c pollutant in th1s mdustry. of regulatmg tox1c pollutants w1th
Several commenters argued that the The Agency agrees. Total phenols lim1ta11ons on md1c11tor pollutants.
proposed zero discharge requirement for (4AAP) measures many compounds. While EPA recogmzes that the
new sources has questionable effluent mcluding the phenohc compounds that relat1onsh1p between "utdlca,or" and
reduction benefits and the Agency did are on the Agency's list of pnonty IOXIC pollutants may not be quantifiable
not cons1der !he benefit/cost ralio of pollutants. Because the 4AAP method on a one-to-one bas1s. we behave
zero discharge. The factors that led to measures more compounds than just the control of the "mdicator" pollutants
Lhe Agency's d.ec1s1on to retdin Che GC/MS compounds. 11 does not prov1de would reasonably assure control of
e.lusling NSPS are discussed 1n Section an accurate quantJiicatJon of tbe lOXJC tOXIC pollutants wrth s1mllar physrcal
v. pollutant phenol (GC/MS). Thus. total and chem1cal propert1es.
B. Pretreatment Standards for POTW phenols (4AAP) 1s cans1dered a non- Subsequent to the 1979 proposal. the
with§ 301(h) Wa1vers conventional pollutant for th1s mdustry. Agency conducted a samphng program
Some commenters af8ued that EPA E. ReRulatton of Tox1c Organics at two refinenes for a penod of s1xty
has no authority to estabhsh more It w~s argued that EPA should days to detennme whether an indicator/
stringent pretreatment standards for promulgate e£nuentlim1tahons surroRale relal!onsh1p ex.1sted between
refinenes that discharge to POT\'If w1th gu1delines for spec1fic toxic pollutants the BPT pollutant parameters and the
Section 301(h) waiVers. such AS methylene chloride. carbon tox1cs. The results of the study confirm
Although the Agency does nol agree lelrdchlonde. mercury. elhyJbenzene. the d1ffir.ulties of usmg sur.h parameters
w1th these commenters. we have naphthalene. 2-1 dimethylphenol. and md1cates that a stnllsttcally
dec1ded to change lhe proposed benzene. and toluene. SI8Dificllnt correlatiOn between
approach and establish one set of The Agency has concluded that the canc.hdate surrogate/indicator
pretreatment standards for allmdirect levels of these pollutants detected 1n parameters and tox1c pollutant
dischargers in this industry. Th1s th1s 1ndustry do no( warrant Industry· pal'ameters does nat exist for th1s
industnal category is the only one for wtde regulation. Mercury was found m mdustry. The Agency. therefore. decided
which EPA proposed separate efnuents from BPT treatment systems nut to 1ssue li1mtat1ons for mdicator or
pretreatment standards for indirect dunng the Agency's sampling programs surrogate pollutants m thiS rule.
dischargers whose wastes go to POTWs at an average concentration of less than Spec1fic tox1c pollutants other than
wHh § 301(h] wa1vers. The Agency 1 pcb. Methylene chlor1de was detected chrom1um are not regulated by today's
would like to gam more expenence w1th in BPT effluents. but IS a contammant rule fur reasons presented in Secllons V
§ 3tllrhl applicants before cons1dermg a inherent 1n the analyses of orgamc and VUl of th1s preamble.
198
Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulations 46443
G. New Source Construction during periods of "upset" or "bypass." is EPA's "fundamentally different
An upset. sometimes called an factors" vanance. See E. I. du Pont de
It was argued that there is no basas for "excursion". IS an unmtentional Nemours IT Co. v. Train. 430 U.S. 112
EPA's statements that no new refineries noncompliance occurnng for reasons (1977): Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Cost/e.
wall be entenng the mdustry. beyo'nd the reasonable control of the supra. Th1s variance recogmzes factors
Commenters stated that new refinenes perm1ttee. It has been argued that an concerning a particular discharger that
are currently beans planned. such as the upset proVlsion 1s necessary in EPA's are fundamentally different from the
one in Portsmouth. Virgmia. effluent limitations because such upsets factors cons1dered in thas rulemaking.
The U.S. refming mdustry has w11l inevitably occur even in properly Although this variance clause was set.
experienced a dramatic reversal of operated control equipment. Because forth in EPA's 1973-1976 industry
historical growth trends as a result of technology based limitations requ1re regulations. it IS now mcluded rn the
the reduction m consumpllon of only what technology can ach1eve. it 1s NPDES regulat1ons and 1s referenced by
petroleum products that has taken place cla1med that liab1hty for such s1tuallons c1tation in the petroleum refimng or
smce 1978. U.S. crude oal runs peaked at is improper. When confronted w1th th1s other mdustry regulations. See the
14.7 m1llion barrels per day m the 1ssue. courts have disagreed on whether NPDES regulations at 40 CFR Part 125.
calendar year 1978. Runs have an explicit upset or excurs1on exemphon Subpart D.
decreased each year s1nce then reachmg IS necessary. or whether upset or
12.5 m1llion barrels per day for the The BAT lim1ta11ons m th1s regulation
excursion rnc1den1s may be handled
calendar year 1981. In early 1982 r.Jns through EPA's exerc1se of enforcement are also subjP.ct to EPA's
dropped to below 11.5 mdhon barrels "fundamentally different factors"
discretion. Compare Marathon Oil Co. v.
per day-representins percentage EPA. 564 F. 2d 1253 (9th Cir. 1977} w1th variance. BAT limitations for
capac1ty ut1lazauons in the low GO's. The WeJ'erhaeuser v. Cost/e. 590 F. 2d 1011 nonconvent1onal pollutants are subJect
1981 DOE Annual Report to Congress (D.C. Cir.• 1978), and Corn Refiners to modifications under Sections 301(c)
predicts production to regaan strength to Assoczat1on. eta/. v. Cost/e. 594 F. 2d and 301(g) of the Act. These statutory
t4.4 m1llion barrels per day in 1985 and 1223 (8th Cir.• 1979). See also Amencan mod1ficanons do not apply to tox1c or
13.4 million barrels per day by 19!10. The Petroleum Institute v. EPA. 540 F. 2d conventional pollutants. Accordmg to
Agency believes that these forecasts of 1023 (lOth Cir. 1976): CPC International. Sect1on 30Ifj)(1J(B), applica lions for
U.S. refinery achvtty andicate that 11 as Inc. v. Tram. 540 F. Zd 1320 {8th Cir. these mod1ficat1ons must be f1led w1thm
unlikely that any new refinery facilities 1976): and FMC Corp. v. Tram. 539 F. 2d 270 days after promulgation of final
will be built at undeveloped sates over 973 (4th Cir. 1976). effluent hm1tallons gu1dehnes. See 43 FR
the next decade. mcluding the 40895. September 13. 1978.
A bypass is an act of rntenllonal
Portsmouth. Virginia site which has noncompliance dunng which waste Pretreatment standards for ex1stmg
become uneconomacal and is not treatment fac1hhes are Circumvented sources are subJect to the
expected to be bualt. However. 11 wall be because of an emergency s1tua11on. EPA "fundamentally different factors"
necessary for U.S. refiners to modernaze has 1n the past mcluded bypass vanance and crcd1ts for pollutants
and expand downstream facihhes at prov1s1ons m NPOES perm1ts. removed by POTW. (See 40 CFR 403.7.
extsbng refinery s1tes to allow 403.13: 43 FR 27736 (June 26. 1978J).
increas1ngly heav1er and hagher sulfur The Agency has detennmed that both
upset and bypass prov1s1ons should be Pretreatment standards for new
crude ods to be processed into a product sources are subJect only to the credits
max wh1ch emphasizes productaon of the mcluded an NPDES perm1ts and has
promulgated Consolidated Perm1t provis1on rn 40 CFR 403.7. NSPS are not
lighter and higher quality products that subJeCt to EPA's "fundamentally
Will be demanded by the marketplace. Regulations wh1ch 1nclude upset and
bypass perm1t prov1s1ons [see 40 CFR d1fferent factors" vanance or any
Thas modernization process as not statutory or regulatory mod1fica11ons.
expected to be sufficiently mdependent 122.60. 45 FR 33290, May 19. 1980). The
upset prov1saon estabhsbes an upset as See E./. duPont de Nemours and Co v.
to be considered a new source. Trom. supra.
an affirmative defense to prosecut1on for
X. Best Management Practices v1olauon of technology-based effluent
lim1tallons. The bypass prov1s1on XIII. Relationship to NPOES Permits
Sechon 304(e) of the Clean Water Act
g1ves the Admamstrator authority to authorizes bypassmg to prevent loss of The BAT hm1tallons m th1s regulation
prescr1be "best management practaces" life. personal InJury. or severe property w11l be dpphed to 1ndiv1dual petroleum
(BMPs). damage. Consequently. although refinP.nes through NPDES perm1ts 1ssued
Although EPA IS not establishing pem11tees m the petroleum ref1mng by EPA or approved state agenc1es.
BMPs at thas time. we are cons1dermg mdustry w1ll be entitled to upset and under Sect1on 402 of the Act. As
development of BMPs specific to the bypass prov1s1ons m NPDES perm1ts. the d1scussed m the precedmg section oi
petroleum refinmg 1ndustry. Numerous final petroleum refinrng regulations do th1s preamble. these lim1ta11ons must be
problem areas are known exist, not address these 1ssues. apphed 1n all Federal and State NPDES
including leaks and sp1lls. storm Wdter perm1ts except to extent that vanances
XII. Variances and Modifications and modifications are expressly
contamination. groundwater mfiltrataon
from storage areas and on-s1te sohd Upon the promulgation of the author1zed. Other aspects of the
waste disposal. Sectaon VII of the regulations the eCfluent hmltations for mteract1on between these hm1till1ons
development document descnbes the appropnate subcategory must be dnd NPOES perm1ts are discussed
possable BMP's for th1s mdustry. Th1s apphed m all Federal and Stale NPDES IJelow.
information can gu1de the penmttmg penn1ts thereafter 1ssued to direct One 1ssue that warrants consideration
agency in developmg case-by-case d1schargers 1n the petroleum refimng •s the effect of th•s regulation on the
BMPs for NPDES pennrts. mdustry. In add1t1on. upon powers of NPDES perm1t-issumg
promulgauon. the pretreatment duthor111es. The promulgation of th1s
XI. Upset and Bypass Provisions lim1tauons are apphcable to any rndirect regulat1on does not restrict the power of
A recurrmg issue of concern has been dischargers. any pennatting authonty to act m any
whether mdustry gu1delines should For the BPT effluentlimllllllons. the manner consistent w1th law or these or
include prov1s1ons authonz1ng only excep11on to the bandmg hm1tat1ons any other EPA regula lions. gu1delines. or
noncompliance w1th effluent limitations
199
46444 Federal Register I Vol. 4i, No. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulations
policy. For example. even if this Information Reference Umt. Room 2004 of Promulgated ~&fluent Standards and
regulation does not control a partacular (Rear). (EPA L1brary), 401 M Street, Lmlitaltons for the Petroleum Refimng
pollutant. the permit issuer may stdl S.W., Wash1ngton. D.C. Industry (EPA 440/2~2/007): (5) public
limil such pollutant on a case-by-case comments receaved by the Agency on
XV. SmaU Business Administration
basas when limitations are necessary to (SBA) Financial Assistance the studies upon wh1ch the proposed
carry out the purposes of the Act. In regulations were based: and (6) the
addition. to the extent that State water The Agency IS contmuing to development document supporting the
quality standards or other provisaons of encourage small manufacturers to use proposed regulations. A summary of the
State or Federal law require- limitation Small Busmess Admimstrataon (SBA) public comments receaved on the
of pollutants not covered by this financing as needed for pollution control proposed regulation is presented in a
regulation (or require more strmgent equipment. Three bas1c programs are in report "Responses ~o Public Comments
limitations on covered pollutants), such effect: the Guaranteed Pollution Control Proposed Petroleum Refining Effluent
limitations must be applied by the Bond Program. the Sect1on 503 Program. GuuJelines and Standards"', wh1ch is a
permit-issuing authonty. and the Regular Guarantee Program. All part of the public record for th1s
A second topic that warrants the SBA loan programs are open only to regulation.
discussion is the operation ofEPA's busmesses w1th net assets less than S6 The regulation was subm1tted to the
NPDES enforcement program. many million, with an average annual after- Office of Management and Budget for
aspects of which were considered in tax income of less than S2 million, and rev1ew as requ~red by Execut1ve Order
developing thas regulation. Although the w11h fewer than 250 employees. 12291.
Clean Water Act is a stnct liabality The guaranteed pollution control bond
statute. the imliation of enforcement is a full faalh and credilmslrumenl w11h List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 419
proceedings by EPA as d1scret1onary. a tax free feature. making th1s program Petroleum. Water pollution control.
EPA has exercased and mtends to the most favorable. The program applies Waste treatment and dasposal.
exerctse that discretaon in a manner that to projects that cost from $150.000 to
recogmzes and promotes good-faath $2.000.000. Daled: September 30. 1982.
compliance efforts and conserves The Section 503 Program, as amended John W. Hernandez.
enforcement resources for those who fall in July 1980. allows for long-term loans Aclmfl.-ldmml\lrolor
to make good-faath efforts to comply to small--and medium-s1zed busmesses.
These loans are made by SBA-approved XVII. Appendices
w1th the Act.
local development compames. whach for Appendix A.-Priority Pollutants Nol
XIV. Public Participation the first lime are authonzed to issue Detected in Treated Effluents Discharged
Numerous agencies and groups have Government-backed debentures that are Directly, and Excluded From Regulation
participated during the development of bought by the Federal Financmg Bank. Pursuant to Paragraph B(a)(iu) of the
these effluentlirrutallons guadelines and an arm of the U.S. Treasury. Settlement Agreement. the follow1ng 98
standards. Following the publication of Through SBA's Regular Guarantee pnonty pollutants are excluded from national
the proposed rules on December 21. Program, loans are made avaalable by regulatiOn because they were not detected m
commercial banks and are guaranteed effluenls from BPT treatment systems by
1979. m the Federal Register, EPA Sechon 304(h) anal~·t1cal methods or other
prov1ded the development document by the SBA. This program has interest state-of-the-an methods:
supporting the proposed rules to rates equavalent to market rates.
mdustry. Government agenc1es, and the For additionalmformallon on the
public sector for comments. Five Regular Guarantee and Section 503
techmcal workshops were held on the
proposed rulemakmg. On Apnl 9, 1980.
m Washmgton. D.C.• a public hearmg
Programs contact your d1str~ct or local
SBA Office. The coordmator at EPA
headquarters 1s Ms. Frances Desselle
~I
was held on the proposed pretreatment who may be reached at (202) 426-7874.
standards. For further information and spec1fics
The mdiv1duals and orgamzataons on the Guaranteed Pollut1on Control
that submitted wntten comments dunng Bond Program contact: U.S. Small
the comment period on the proposed Busmess Admamstrataon. Office of
regulataon are listed m Appendix A of Pollullon Control Financmg. 4040 North
thas preamble. Fa~rfax Dnve. Rosslyn, Virgmaa 22203,
All comments received have ~een (703) 235-2902.
carefully consadered. and appropr1ate
changes in the regulations have been XVI. Availability of Technical
made whenever available data and Assistance
mformallon supported those changes. The maJor documents upon which
Major issues reused by commenters are these regulataons are based are: (1) The
addressed in Sect1on IX of th1s Development Document for Effluent
preamble. A summary of all the L1mitat1ons GUidelines. New Source
comments receaved and our deta1led Performance Standards. and
responses to all comments are mcluded Pretreatment Standards for the
in a report "Responses to Public Petroleum Refinmg Poml Source
Comments. Proposed Petroleum Refimng Category (EPA 440/1~2/014: (2) a report
Effluent Guidelines and Standards.·· entitled Long Term Momtormg Data
which IS a part of the public record for Collection Survey for the Petroleum
this regulation. This report. along w1th Refimng Industry (public record): (3) a
the rest of the public record. w1ll be report entatled Wastewater Recycle
avaalable for public rev1ew four weeks Study, Petroleum Refimng Industry
after the pffective date in EPA's Public (pubhc record): (4) EconomiC Analys1s
200
Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 201 I Monday; October 18: 1982 I Rules and Regulations 4G.W5
EPA
No.
Prtanly pallugnl EPA
..... i:l
.. .,....
<15 ..... CIIIancle 18 2<1iiCIOCNIIIyNiuyl · - 73 llenZDCalllfr-
.
••
47
51
,_... llnlnwdl
lllalnDiallll
4ichlol0000101..,_
Cfll0odllli010118-
20
21
22
25
2~111a*oe
2.4 S.IIICiiiCIODIII•IIII
pariiCIIIoroNia craal
1.2-lao-•ze•
71
11
118
ClllyBene
.,__
..,.,_
.._
----
52 ~ 281~- 115-
53 ,.i&l&ll!ldOJucr 'ap 27 1.4-CiiCIIIclroOinzene 117 llaryllrum
Sol 3.3"~121dine
28 111 - ...
55 Nlllllhalene 2911~- 120-
5I liillaiMnZ- 31 2.4oGCNoGIII•oal I 21 c:yanrcla
57 2.......1111 31 1.2---- 122 ....
5I ._.1111111•1111 33 I 34c:lllaroclrCIIJYI- 123 rnan:ury
58 2.4oclliiiDIII- 35 2.•~ 124 IIICIIIII
80 4.1-d11141CDCI'. . . :II 2.1-d•• lOla . . 125-
••ez ~ l7 u.-• .,....,_.. 128 .....
.. ...._,......,.
~ 41 4-biOIIOIII>ellfl pNnyl - 127 ........
83 Na&.-aaail f\oCIIIDtta•=•
......
,...w.......... 41 IIIS(2<1ilao-OIIyl) - 128 -
llll 43 a.(2-cuiO-ayJmalllaN
• 3..._.....,_ .
llul7l ~ llfilftllaiA
..
•s·,...-
....,.,..... c:Nande
•1 .,..,.,. llrOftde
linllnOioml
II. Pursuant to Paragraph 8(a)(m) of the
Sertlement Agreement. the followang two
.......,..............
72 llenla(al.- 47
pnonty pollutants are excluded from nallonal
51--
74 5, CiiiQUOCMth)IIOLICihaN
75 52~ regulation because their detection rs believed
.,. ...--
77 ~ 53 '-"'Ioo:ycc--
to be attributed to laboratory anolysra and
sample contamrnatron:
79 IMnlllllfll.....,..... 81 N-ftolrCISOdlme,.,..,..,..
80 nuar- ez~....,..
ez dllleniii(Liilantlne- 83 N-fto-II'OIJYI-
a odlrlo(l~~ 51 a.(2..lllyi'-VQ ~
15 ~ 68 Ool>oOCiyl ...........
. .......
u
81
90
~
....,.c:Nande
~
~ ez
71
7•
_,ye
:l.~zolluaran,..,..
75 llenzo lkl lluaranlhane
79 llenZa (gllll ~
llftiMiaW
cMieriZD 1a.111 . . . . , _
.. , .......,..... Clllanda
81 a.(24lllytllaayiJ plilllalala
"
.. ...-......
gz
Ill
4 4".0DT
•.•··DDO ..
•.•··ODE
a
17
81
- 11.1.3-CDJ ~
DICII_IIIy....
....,. c:Nancle Appendix D.-Priority Pollutants Detected ia
Efnueats Discharged to POTWs, but
....
95 ~ 90 di-
91
.......... 91 ClllarllaN Excludftd From Regulation •
. ...,._...,.
17
911
100
IGI
~
1'1811111C1ilar
· - aiCIWiyde
.. ••.oDD
95 illlfta-enGCIIUIIan
91 . . - . . . . . - ...
911 .......
99 - ald.,..
I. Pursuant to Paragraph 8(bl(a) of the
Settlement Agreement. the followmg 5
pnonty pollutants are excluded from
102 11Dfteo8HC 100 , . . _ regulation because 95 percent or more of all
103 lle..SHC 101-- porn! sources an the subcategory mtroduce
ill'p!llftla-BHC 102 ....aHC
105 ....aHC 103 -8HC
anto POTWs only pollutants whach are
101 PCB-1242 Ill' ~SHC (lmdaneJ suscepuble to treatment by the POTW and
107 IIC&12S4 101 PCB-1241 whrch do not mterfere wrth. do not pass
101 IIC&-1221 107 PCP-i2S4 through. or are not otherwase mcompatlble
101 IIC&-1232 101 PC&-1221
110 PCB-12•8 109 PC&-1232 w1th such treatment works:
Ill PCB-1280 110 PC8-12..
..,...,.....
112 PCB-lOII 111 PCB-1260 ------- ··--------
-
113 Ill PC&-1011 EPA
114 .........,. llilllal) 113 ICnrBDNN No PlloniY DOIIIIIanl
11e 114 on.-., (IOiaJI
129 2.3.7.~zo.p.cloOWI CTCODI ill··-
128 _ , _ , z•
57
127 ,.....,. IIDCall n
129 z.:l.7.a.~CTCOOI 80
Appendix B-Prionty Pollutants not 125
Detect.d ia Efnueata Disc.baraed To POTWs,
aad Excluded From Replauon Appendix C.-Priority Pollutants Detected ia
Punuant to Paragraph 8(al(in) of the Treated Ernuenta Discharged Directly, but II Pursuant to paragraph 8(b)(u) of the
Settlement Agreement. the folloWing 75 Excluded From Replatroa Settlement Agreement. the followrnlj 33
pnonty pollutants are excluded from national pnortty pollutants are excluded from
I. Punuont to Parasraph 8(al(mJ of che regulauon because the amount and hJXICII}' of
regulation because they were nol detected by Sertlement ARreement. the follr1wmg 25
Section 30-l(h) analytical methods or other each pollutant does not JUStify developmg
pnonty pollutants are excluded from ndllonal national regulanons:
state-of-the-art methods an effluents resulallon because they are already
discharged to POTWs: effectrvely controlled by technologres upon
whach other efnuenr hm1tat1ons and
guadelines are based:
21-
3~
5 ..._
I --•ICIIidll
I 1~...--z-
1 lieaa&iliiCIO_IZ....
-
EPA
lac~
• ...-.z...
•oII7 c..--
23
:ro
•z-,...,..
II.I•U1C11100iill1ane
CIIIOafMII
1.2·11-lo.l'iloOii~
n .,.,_..
..
II"--- • 38 - .........
40 4oelllaoopr . . .,. D'*'fl .,..,
13 1.1-dlc:lilel- 23 Clllora-
14 1.1.2-a~~CNo~-- 31 2.4-<IICI-<llrCnliiCIOIOraDIIIal-r..•"'llllal 60 ~--
• 8.-nal
·•5 I.IU·Ielr~l- 5I -~Cifllhalala 6-6 pamaGI!Or--101
18~ to rllliillyl llftlllmla 87 bliftZYI llftiNiale
llulyl
II lliiCI-cNDIOii""" .,,.., 71 ......lllyi11Nftatal8 81 ~ ...........
201
4~ Federal Regisler I Vol. 47, No. 201 I Monday, October 18, 1982 I Rules and Regulations
-
EPA
.,.,....,.~
72 . . ., . , . . . _
Indirect discharger-A facality wh1ch
discharges or may d1scharge poiJutanls
1nto a publicly owned trealment works
kg/m ~ilosrams per cubac meter
lb/bbi-Pound& per barrel (one barrel equals
Sec.
reduction atta1nable by the applicalion of
the best conventional pollutanl coniJ'OI
technology. (Reserved)
419.25 Pretreatment standards for extsttng
.....
78~
7:1 -
a.
15
----
.,._
_ ..
_oftlluo-0811111111101!
92 4.4'.0DT
ICI ....
91 . . . ~
·.ooe
. .-. ·
42 gallons I
mall-Milligrams per liter
NPDES penn1t-A national pollutant
dl1charge elim1nauon system permit
l&&ued under section 402 of the Act
sources.
419.28 Standards of performance for new
sources•
419 27 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
NSPS--New source performance standards.
105 ~.. IIHC Subpart C-Petrochemical SubCategory
115-
under sect1on 304 of the Act
117 ...,..,. ppb-Pana per balhon 419.30 Applicability: descnpllon or the
111-- POTW-Publicly owned treatment works petrochemical subcatesory.
120 Clllllllll' PS~Pretreatment standards for existing
121 ~
419.31 Spec1ahzed definitions.
122 '-II soun:es of 1ndirect discharges. under 419.32 EfnuentlimltationsguJdelines
123 ~ sechon 307(bJ or the Act representina the dearee of effluent
12• I'ICIL.. PSNs--Pretreatment standards for new reduct1on attaaneble by the apphcallon of
121 - sources of d1rect discharges. under the best practicable control technology
sect1on 307lbl and (c) of the Act currently available.
RCRA-Resource Conservation and 419.33 Ernuent hm1ta11ons su1delines
IlL Pursuant to Parasrapha 8(a)(1ii), 8(a)(iv). Recovery Act (Pub. I.. 94-5801 of 1976.
and B(bl or the Senlement Agreement. the representmg the dcaree of effluent
Amendments to Solid Waste Disposal reductiOn attaanable by the apphcauon or
followina1Z pnonty pollutants are excluded Act the best ava1lable technology
from regulation ror a combmat1on or reasons. TOC-Total organ1c carbon economically achievable.
FirsL there 11 sagnalicant removal of some of TSs-Total suspended solids 419.34 Ernuent hmllallona gu1delines
these pollutants by tha ex1alln1 pretreatment ~&a/1-Microsrams per hter represenllnathe dearee of effluent
standards ror oil and areaae: second. there 11 40 CFR Part 419 is revtsed to read as reduCtiOn allamable by the apphcallon or
s1puficant removal or all these pollutants by follows: the besl conventional pollutant control
the POTW treatment systam: and thardly. the technoloay.(Reservedl
amount and toxac1ty of tha pollutants does 419 3S Pretreatment standards for ex1stmg
not JUStify developina national pretreatment PART 419-PETROLEUM REFINING
sources.
standard& POINT SOURCE CATEGORY 419.36 Standards of performance for new
aources.
Subpart A-Topping Subcategory 419.37 Pretreatment standards for new
....
EPA Sec. sources.
... . ..
I_..,_
..,_
...,..
34 2.4411leDifl.... ..
419.10 Applicability: de!cnPtJon of the
topp1ng subcategory.
419.11 Spec1ahzed defimllona.
419.12 Elnuent lim1tat1ona BU1delines
Subpart D-Uibe Subcategory
419.40 Apphcab11ity: description or the lube
subcategory.
...55...,.,._
_...._ representma the degree, of eCfluent
reductio" attaanable by the application of
419 41 Spec1atn•:ed definitions.
419.42 Efnuent hm1ta11ons gu1dehnea
the best practicable control technoloay represenunatha desree or effluent
:z....,..,,-• .,.
58 ............
. --
59
currently ava1lable. reducllon allaanable by the apphcat1on o(
15 ,..... the basi practicable control technology
78--- 419.13 Etnuent hm1tanons au1dehnes
81 .....,_.. represent1nathe degree of effluent currently avaalable.
reducho.l attaanable by the apphcauon of 419.43 Effluent hm1tallonasu1dehnes
best available technology economically represenlmg the degree of effluent
acluevable. reduct1on allamable by the apphcallon o(
419.14 EfOuenllimatallons guadehnes the best available technology
Appendix E.-AbbreVlatioaa. Acronyms aad econom1cally achievable.
Other Tenn1 Used ia This Notice representma the degree of effluent
reduct1on attamable by the applicahon of 419.44 Effluent lim1tauons su1dehnes
Act-The Clean Water Act the best conventional pollutant control representmsthe dearee of effluent
Aaency-The U.S. EnV\ronmental Protectaon technoloay.(Reserved) reductiOn allaanable by the apphcallon or
Aaency 419.15 Pretreatment standards for eXJ&tlnB the best convenuonal pollutant control
BAT-The best avaalable technology sources. technology. [Reserved)
economically achievable. under Section 419.18 Standards of performance for new 4l9.4S Pretreatment standards for e.x1stmg
304(bl(2l(B) or the Act sources. sources.
BCT-The best conventional pollutant 419.17 Pretreatmenl standards for new 419.48 Standards of performance for new
coniJ'Ol technoloay. under Secuon sources. sources.
304(b)(4l or the Act 4l9.47 Pretreatment standards for new
Subpart B-CracJclng Subcategory sources.
BMP-Best manaaement practaces under
Sect1on 304(e) or the Act 419.20 Applicabd1ty: descrapllon or the Subpart E-lnlegrated Subcategory
BODS-Five day b1ochem1cal oxygen demand crHck1ng subcategory.
419.21 Spec1ali:z:ed defimllons. 419.50 Apphcab•hty: descr1p11on of the
BPT-The best pracncable control technology antegrated subcategory
419.22 Ernuent hmatat1ons guadehnes
currently ava1lable. under Secuon representing the degree of ernuenl 419.51 Spec1ahzed def1mhona.
304(bl(1] or the Act reduct1on atta1nable by the applicahon of 419 52 EfRuent hmiiHilona gu1dehnes
COD-Chemtcal oxygen demand the best practacable control technoloay represent1n1 the degree ol elfluent
Clean Water Act-The Federal Water currently avaalable. reduction att;unable by the apphcallon of
Pollullon Con1rol Act Amendments of 419 Z3 Elnuent hm1ta11ons guadelines the besl pracncable control technology
1972 (33 U.S.C. 1211 et seq.), aa amendeo · represenuna the degree of ernuent currently avaalable.
by the Clean Water Act of 1977 (Pub. I.. reduct1on attamabte by the apphcat1on of 419.53 Effluent lim1tarions gu1dellnes
95-Z17) the beat ava1lable technology representma the degree of effluent
Direct discharger-A racllily which econom1cally ach1evable. reduction allainable by the apphcat1on of
di1charges or may discharge pollutants 41!f.24 ElOuent hmitauons suadelines the best available technology
1nto waters of the Un1ted Slates represenuna the degree ol ernuent economically ach1evable.
202
Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 201 I Monday, October 18, 1982 I Rules and Regulations 46447
-;1'1:. subject to thiS subpart must achieve the

-119.54 Effluent lim1tahons gu1delines following effluent hm1tattons
representing the degree of emuent representmg the degree of effluent 2.31
10 0 10 10 48 - · --- - - - .• -. - -..· - - - - ·
reduction allaanabla by the applicataon of reduction attamable by the applicataon 10 !i 10 10 gg ___ --·- - · - • - - - - - · - Ul
the best conventaonal pollutant control of the best practicable control 11 0 10 II 49 ---·-· ,.._, _ _ , , __ , ----· .. 273
technology. !Reserved) II 5 Ia 11 99 - - - - - - · - · - · - - - - - . 2.91
419.55 Pretreatment standards for ex1s11ng technology_ currently available (BPT): 120101241 3.24
sources. 12 5 10 1 2 . 9 1 - - - - - - - · - 3.S3
13 0 Ia 13 49----·----- · - - - - - - 311'
419.58 Standards of performance for new 4.11
sources.
419.57 Pretreatment standards for new
-- -- --------------- 135101391 · - - · - - - - - ·--... - -
14 o ar .,..1•-·----·-------· 431
sources.
Authority: Sees. 301. 304 (b), (c), (e). and (3) See the comprehensive example
{g). 308 (b) and (c). 307 (b) and (c). and 501 of Subpart D § 419.42{b)(3).
the Clean Water Act(the Federal Water (c) The followmg allocations
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 as
dmended by the Clean Water Act of1977) constitute the quantity and quality of
Jthe '"Act'"): 33 U.S.C. 1311. 1314 (b). (cJ. (e). lll4ilnc - (kotogr- -
1.000 m• ar roectaiDCkl
and (g), 1318 (b) and (c), 1317 (b) and (c), and controlled by th1s paragraph and
1381: 88 Stat. 818. Pub. 1.. 92-500: 91 Stat. 15117, BOOS.. - - ·- .. .. .. • 22.7 12 0 ultrabutable to uallast. whtch mdy be
Pub. L. 9~217. TSS - - - · - - - ---·- - IS.I 10 I
discharged after the applicahon of best
coo• - · - - - - - 1110 603
Subpart A-Topping Subcategory Oollnd g r - ... -- ----- 811 17 practicable control technology currently
""-"a"oe comOOUI'CIS - - - - 0.168 o 076
Atmnall&l as N - - · _ _ U1 1 • 27 avaalable. by a poant source subJeCt to
§ 419.10 Appllcab1llty; description of the
toppang subcategory.
Sui--- ___ --·
Taw!~ _ - - - - -
o ••a
1
0345
oo68
0 20
th1s subpart. an add1llon to the discharge
HDavalenl cnron-------- 002111 0012 dllowed by paragraph (b) of thas section.
The prov1sions of this subpart apply 11H ---·-- -·-. ·-· ... .. . ·~..-.._ _
1'1_ __~,__ _1_'1_ The allocation allowed for ballast water
to discharges from any facllaty that
En;blll U111b IIIQUnela I * flow. as kg/cum (lb/M gal). shall be
produces petroleum products by the use
of topping and catalytiC reformang.
1,000 IIIII ol 'aec:ISICCIII based on those ballast waters treated at
whether or not the fac1lity tncludes any BOOS -·- - - - - ·-·---~'
TSS ....- - · - - - - - - ......
80
51
1 •zs
31
the refinery.
other process an addahon to toppang and coo'·------ - - - - j 412 213
catalytic reformang. The provis1ons of ()I and gre... ----·--1 25 L3
this subpart do not apply to facalitaes .......,.IC~---, 0060 0027
o •s
· that include thermal processes (cokang,
AlnmantaaH-·---·
Sulflcta • ... • -- • • •
099
053 I 024 -------- ----------
• BPT etlluanl l'""ta-
vas-breaking, etc.} or catalytiC cracking. Taw! C/WOflllum - • • -< 01221 0071
He-lam crvarnun • ..... i 0 10 0 0044
1 101 llallaSI wa1•
§ 419.11 Specialized deflnatlons. pH -- -- ........ -· -- -I c•1 I 1'1

I i 1
Avl!raqa
Of Ollly
Pollutant or IXIfluWII groaeny
• Sea taa1na1a ra110wtn9 Tabla "' f • 19 13lcl
I lar any 1 I can:a..
For the purpose of this subpart: Maxrmum ' valUeS for
'WoiiWI IN r1111ga Gl 6 0 10 9 0
(a) Except as provided below. the
general definations. abbrevaahons. and (b) The limats set forth m paragraph
I
I
aay l ""•
I
aa,.
snan noc
methods of analysis set forth an Part 401 (a) of this sechon are to be mulllphed by I axe-
of this chapter shall apply to thas the followang factors to calculate the
,_,
lilelnC UMa lktiOqriiiiiS
subpart. max1mum for any one day and l)ef CWIIC mel• ol
(b) The term "runorr· shall mean the max1mum average of dally values for
flow of storm water. tJnrty consecutive days. BOOS.. _J ooca 0028
(c) The term "ballast'" shall mean the (1) Size factor. TSS - · - - ---- .,_, - - - 'J )033 0021
flow of waters. from a ship, that as coo•, _ ·-·--- - . - 1
0 47 024
treated along w1th refinery wastewaters 0~ ~ gt88M ... .. - • ...... • •- I 0015 0008
Soze pH ... ·---· -- -·-- - -·1 1'1 1'1
in the main treatment system. 1 rac:1ar
(d) The term "feedstock" shall mean ~---------
'1I
engr.sn .,... cDOUnc~a
I02 I * I 000 gat 01 llawl
the crude otl and natural gas liqu1ds fed lau 111an 249 -·--·- --- ··- - · • •
lOll
25 0 Ia
10 •Ill - - - ,- ·-- -··-
- · --·-
---·- •
to the topping units. 500 749 _____ ___ I 18 BOOS I 0 40 021
(e) The term "once-through coohng 1s o ra 91 9 - - - - --·--- _ ___ _ _ _ I I 28
TSS . . . . . . . . - - - · - - . ·-~ 026
I
017
water" shall mean those waters
discharged that are used for the purpose
100 Ia 124 9
150 0 or
_, ___ - --· - - - - -·-- • - -
125 o 10 ··a 9 _____ ------·--- _
gr•t•-----·--·-. --· ·-
... _ I Ill
150
I 57
COO
0
o~~qraa•·---·
, -----·,- "'""' .. 1
... 1
39
0121
20
00117
IIH • ............ I 111 1'1
of heat removal and that do not come
into direct contact w1th any raw 'S• foalnatl IOIIQwlng 11018 1n f 411 13(CI
(2) Process factor. 'WoiiWI IN r.nge 016010 90
material, intermediate. or fimshed
product. Id) The qudntaty and quulity of
(0 The followmg abbrev1ataons shnll Procau pollutants or pollutdnt properties
be used: (1) Mgal means one thousand IKIOI'
controlled by thas paragrt~ph.
gallons: (2) Mbbl means one thousand attributable to once-through coohng
lea lllan 2 48 -· - - - · - - ----- --·- -·-- 062
barrels (one barrel as equivalent to 42 2.5 ra 3 •a ------- -.---·--- ·-·-· __ 087 • water. are excluded from the discharge
gaJlons). 3 5 Ia 4 411 · - · - - - - - - - - - . -·--- · - - 080
allowed by paragraph (b) of thas section.
4 5 to 5 48 - - - - - - - · - - - ·----- 095
55 10 5 99,_,_ _ _ _ _ - - - - - · - - - I 07 Once-through cooling water may be
'419,12 EHiuent limitations guidelines
60 to a 49 -· - - · - - · - - - - - · - - - - I 17
representing tl"'e degree of effluent
11.5 Ia 8 99 -- - - - · - · -..-·---· - - - · - I 27 discharged w1th a total organac carbon
reduc11on attainable by the applicatiOn of 7 0 Ill 7 48. · - - - - - - - · - - - - - - · - Ill concentration not to exceed 5 mg/1.
tl"'e best practicable control technology 7 5 IO 7 9 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I 51
80 IO 1 1 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - ---~ Ill' (e) Effluent L1matallon for Runoff-
currently available (BPT). 1510 899_,___,,_ ----- .. ·-- -----· I 79 (ReservedJ.
(a) Except as prov1ded in 40 CFR 9 0 10 9 48_ - - - - - - · - - - • - - - - - - l'l'i
9510899- --- - - - - - -·-··-·-- - 212
125.3D-32. any existmg poant source
203
46-148 Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 201 I Monday, October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulations
I~19.13 Effluent llmltetlona guidelines (e) Effluent Lim1tat1on for Runof'-

repN8entlng the det'" of effluent [Reserved).
55 10 1.91 1.27
the best available technology economically I •U9.1~ Effluent llmatatlons guidelines
actllevable (BAT).
(a) Except as provided in 40 CFR
7010711
7511171111.
80 1D 1.19.
851091111.--
...
138
151
1 79
reduction attainable by the appllcat1on of
the best conventional pollutant control
125.3~ 32, any existins pomt source 90 Ia 919. - - - · - 195
technology (BCT}. [Reserved J
951119.99...- 2.12
subject to this subpart must achieve the 10010 1 0 1 1 1 . - - - - - - - - - - - 231
foUowins effluent limitations
---
10 5 Ia 10.99 251 § 419.15 Pretreatment standards for
represenlins the degree of effluent 1101111118 Z.T.I existing sources (PSES).
115101199 2.98
reduction attamable by the application 12010 12.•8 32• Except as prov1ded in 40 CFR 403.7
of the best available technolosy 125 10 12.99
13010 13.•1
353
381
and 403.13 any ex1shng source subJect to
economically achievable (BAT): 13.5 10 13.1111
140ar~.
- 118
138
thas subp_art wh1~h mtroduces pollutants
into a publicly owned treatment works
must comply w1th 40 CFR Part 403 and
(3) See the comprehensive example in achieve the followmg pretreatment
Subpart D. § 419.42(b)(3). standards for existmg sources (PSES).
BAT -""-1 -.a- (c) The followins allocat1ons The rollowms standards apply to the
ve constitute the quantity and quality of total refinery flow contribution to the
POTW:
-
30 controlled by th1s parasraph.
attnbutable to ballast, wh1ch may be
_....
-lllallnal
Cl;yS
discharged 11fter the application of best
ava1lable technology economically
·- .......
Pre IIIIII•
achievable by a poant source subJect to
lor 811SIInCJ
the provisions of this subpart. These IOUICft
-- -
allocations are in addition to the mumum
lor any 1
coo• .. -----·--· 117 803 discharse allowed by paragraph (b) of Clay
~ 0 11111 0.071
aN. 2.81 127 this section. The allocation allowed for
flloblltgrams
Sulfide .. -·- 01 .. 00111 ballast water flow, as kg/cu m (lb/M
.....,_
TOIII- 00 0.3-15
Oll21
020
0012 gal), shall be based on those ballast par
(lng/1))
~~-
waters treated at the refinery.

0t1 aNI Graue · - - - · - . . __ . 00- ·--·-I
r----,
100
1
..,.,_ ... Nl - - ·------ -· - 0 -·--' I 100
---
''Nitefa lila - v a Ill 1118 IIOTW _,_IS solely at 10U1
wa1ars. lhe ow- ar o~~e~a1ar "IU 11'18 oDnan at com111Y"'9
000• ·----~-------1 II 2 213 wo~n 111oa 1,.1 ar 1118 aatly rna•""""' .,... f1mna~a~ lor
~-------1
0010 0027 - Hllanlllll f•191311lanll (Ill
"-------,
Sui!IIM------.
099
0053
0•5
0024 BAT ell"-1 ltmtlallana
larNIIUI,..Ier
.....__
T C I I I I - - - - ----1 0122
0.10
0071
000..
§ 419.16 Slandards of performance for
new sources (NSPS).
l'otluWII or polluwn .._,.,
• (c1) Any new source subJeCt to th1s
(b) The liputs set forth m parasraph subpart must ach1eve the followang new
(a) of th1s section are to be mult1phed by source performance standards (NSPS):
the followins factors to calculate the
max1mum for any one day and
max1mum average of da1ly values for
thirty consecutive days.
(1) Size factor. coo• . ---------·-·-.. oo .... ~ o•1 1 021 • I NSPS allluam
,_,._
EI'IIJIIIII Ulllll (Daunds ! I ~~~
1,000 111111 at '-IIIIIICIII* Sftllll day
I
coo • ___ ----- ---·-.- ·--~
I* I 000 ;al of flow)
3a I z.o
I MaXImum
' lor any I
IvaiU~3
at Dally
consac:u-
lar
Clay 11¥8 days

l.a8 man z•.-------------1
----------- --·-l I 02
250 Ia •I II
500 Ia 74. ------------i
101
1111
'In any c:ae "' wnoc11 me IDIIIcant can CIIJmllnslrlla 1.,a1
me cili-a - _,VaiiCif'l •n lila ...._. ewe-s 1 OliO
mq/1 f I ,000 PC~~~~ I. lila R89GW ACII'IIIIIISUIIOt may SUOSUIU18
.1 I '!:'.:'
750 Ia 111111 ----·-------1
100 111 •2• 11 • ------
121
138
TOC as a 1181WNtar n 1- of COO EH"-' llmllaDOns rar
TOC SNH De DIS8CI on eft"-' Clllol 1r0rn 11M! l)lanl correlalo Marne ,..Ia (luklgrams
1250 Ia 1 1 1 1 9 . - - - - - - - - 150 . , TOC 111 BOOS - CUIIIC , . , . , Ol
157 I 1n 1118 IUII!Jinenl ol IN Aeqlllft81 Aomo,SI!IICit. ICMQUala IIOwJ
1500 or .,.awr - - - - - - - - · - - - · corrlllllaan Clalol Ita no1 avadallla, ,.,. allluanl ,.,.,.,_ lar
TOC Slllll De n l a D - a1 a ra110 o1 2 2 10 1 111 1118 EIOD$ 118 83
111111CaD1e eft"*'l ~rrolaDonS on BODS 83 19
TSS ·-00 -- - ..... 0 -- -· •
(2) Process factor. coo • -~ 1110 32

(d) The quantity and quality of 0t1
0
ana graua --
--· -- - - -
00 • • _
-·--
-·.
-·
-j 38 19
pollutants or pollutant properties Pll-.c; _,_.,.,. -· --
A"""C'nC8aH'. _____ --··-·t
0 -·
0088 0043
28 13
controlled by this paragraph. SulltCia 0071 0035
attributable to once-through coohng ----j
0 - 0 ·-· -· - - - · - - - - •
To1a1 ctWOmun • 0 II 0105

water. are excluded rrom the discharge Ha...,.,.m o ; N - oo•-- __ • I 0.015 00068
l . a 8 - z... -------------1
2.5111 3 . • • - - - - - - - - - · - - -
062
0117 allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s sectaon. "" .·-·-·---- ·- ---- - I 'I C'l
3.5111•·~------------- 080 Once-through cooling water may be EngiiSII ..... (IIQUI!IIa

• 5 Ill 5 ·~~------·--------1 095
discharsed w1th a total organic carbon I* 1,000- ol ftowl
5.5 10 5.1111'-·--------------t I 07
1.0 Ia 1 . • 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - · - - - - - 117 concentration not to exceed 5 mg/1. BOOS • -00 - - -. . - - • _j lu
204
Federal Register I Vol. 4i. No. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulations 46449
_,_
NSPSe- dValhfble. by a pomt source suu1ect to
th1s subpart. m addition to the d1scharge
' - rl'lo aoscnarge ro rl'lo POlW conso.,s !OOiely or .....,
••ters. Cl'le owner or 0081'11\)f ftU II'Mt GOIIOft Ol
..,,. lfttS lemd or the aa11y ma.umum mass 11n111ar.nn ror
COf'I'DIYinCJ
~]'.3.
allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s section. ""'"'"'flfoOo"" rorrn .. t ••s •& car ana chi
The 11llocat1on allowed for ballast water (h) The followmg standa1d 1s o~pplwd
•ar-• ~ flow. as kglcu m (lb/Mgal). shHll be to the coohng tower d1schHrge p11rt of
---------t---~ ~~
b11scd on those ballast waters treated at the total rcfmpry flow to the POTW by
the refinery.
- --- ----------r-- NSPSE-
------ mult1plymg: (1) The standard: (2) by the
TSS.
coo. -.-------
30
21 7
••
112 t..mn•IICII'IS
w •••
rar a.rr.sa total refinery flow to the POTW. and (3)
by the rauo of the cooling tower
01 - .,._ . - ------ --- 13 070
"'*-------- 0031 0016 d1sch11rge flow to the total refinery flow.
---------
-T_ _u _ __
N --------
10 o•s
~-------- 0027 0012
0.0&1 0037
DH--·------ ,.,
00052 ooon
I 'I ------ --~--- -
Preue••·
' rar,_
1
•See , _ ~-., t•lt.t31cl.
SI8=11S
· - - ·. . 111101080
(b) The limits set forth in pan~graph
-
...
llawl -
- (luiOgrams
- · · 01
I -..c-
...........,
(a) of this section are to be multiplied by BOO$_ _ _ _ - - - - • -- __ j
'
r rar any 1
the following factors to calculate the
max1mum for any one day and ~-.
01-~
----1 DOC&
0.033
o.c7
0015
0026
0021
0.2•
0008
_j ___~_
.......
Mdlograms
max1mum average of da1ly values for ------ -
------, ,.,
11M --- - - - - - - - - ----
1'1
1"'11111
thirty consecutive days. r---
enpsn - IIIOUI'dS
(1) Size factor. ... 1,000 v-1 of llawl TOIIII- -· -1
I
aoos__ -- -
_-_-
_-_---- --I
_ -·-
a.co 021
---------==i ,.,
TSS... •• _ _
I,OOOIIIIICII,_per_oMy 027 017
3.1 2.0
~111M 2••----=------1 102

coo'.
01- . , _ - - - - - - - -
pH----------=
0128
,.,
0017 Subpart a-cracking Subcategory
~·==========1
101
50.010 7CI Ill 1
See roo- ...,.,_, - ft t Cll l3(c:t § 419.20 Applicability; description of the
=-=========!
7!50 10 1 WIIIWIU. . . . .
25.0 10 891 128 CII6.01090 cracking subcategory.
131
125010 ......
100 1D 12CI ISO (d) The quant1ty and quahty of
•sooar.-•--------
- - - - - - - - _-:-J_
I 57
pollutl!nts O! pollutant properties The prov1s1ons of th1s subpart are
applicable to all discharges from any
'(2) Process factor. attributable to once-through cooling fac1hty that produces petroleum
water. are excluded from the discharge products by the use ot topp1ng and
allowed by paragfaph (b) of th1s section. crackmg. whether or not the fac1lity
...___..._, 1: Once-through cooling water may be
discharged w1th a total organ1c carbon
mcludes any process m addition to
toppmg and crackmg. The provts1ons of
" - INft 2.CI ~-- 0 82 concentrabon not to exceed 5 mgll. th1s subpart are not applicable.
;::::.· --;; ;:
25103CI. 067 however. to facilities that mclude the
(e) Effluent L1m1tations for Runoff-
processes spec1fied m Subp11rts C. D. or
[Reserved)
E of th1s part.
§ 419.17
!~ E~E~----------- ___ _~ 1~
Pretreatment standards for new
sources (PSNS). § 419.21 Specialized definitions.
Except as prov1ded in 40 CFR 403.7.
80 IOUI - - - --· 1St any new source subJect to th1s subpart The general defimt1ons. abbrev1at1ons
8 5 10 189••- - - - - - - - - - · - - -·-· I 79
wh1ch introduces pollutants mto a and methods of analys1s set forth m Part
901094 ~ 1!15
1Uto989. 2.12 publicly owned treatment works must 401 of th1s chapter and the specialized
10 0 10 10 •• - - - - - - - - - - - - . ---·
1 0 5 1 0 1 0 1 1 - - - - - - - - - • .1
2 31
251 comply w1th 40 CFR Part 403 and defin111ons set forth m § 419.11 shall
II 0 10 II Cl ~ 2.73 achieve the followmg pretreatment apply to th1s subpart.
1151011!111_. - 2.98·-
120 10 12.CI- - - - - - - - - - - - l-2C standards for new sources (PSNS) (11)
12510 12.91. ______ - - - - ----' 353 § 419.22 Effluent limitations gu•dellnes
The follow1ng standards apply to the
13010 13.CI
13 5 10 1311
------·i - · - · ---·
38C
• 18 total refinery flow contribution to the representing the degree of effluent
·~~ ~-:··-------- _-:-:L - ~ 36 POTW: reduction ana1nable by the application of
the best practicable control technology
(31 See the comprehensive example m Panuww--ar-IICIIIuWn---=--11 ~ currently available (BPT).
Subpart D. f 419.42(b)(3J. (a) Except as prov1ded m 40 CFR
~
(c) The followmg allocations 125.30- 32. any ex1stmg pomt source
constitute the quantity and quahty of sub1ect to th1s subpart must ach1eve the
pollutants or pollutant properties - . ------ -- -- . followmg effluent hm1tallons
controlled by th1s paragraph and
dllrlbutable to ballast. wh1ch may be
OIIIIICI greaM
...
Mdlogr.....
-("''IIII
-- 100
~· representmg the degree of effluent
reductiOn attdmable by the apphca 11on
d1!1charged after the apphcatlon of best Allvi'Onla (U N) of the best pract1cable control
'100
prac11cable control ter:hnology currently technology currP.ntly ava1lable:
205
'46450 Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1Y82 I Rules and Regulations
BPT•~- (C) The prOVISiOnS of§ 419.12(C) apply 1.000 IIIII al IINdaiDCII ~ ~~.:::;; • -~- , : : ,
A-8911 to discharges or process wastewater
I
~--
-...
01...., pollutants attnbutable to ballast water use z••-----·-- -· 091
-ror IIWI
095
30 by a point source subject to the 250 ••• 9 - - - - ····- ·---·- - - -
prOVISIOnS of thiS subpart. so 0 IO 7•1------··. - . . ---·-···-· 104
~ 75 0 10 Ill - - · · - - · ·-· -·- ·--- 0 - -
I 13
lftlllnal 100 0 10 12• 9 -------··-- - - - · - · t 123
nc:INCI (d) The quantity and quality of 0
135
125 0 1D U9 9 · - · - - - - - · - •.•• ·---· ---1
pollutants or pollutant properties 150 0 or great•- --·--- -- ·--- .•• - - - 1 I •I
Metnl:- ~ controlled by th1s paragraph.
~- 1.000 m• 01
leedllaclll
attributable to once-through coohng
water. are excluded from the discharge
aoos I (2) l'rocess factor.
TSS••-
..... _____
-- ·-·------
coo•.-------
OIUid
212
195
2100
a•
1,,
121
lOll
•5-
allowed by paragraph (b) of thiS SeCtiOn.
discharged w1th a total orgamc carbon
r-~
......_ UN
l'henall; ClllftiiiCIUIId 021
Ill
010
15
concentration not to exceed 5 mg/1. -· Pral:al c:onr.-aaon ° -
sYII* 0 Ill 0012 (e) Effluent Lim1tat10ns for Runoff- I

TCIIII ClniiiUII
~ ClniiiUII
- 0•3
0035
025
0011 [ReservedJ Less 111M 2 •9 . --- ··- -· ·- ----~
2.5 10 3 ••
0 58
0 13
-
0 - - 0 · - - 00 0 0 0 0 ---- -·-
pH_ 1'1 1'1 o r•

§ 419.23 Effluent llm1tat1ons gwdelines
representing the degree of effluent • 5 10 s.••·-------······
3 5 10 • • • - - - · - - - - - - - - - ·
55 10 5 11--·-- ••.. •. . -·-· -- --

------ 0 0 88
I GO
reduction attainable by the application of I 0 10 I • " - - - - - - - - · · - - - - - · · I 09
the best available technology economically 6 5 10 191-------------~ I II
achievable (BAT). 7 0 10 7 49 - - - - - --·· --- - I 29
gg 55 7510 799·-------·-· ·-·--·-- .. - 141
BODS--- . -·-·-- - - - -
TSIL-•• - - - - - - - - - - 19 •• (a) Except as prov1ded an 40 CFR II 0 IO 8 •9 • ••• - · · - · · - - - · - - · --t I 53
COO'··- -- ··-·----· r•o 38•
125.3~.32. any ex1sting point source
8 5 to a 99 ·--·--····- _ _ __ - - - - •••• , 1 111
Col end ;rs.ase ----------l
30
007•
I I
0031
9 o •o a •9 ---·--- ·--· . . .. ----· ·-- 1 82
"-aaoe:~-----· subject to thas subpart must achieve lhe 95 or gr111er •. -- _ ...•.•. -- _ -·-·· • _I-~
Allllnanl8 U H • -· · - - - - Ill :10
SYIIde--·------1 0015 0029 followmg effluent limitations
TOW!-------- 015
0.012
00111
00058
(3) See the comprehensive example an
~----- reductaon attamable by the application
pH__ -- l'l I' I Subpart D. § 419.42(b)(3).
of the best avaalable technology
•See 1a111n111e lolclonlg I I * n 1• 111.131ca, economacally achievable: (c) The provisaons of§ 419.13(c) apply
'WIINn N 1W1ge 01101010.
to discharges of process wastewater
(b) The limits set forth in paragrdph pollutants attributable to ballast water
(a) of th1s sectfon are to be multiplied by. by a point source subacct to the
the following factors to calculate the - - - - - - - - - - - - · - - 0 · -
provisions or this subpart.
1 BAT EI!Unl 11m111uons
milx1mum for any one day and (d) The quantity dnd quality of
I
maximum average of daily values for
tharty consecutave days.
(1) Size factor.
,._,_,
IQranyl
A-.
v:..
~
-z. pollutants or pollutant propert1es
controlled by thas paragraph.
allr1butable to once-through coohng
I -
Clay -clays
stiiiii'OI water. are excluded from the discharge
1.00011111011-.xk~ ....... - ~~ -------------~---
allowed by paragraph (b) of thiS section.
Men: unns (kdalpams Once-through cooling water may be
u.-. ~•-----·----
250 10 49 9..
o91
0 85
per I 000 m• ol discharged w1th a total orgamc carbon
1-*kl
500 Ill 7•9 I 04 concentration not to exceed 5 mg/1.
7501a911. 113
ICIOO Ill 12• 9 123 coo•. .. _ ..•. -·-
210 109 (e) Effluent L1m1tatJon for Runoff-
021 010
1250101419 - 135 ""-'a'e ClllftPOUIIIIS-- - - -
188 ss !Reserved]
150.0 or~-------· .I • 1 - u N · - · - · ---···.
Sulllde - - - - - - - - -
018 0 0112
TOW CMimUft •• · - - - - - - "043 0.2!1
§ 419.24 Effluent llm1tatlon gu1dellnes
H e s - ctwamum - · - - - 0035 0011
(2) Process factor. representing the degree of effluent
Eroglllll ...,,.. IPOUIICII reduction analnable by the application of
--------------·---- per
l-OCI&I
1.000 IIIII ol
the best conventional pollutant control
technology (BCT). (Reserved I
coo • _ ·-- .. -· •. . _ r• o 384
Prlenanc _ , _ _ __ ..._. -- •• _ oor• 0031
z.••-------------1 § 419.25 Pretreatment Standards for
H---· · · · --
051 a 30
Less INn
2 5 1113.•9-----------1
:15111. • 9 · - - - - - - - - - - - 1
013
o r•
A...._
SullldG -
Tolll-
0
H - - ·--- ·-···-
- -- ·- - - -
-· ___
--
I I
0 015
015
0029
00111
Existing Sources (PSES).
. , Ia s.••----------
5.5 10 5 8t ·-----,---------~
088
ICIO 1 0012
00051
Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7
110 Ia '49- - - - - - - - - · - - - - - 109 •s. laalnote ronowonv tlllle "' t 411 13lcl(21 dnd 403.13 any exasting source subject to
11.5 ID I 9 1 - - - - - - · - · - - - - , - •I 19
70 10 H I - - - - - - - - - ., . _ 129 th1s subpart wh1ch introduces pollutants
751a7!JII_ 0 141 (b) The lim1ts set forth in paragraph mto a publicly owned treatment works
1.0111141. - 153
(a) of this section are to be multiplied by must comply w1th 40 CFR Part 403 and
1510 Ill-----------·
90 10 9 •• ·-·--------·-----·-·
187
I a2 the followmg factors to calculate the ach1eve the followmg pretreatment
15 or IJft•-------·- 1111 max1mum for any one day and standards for exastmg sources (PSES).
max1mum average of da1ly values for The follow1ng standards apply to the
(3) See the comprehensive example th1rty consecutive days. totnl refinery flow contr1huuon to the
Subpart D § 4'9.421b)(3). (1) Size factor. POTW:
206
Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 201 I Monday, October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulations 46451
50010 74 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - I o•
75010198 1.13
9·-----·---------1
100 0 ID 124
1------·-
125.0 10 149
123
135
1500 01greal•-----------1 1.41
""'"-Ia H l ' - - -
(2) Process factor. 'W"- l/le diSCII8Ige 10 tile P0TW COIISISIS IQiely crl -
..,.._ 11111 - or =••rar naa 111e oPIICift or =rno~y~ng
~·----------------3 100 •Illrn.s 1111111 or 111e dilly rnurmurn rnaa ldiii,.IIOII lor
'100 . _ , . •• 1onn '" t 4 111281al and lbl.
I w.w. 1M Glll:fllfp IU llle POTW _ ... IQiely Of - (b) The followmg standard IS applied
. .--. 111e - ot _.rar .,. 111e CI01Iaft 01 CXIIftiiiYIII9 to the cooling tower discharge part of
_. IllS limit ot 111e d.., - , . . llmllaaan lot
_ . • 11an11 n t 418.23 Cal and 1111. ..... ,....z.•t·---
2.510 349.
0511
063
the total refinery flow to the POTW by
multiplying: (1) The standard: (2) by the
§ 419..28Standards of performance for
3510 449.
45105.49 -- 074
088 total refinery flow to the POTW: and (3}
5510599 100 by the raho of the cooling tower
new eourcee (NSPS). II 0 ID 8 4 1 . - - - - - - - - 108
(a) Any new source subject to this 8510899- 1.19 d1scharge flow to the total refinery flow.
subpart must achieve the followmg new
7010 H9.
75to799 _ _ _ _ -- 129
141
source perfonnance standards (NSPS): 8010 849 153
8510 899-
9010 949. --
·------
187
182
9 5 01 g r a a t • - - - - - -..- - - - - - --. 1811 Prelnlalo
""'"'
-
...- d s
101-
(3) See the comprehensive example in
Subpart D. § 419.42(b}(3). l or any 1
(c) The provisions of§ 419.16(c) apply diJ
pollutants attributable to ballast water
by a pomt source subJeCt to the
prov1s1ons of this subpart. T o t a l - - - - · - .. _. ___... _ -~
(d) The quantity and quality of
Meine ..... (lulacpams
pollutants or pollutant propert1es
- 1.000 rn• or controlled by th1s paragraph. Subpart C-Petrochem1cal
1..-.:llt attributable to once-through cooling Subcategory
B"'"• 183 8.7 water. are excluded from the discharge
...,., 113 72 allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s sect1on • § 419.30 Applicability; descrsptlon of the
coo• 1180 81
Once-through cooling water may be petrochemical subcategory.
011 .... ~ •a 28
Ptlenollc _ _ . . . . . 0.119 00511 discharaed w1th a total organ1c carbon The provisions of th1s subpart are
.--cuNJ- 188 II& concentration not to exceed 5 mgll. applicable to all d1scharges from any
Sulllde - - - 0105 00.8
014 (e) Effluent L.im1tat1on for Runoff-- facility that produces petroleum
,..~i:o ,.,
To•-
-........- 0001111
[Reserved] products by the use oi toppmg, crackmg,
"'" § 419.27 Pretreatment standards for new
and petrochemical operations whether
or not the fac1lity mcludes any process
sources (PSNS). m add1tion to topp1ng. crack1ng, and
Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7. petrochemical operations. The
BOO£__ 5.8 3.1 any new source subJect to th1s subpart prov1sions of th1s subpart shall not be
TSS •o 2.5
wh1ch introduces pollutants mto a applicable. however. to facllit1es that
coo•
Col_.,.__ us 21
17 093 publicly owned treatment works must include the processes spec1fied m
""-- 00.2 0.020
comply w1th 40 CFR Part 403 and Subparts D or E of th1s part.
-IDHI 88 30
Sulllde-- 0037 0017 achreve the followmg pretreatment
...........
T0181-
IIH
~
OOIM
,.,
00072
00.8
,.,
00032
standards for new sources (PSNS).
(a) The following standards apply to
§ 419.31 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of th1s subpart:
'S.IaolnotaiQIIowwlg - I n f411.13(cl.
the total refinery flow contnbut1on to (a) The general defimhons.
1 Wdlln llle tii!Qe 4.0 IU 1.0. thePOTW. abbreviations. and methods of analysis
set forth m Part 401 of thas chapter and
(b) The limits set forth in paragraph the spec1alized defamhons set forth in
(a) of this section are to be mulhplied by § 419.11 shall apply.
the following factors to calculate the (b) The term "petrochem1cal
maximum for any 1 day and maXJmum
·- ,_,,
Pretrea'"
opera lions" shall mean the production
average of da1ly values for 30
- lot-
of second-generation petrochemacals
consecutive days. ICU'CB- (i.e.. alcohols. ketones. cumene. styrene,
(1) Size Factor. lor any 1 etc.) or first generat1on petrochem1cals
clay and 1somerizat1on products (1.e. BTX,
1,000 IIIII ollwlllliDcll I * • - day
Sa
IICtar
.......,... olefins. cyclohexane. etc.) when 15
percent or more of refinery production :s
- it•
Leu-2•1 0111 011- grease ____________ =:J (rng/1) as first-generataon petrochemicals and
ao~a•t------------------- 085 100 1somerizat1on products.
207
46452 Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 201 I Mond.Jy, October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulallons
§ 411.32 Effluent limitation• guidelines IP.~- (b) The hm1ts set forth m pdragraph
ret~resentlng the d~ree of effluent Proceu COftiOQ&Q_, ......
ra~:•ar (a) of 1h1s scct1on are to be mulhphed 'ly
redUction attainable by tile application of - t----
the followmg factors lo calculate the
the best practicable control technology L••-••9 1 073 max1mum for any one day and
currently available. 05105•1 --. J 080
max1mum average of da1ly values for
5510519 • I 091
(a) Except as prov1ded in 40 CFR 80108•1. 091 thirty consecutive days.
6510691 108
125.3D-.32. any ex1stmg pomt source 70to7•9 I 17 (1) Size factor.
subJect to th1s subpart must ach1eve the 7510791 . ------ ----- -i I 28
80108CI I 39
following effluent limitations
-:- =~-:::-=~--~-~- -I
8510891 -· I 51
representing the degree of emuent 90 Ill,., ·- I 65 Sire
lectoo
reduction attamable by the application • 5 .. 9'W818r - • . :=-..:-= I 72
------------------------~-
of the best practicable control Lea men 2• 9 • - • --- -· - -- - · -- 1 0 73
25 0 10 •• 9 . -- . -- --·-· - - -·· -----1 076
technology currently available (BPT): (3) See the comprehensive example m 50 0 10 70 9 -- .• - - · • - . --· -. ' 083
Subpart D. § 419.42(b)(3). 75010919 - - - . - -· ---·-- ·- ·-· ~ 081
100010 12CI • - - --. - - - - - -1 091
(c) The provisions of§ 419.12(c) apply 125010 IC99 - · •• - • - - -· ••••• -· 1 I OCI
to discharges of process wastewater t50 0 ,. grater __ • • _ - - · - - _ -· __ 1\3
pollutants attributable to ballast water ----------------------~---
---~------- by a poant source subJeCt to the (2) Process factor.
BPT EI!Mnl--
provts1ons of this subpart.
(d) The quanttly and quality of
pollutants or pollutant properties -------------- -- ...,...--
Proc·
controlled by th1s paragraph. ass
1ac1ar
attnbutable to once-through cooling
~- men • ••- - • - - 0 73
allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s sect1on. •510541----- - -------·--·· 1 080
Once·through cooling water may be 5510599 --··- · - -·- -· ·---· ~ 091
Cl 0 10 8•8 - - - - - - -· - - . ---- ----- 1 091
discharged w1th a total organ1c carbon 8 5 10 6 91 - - - • -·. -- - - - - - - - - ·--- --, 108
1100$ - - · -· ·- - ·- ··- - 3ol 8 11.•

concentratton not to exceed 5 mgll. 7010 7••---- -- ---·--. ·-- ·-·
-··---:J'
7 5 10 719 - - - - - - - - - --· ••• -
I 17
128
TSS---- ----·- - - Zl.4 1•8 (e) Effluent Limitation for runoff- 1.0 10 8 . . _________ ·-----··· --· •• I:J!I
ceo·--------·--
01- vr-------- 11 1
2100 1010
51
[Reserved). 1.5 ID 8 91 - - - . - - - - - ·----··- --- •
9o • 9 •9. - - - - - - - - __ _ ··---·· _ ·- I
I 51
165
, . , . _ CIIIIIIIIIIU"d- - CU5 0.120 95ao;,•••- -· - - - - - - - -·. I 72
~aN____ ZIA 108
§ 419.33 Effluent llm1tat1ans guidelines
SUftde___ Cl52 Cl1191 repreMntlng tne degree of effluent
T-- Cr.52 0311 reduction attainable by the application of
(3) See the comprehensive example m
. . . _..... -
pH-----·------ ----- 0.0.
,., ,.,
0020 the best available technology economically
achievable (BAT). Subpart D. § 419.42(b)(3).
(c) The provtstons of§ 419.13(c) apply
(a) Except as provided in 40 CFR to discharges of process wastewater
125.3o- 32. any existmg point source pollutants attributable to ballast water
BQOL__ _ _ _
subject to th1s subpart must aclueve the by a point source subJect to the
12.1 8.5 following emuent limitations prov1s1ons of th1s subpart.
TSS.- &:1 U5
COD'
,.,._
01-~-
741)
1.1
••2.1 reduct1on attamable by the application (d) The quantity and quality of
T----
00. OC)q,l of the best available techology
controlled by thts paragraph.
--
" " - " a aN &.25 18
~ CI.071 0.035 economtcally ach1evable (BATl:
0.11:1 0 10'7
attnbutable to once-thr.pugh coohng
- ,., ,.,
0018 0 00'72 water. are excluded from the discharge
pH
allowed by paragraph (b) of thts section.
'See *"-• ' - ' 9 ...,._on f•1113(cJ. BAT E"'-tt Lnaa- Once-through cooling wat,er may be
'Wolflll - . . . aii.O Ill 11.0.
..,._
A-.geal
discharged w1th a total organ1c carbon
__ ----
concentration not to exceed 5 mgl1 .
(b) The lir:nts set fortl1 in paragraph 10r:30
(e)Effluent L1m1tauon for Runoff-
(a) of th1s sectJon are to be multiplied by [Reserved].
the followi.Jl8 factors to calculate the 1101-
max1mum for any one day and ,.....,.__ § 419.34 Effluent limitations guidelines
maXImum average of dally values for 1 ooo rn• ol r...taiOdlt representing the degree of effluent
thirty consecutive days. reduction attainable by the application of
coo• - 2100 1010 best canventJanal pollutant control
(1) Size factor. "'-ooe~ 025 0120
technology ( BCT)-{ Reserved I
"-UN·-· 23• lOCI
IOOO _ _ al _ _ _ _ Su- ·- 022 0091
T-~- 052 0:30 § 419.35 Pretreatment Standards far
oo.oe 0020
-~ existing sources (PSES).
L-.,., 2"1-
--·---------j
073
078
e...,.- epaunas -
I 000 IIIII al 1-IOCkl
Except as prov1ded m 40 CFR 403.7
25 0 10 .. , ___ . - and 403.13 any ex1st1ng source subJect to
500 10 7• • - •• 0.13
coo•
r
II 7C0 I:18. th1s subpart wh1ch mtroduces pollutants
T--
75 0 10 .. 9 ·-- · - - - - - · - ·-- - 091
098 "'-ooe~ 0081 00425 mto a pubhcly owned treatment works
100010 12•1- -·- - - - - - - - - - - ·
---
1250 Ill I C I I I - - - - - - - - - - - lOCI -..eeN. I 825 I 38
113 Sullode- ·- I 0 0 7 1 l 00135
must comply w1th 40 CFR Part 403 and
1500 . . . . .1. - - -------· --·-·
.I 0113 0107 dCh1eve the followmg pretreatment
(2) Process factor. 'See-· '
IQI!owong • - . , f01913CCI
0011 ~-~~2 standards for r.x1st1ng sources (PSES)
The followmg standards apply to the
208
. Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 201 I Monddy, October 18, 1982 I Ruies and Regulations 46453
I Wilen! Ule dnc:llarqe Ia llle POlW -~~ SOlely of .,..

total refinery flow contnbulion to the W81..., lhe - 01 QDaraiOI lla llle - ol COIIIIIiYnl
POTW: -
-
illls lrmol 01 1118 duy -
MIIOIIII'" 1•11 31 l a l - (II~
masll llftllleiDI far
Leaa 1111111 2• a. --· ·---·-- -- - - - - a 7:1
25 o 10 •• 1 - · - · - - · - · - · - a 71
500107•1--- 083 (b) The following standard is applied
7501099'11 - - - - - 091
100a 10 1 2 • 8 - - - - - - - - - 098 to the cooling tower discharge part of
125010 1•11 ··--- I 01 the total refinery flow to the POTW by
lSD a 01 ~~-.a-- I 13
mulhplymg: (1) The standard: (2) by the
total refinery flow to the POTW: and (3)
(2) Process factor. by the ratio of the cooling tower
discharge now to the total refinery flow.
:=::-HI-------------_-_-:::-::::::::_-_,, 100
'100
•••---~
1
·~ llle ~ 10 IN POTW-.,...., 01-

0 73
,....., .
Leu,., 080
_ . , . _ 0 1 _ _ ,_
-- u. .11M ct 111e C1M9 -
. fartll .. 1•11.33 ,., -(Ill.
-
llle-01~
limlllloan far
• 5 10 5 • 1 - - - - - -
5510 5.99
ao 10 ••• - - - -
-
---
091
099
,..
101
-
&.5 10 1.89 ------- 113ndardS
7 0 10 7 . . _______ ·---
-- --
- --
--
I 17 lor-
7510799 · - - - - - - 128 IOUI'CIIS
1•19.36 Standards of performance far 138
10 10 8 . . -···- ·-·- -------~
new aaurcn (NSPS). I 5 10 8 89 - ·-- - - - - - · - - · - · I 51
.- ____j, lOll=·
--
11010 9.•9 · - - - - · · - · - - - 185
(a) Any new source subject to th1s 9501~1· I 72
M~
subpart must achieve the followmg new
source performance standards (NSPS): (3) See the comprehensive example 1n IIIIIJ/11
Subpart D. § 419.42(b)(3).
(c) The prov1s1ons of § 419.16(c) apply
TaiBI----·
-·---1
NSPSE""-W
u-- pollutants attnbutable to ballast water
Subpart D-Lube Subcategory
s by a pomt source subject to the
--
provisions of th1s subpart. § •19.•0 Applicability; descrrpUon of the
3D (dl The quantity and quality of lube subcategory.
- claya
pollutants or pollutant propert1es
..ana1 controlled by this paragraph• The prov1sions of th1s subpart are
attributable to once-through cooling applicable to all d1scharges from any
water. are excluded from the discharge fac1hty that produces petroleum
allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s section. products by the use of topping. crackmg,
Once-through coohng water may be and lube o1l manufactunng processes,
....,.,. 21 I Ill discharged w1th a total orgamc carbon whether or not the facility mcludes any
TSS... I• I 95
coo• 1330 110
concentration not to exceed 5 mg/1. process tn add1t1on to toppang, crackmg,
OII-9WM --· II 3.5 (e) Effluent Lim1tataons for Runoff- and lube orl manufacturmg processes.
""-* 0151 077 [ReservedJ The provisions of this subpart are not
"-•" :r.u
--
107
s..ma. 0 loG 0013 § •19.37 Pretreatment standards for new applicable. however. to facllitaes that
TOIIII--- C7:12 0 111 IJ1clude the processes spec1fied 1n
DH- ,.,
aoa
,.,
0012 sources (PSNS).
Except as prov1ded in 40 CFR 403.7, Subparts C and E of this part.
Englosll - (paunciS
any new source subJect to th1s subpart §•19.•1 Specialized definitions.
I * 1.000 1101 al wh1ch mtroduces pollutants into a
'-10Ckl
pubhcly owned treatment works must The general definitions. abbreviations
-•----
I 77 • I comply wrth 40 CFR Part 403 and and methods of analysrs set forth 1n Part
52 3.3 401 of th1s chapter and the specaalized
•7a z•a ach1eve the followmg pretreatment
z.• 13 standards for new sources (PSNS). definrtions set forth m § 419.11 shall
-~- 0051 a027 (a) The following standards apply to apply to this subpart.
--- ·
llde
aN 13
aoso
a 111
,.,
aoaee
u
aozz
0068
ooou
(')
the total refinery flow contnbutaon to
the POTW: § •19.•2 Effluent hmrtatlona guidelines
reduction analnable by the application of
·-
PN!rulo
- the best practicable control technology
•s- •-ra~-.g-., f•11.131cK:n.
1 WIIIwl llle . . . ol 1.0 ID 9 0.
(b) The lim1ts set forth m paragraph

(a) of th1s sect1on are to be multiplied by
the followmg factors to calculate the
-- "*"
lor-
ma..........
lar...,. 1
Clay
Mol..,.,.,.
currently available (BPT).
(n) Except as prov1ded in 40 CFR
125.3()...32. any exu;tmg po1nt source
subJect to th1s subpart must ach1eve the
follow1ng effluent hm1tat1ons
maximum for any one day and - ld• representtng the degree of effluent
max1mum average of dally values for (IIIIJ/1)
reduct1on attamable by the apphcauon
thirty consecutive days. a.- 9UM·-----·
HI----------~
100
of the best practicable control
"""-"'~ (u '100
(1) Si7.e factor. technology currently ava1lable (BPT):
209
Federal Register I Vol. 4i, No. 201 I Monday. October '18, 1982 I Rules and Regulations
aPT-...-... .
_.
...
CALCULATION OF THE PROCESS
CONFIGURATION
representing the dP.gree of effluent
reducllon attamable by the application
-
v:.:"7ar
30
- clays
.,... nol
-~
-;:.:::,~
ow. -----~ __, ...

er.cDn9 -
I Proceu
tm crude . .
VKUUm. crude
· Oesatllng -
1 Fluid caL
~-- w.~;;
~.-
~--·
__ ••
- - ---··
crac~ang__ __
·1
I
~- I
8
of the best avaalable technology
economically achaevable (BAT):
c:a1Un1J. v - n q -------~'
I, Mowlg
n..m.J crac:lung . --·-·- .
lied caL cncu.g. __
aoo• ··-------·--
rss --·· ·-·--·-------
501
351 I2!111
22.7 I F1uod calung. ·
HyGacnclung ------
~colung • • • • I
·--- ·-
-,
j
3600 11170
coo• -·-·-·-·------·- - - L - . __,_ . . .. . F..,_ del-.! ., 111e • 13
01- ~ -·-----·-·-· 112 115 .......,, cloc:umenL
Ol&e
""-'- ~---·-- 031 Alllftlll, _____ .,.......... ____ -
______
prac~uc~a~
12
..._... D N - - - - - - - . j
Suiii!M--------·---1
...._.
Toe.!-----·----
23.4
033
077
0011
1011
0 ISO
045
0030
....... -------·-·L
......., -.lsrlylng -
- ----
-· ·-
1
""'-=---- 1'1 1'1 coo• -·------·--

PIIenolrc - - ·-·. -
31100
0311
: 1870
0114
A - a N , , . , _ , •• 234 1011
-~-nga• Sulllde - ---·-- ·- • • ·--· 033 0150

c-. ' -ro ---. To1a1 c:11ram1um - - - - - - _ 071 045
BOOL..- -·--·-- ... ·--- - 17 9 91 clayl puc

II 000 IIIII
F <ng
-
-
SIIUin
reta-
"".,.._ coni"JV-
rallan
H-¥8----··--- 0068 0.030
80 ---+-~~~~-~-- Enghsn unrts !pounds

coo• . ________
TSS.------ .:._ ___ 1210
··--·--··-· 125
-·---~----
660 - I ,000 IIIII of
01- gr- ----·----1 57 30 ....... -· 1250 10 1-IIOCII)
Pllenolc ~------- 0 133 0065 VKUUm 60.0 048
..._aN·-·-·-·--- 13 38 OeYII• coo• . ., 1210 &ao
SulficM - · - · - - - - - - - - -
T0181- - - - - - -
0 I Ill
0.273
0053
0 1110 ftg--t
T0181- · - ·-
125.0 10
2.48 •:l-411
P"--re CllniiiCJUIIIIS. -- -
ArnmonoaaH--··-
-·- .,'
. .
0 I 33
83
0 065
31
TOial dlro--. .. - -· ····-- I

0011
~
........... - - - - - - - 0024 I
Suilrde ·- ••• ·-·--·- ·--- •• -· 0 I 18 0 053
pH 1'1 1'1 0321 0 273 0 180
'See,_ lallawon9 laDle f419 131C)I2).
:---
CIK!ung-
410
Heuv-•--- ··- -· . . 0024 0011
~-= -~~1
ft 0.180 --- •••• - - ·-
'Witi*P aoe 1'11'!111 of & o to a a. 0 481 ,, •L9.1 'S.. '--•l'llltolllng ,_ rn f 419 131CII21
lw.e 53 0 042 - - - - - - · - -
(b) The limits set forth in paragraph
-r--_____ _
40 0032 -·---·
49 0039 L---- -
(a) o( th1s section are to be mulhplied by .To• 0113 , J,J · I ~7
,,:z (b) The lim1ts set forth m paragraph
maximum for any one day and
A.,._,
AICINI1 -- •0 0032 - Ill
(a) of th1s secllon are to be mult1phed by
maximum average of dally values for
thirty consecutive days.
~.J -_--=:1::-----l.
-=:.:c.... ___I __ . _ __ ~- · __ _I . ~li
__ _j_ __
7
(1) Size factor. Nola:
maxamum average of dally values for
s.. Table f419421111121 ror proceu IKIIIr Ptocaa tharty consecutive days.
IK!ar•n 1\11
S.. TaDte fo419o4ZIII1111 lor sze f8clor tar t25000DDI-
Sir.., clay 1.- refinely Srz• IKIIII' ~ 11 !11
To calculllle m e - lor eacn - · · mull"*' lfte ,,,...
f 419 •Zial Dy 110!/llhe Droceu laclar and srze ractlll' BOOS
Leu....., 499 _ - - - - - - - - - - o 71 ,.,.. rmaunum rar any 1 claYI•I71Y0a8>'097=153 ill (1) S•ze factor.
- 1,000 IIIII 011-ock.
50 0 10 74 9 -------- 0 74
75 0 Ill 99 9 -- --------· ----· 0 81 (c) The prov1s1ons of§ 419.12(c) apply
1000101249------------- 088
125010 1 4 9 1 - - - - · - - - - - - - · - OY7 to d1scharges of process wastewater Srza
150010 1 7 4 1 - - - - - - - - - - · - 105 I 000 IIIII oii-IIOCII - 111'.., clay
pollutants attributable to ballast water Iactor
175.010 1 1 1 1 . 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
200.0 Cll' ~ - - - - - - - - - - - · , -
I 14
I 19 by a pomt source subJect to the
proy1s1ons of th1s subpart.
Lrns ,.., •e 9 _ • • ·- •
50 0 lo 74 9 ______ - · _ •
I 0 71
0 74
(d) The quantity and quality of 75 0 tO 99 9 ·---------·-- - - - ·--- --,· 081
(2) Process factor. pollutants or pollutant propertaes 1000101249 ---- - - · - · -. - -
1250to 1499 ______ • •• • I 088
.
097
·----,-- controlled by th1s paragraph,

attnbutable to once-through cooling
150 o to 174 9 ·- -·--- __ • ·-· __
,,.
1750tot999 · · - · - - · ·
•
··I
I 05
::-...;~ ---=--~~ -=::.

19
200 Q Cll' Qteel• • ·-·· ·- -· •• -- ·- •••" 1 I
allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s section. ----------·------·----
Once-through cooling water may be (2) Process factor.
1.510749 ____ - - - · - - ·---- -- 088
7 5 10 7 99 --- - - . - - ·-----·- ----· , 00 discharged w1th a total organic carbon
110101149 •••_. - - . - - - - - ·--- 108 concentratiOn not to exr:eed 5 mg/1.
15 10 1199 ----·· -·--·-. - · - - - - - . ---·-. I 19 (e) EffluP.nt L1m1tallona for Runoff- Proceu _,rrvur•'- Process
9 0 to 9 49 - ··- · - - - - - - - - - - - -
95111999 - - · - --- - - · -
I 29
141 fReservedl ------·-----------+1__::'•=CI=DI: _
100101049 - · - - - - - - - - - 153 LIIUt-849 - - - - - - , ... - 081
10 5 tO 10 99 - - - · ·-·· - - - - - - · - - I 87 § 419.43 Effluent llmttatlans gutdellnes 115 to 7 •9 _ -·· _ _ •. __ _ o 88
1101111141-- - · - - · - - - · - - 182 representing ttle degree of effluent
115101199 1911 7 5 10 7 99 - · • . -· -·--·---·- -- -- · · - -- ·- I 00
1201012.4._ 2.15 reduct•on attamable by the application of 8 o 10 a •9 _ • -·- ·- - - - · _ --··-··-----· ' oa
8510899 - - , ,,
12.5 10 12.99 ·-- 2.34 ttle best available technology ecanom•cally 9010 949 ••••• ·-· ---·-· • I 29
130ar~•- 2.44 achievable (B.\n. 9510199---·-·. --·-· -- 141
(a) Except as provided m 40 CFR tOO to 1049 - - · · - - · - - · - - • --·---
tO 5 10 10 99 - - - - - ---··-· _ •• _ ·-·- -·-
t 53
I 87
(3) Example of the apphcat1on of the 125.3()-.32. any ex1stmg pomt source II 0 10 II 49 · - - - - - - - · •• I 82
above factors. E."<ample-Lube refinery subJeCt to th1s subpart must ach1eve the II 510 1199. --··-·- ·-·-·-·• I 98
120tOI2.49 •• --·--·-···· 2.15
125, 000 bbl per stream day throughput. followmg effluent hm1tat1ons 125101299 -· - ·-·--··- 2.~
210
Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 201 / Monc.J.1y. Octobr.r ia. 19H2 I Rulr•!l .wd Rc•!:julullm•:.
NSPSe,_ (J) S•:c th~ cumpr~:hcn:.IVP exHmple m

. ___, Subpurt D. § 419.42(h)(:!J .
I1 - --
- ·1 --
- •
•l0ar9'n••-. ---~
,......., ..... ar paauw.r 11'-'¥ I
I M........,. ~~~
- rar
(c) The: prov1s1ons of § 419.1S(c) apply
to UIKc!t.ar::;cs of process wastewater
--..-
- - - - ------ • .J
larlllll'l ~~ pullutant11 Hllrtbutable to ballast wHter
(J) St!e the comprehensive examplP m
Subpart D. § 419.42(b)(3). I • day I -csaya
by d pomt suurce subJeCt to the
prov1s1on of th1s subpart.
(c) The prov1s1ons of§ 419.13(c) apply
(d) The quantity and quality of
to discharges of proces11 wastewAter Meine
per - · (lulogr-
1.000 m• or pollutdnts or pollutant properties
pollutants attnllutable to ballast water '-lOCI&I
controlled by thts paragraph.
by a pomt source subJect to the I
:::JI
co-___3
BOO.S . - - - ... - -- ;s..l • II. dtlrlbutHblc tu once-through cooling
prov1sions of this subpart. TSS .... ________ 2:1• I Ul
wat~r. are e:otcluded from the discharge
coo • . ___ .. . ·--· -------1 2•5 o 12e o
(d) The quant1ty and quality of
01 ana.,._ __ -··-
Ptlenobc
--j 105
025
I 51
0 12
rtlluwed by paragr11ph (b) of th1s section.
1'
OncP·Ihrough cooling water may be
controlled by th1s paragraph. -aN ------ 2:1• 107
Sullodll ... ----- - - - - - - 0.220 1 0 10 dis"harged w1th 11 total orgamc carbon
attnbutable to once-through cooling Total C f V - .... - - - - - 0.52 , 0 31 concentration not to exceed 5 mgll.
water. are excluded from the discharge ,....,..,"""_ _ ___ j 004 0021
II>" ----- iL.._I'__
l ,..;.._l_'l__ (e) Elflucnt L1m1tat1ons for Runoff-
allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s sect1on. (Reserved(
Once-through cooling water may be Engroan ...... (poundS
per I 000 Dill 01
discharged w1th a total orgamc carbon leedlloekl 11 419.47 Pretreatment standards tor new
concentration not to exceed 5 mgll. sources (PSNS).
(e) Effluent Lim1tat1on for Runoff- BOO •• -- - - - - - - - -
W..Z 15
TSS - - • ----- 13 53 f:xcept dS prov1ded m 40 CFR 403.7,
(Reserved] coo· _ ··- -·- --------
110 •so dnv nPw source subJect to th1s subpart
01•""11'- ·-. - - - - - 31 20
"'*'oioc: CllfiiDOUf'dS • -- - - , . 0 01111 0 a.:J
wh1ch introduces pollUtants into a
§ 419•.W Effluent limitations guidelines
rwpresentJng the degree af effluent ~-N
Sulhae _ ______
··--·-··-- o83011 I o38035 puuhcly owned treatment works must
comply w1th 40 CFR Part 403 and
reduc:Uan attainable by the apptlc:attan at Tocal 4 1 - - - · - - - - o 110 o 105
the best conventtcnat palfutant control ............ crvomoum I 0022 00072 dCh1eve the follol<\lmg pretreatment
technology (BCT)-{ Reserved I ;:IH - ·-=--:---._-_-_-_-_-__._l_l_'l_ __,__t_.,_ standards for new sources (PSNS).
• See r - e !allOwing - . , f4t9 131CI Ia) The fullowmg standards apply tu
§ 419.45 Pretreatment standards tar -:l'lerlll")e6.01090
the total refmery now contrlbullon to
e11isUng sources (PSIES). the I"'TW
Jbl The hmits set forth m pAragraph
--
Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7 (a) of th1s sect1on are to be multiphed by
and 403.13 any ex1stmg source subJect tu Preuaa1
th1s subpart wh1ch introduces pollutants maxtmum fur any one day and r ar,_
"ociuranl ar I:IOfiUIIU1I arooerllf _,.CIIS
mto a publicly owned treatment works max1mum average of da1ly values for
must comply wtth 40 CFR Part 403'and th1rty consecutiVe days. ...............
lor ar:y 1
day
ach1eve the followmg pretreatment (1) S1ze factor.
stAndards for existmg sources (PSES) Mllllgr8ms
The follow1ng standards apply to the Dar ••er
total refinery flow contribution to the ·- (mglll_.
POTW. Olanowaase •OO
Leu :Nn •lit._ -·-. ---------~ 071 -taNJ _ '100
!!0 o 10 7• 9. . ·- - · - - - - - - · - - - 0 7•
011 • Wllere me CIIIC!Wgo 10 1M POTW COftSISIS SOlely or sour
75 0 10 999 -
100010 12•9. -----------1
-· · - · - - - - - - - - - -
018
097
. .1_ IN - ar _.atar lias me : l l l - or """"''"'~.g
•1ft :ftiS I..., Ot Ehe Ga11V 1118Jr.ttnum mass ollll118t~Qn !Qf'
·-
125 0 10 1•9 9 ------- · - - - - - - - - - - '
Prwn••·
,._. •501)10 17•9 - - · - · - - - - - - ·-· ___ , I 05 1111r110111a 11!1 ron~~'" f •19 ol6 tal a'ICI (bl
175010 19119 - --------------·. 1 I.
gr•••• . -- -·-· .·- . -:
I=
200 0 01 I 19
rar eiiiSDng (b) The followtng standard 1s apphed
to the cooling tower discharge !'cUI of
--------. -~--
.
I ,.,
lor IIIII' I
121 Process factor. the total refinery flow to the POTW by
mulllplymg: (1) The standard: (2) by the
total rcftnery flow to the POTW: and (3)
by the rat1o of the coohng tower
discharge flow lu the total refinery nuw
01 .,., g r - - . ·-· . . . -· 100 Leu INft I •a ••___ .. ·-· ·- --- __ __ .. ·' 081
" " ' - (... N) .. -· - - - - - - - - - - - - - • 100 55 ra 7 •& ·--·- __. 018
l'rwaal-
7510 7!19 --- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - , 100 mem
•w..... IN~ 101M POTW _ . . -.y 01 - . . 801011•9 ____, - - - - - - -· 109 s1ancsaras
..r_
lfte - ar -•tar nu me 1111- or COftiiiiYI"9 as 10 8 99 _ .. _ - - - - - - - · - - - -· 119 •or,_
Wlllllrlos•-arrN~----·ar
. _ Ml rarlft., f •19 ~ (aJ- (DJ 90109~11
95 IO 999
. ---
................ .
------·-t 129
I •I ..............
sour.:es
I 53 rar .,., I
10010 10•9 -· - - - - - - - - - - - - - · aa,
1051010911 • - , _____ • I 67
§ 419 •.&6 Standards ot performance for II 0 IO 11 •II .. ........ -- -- • - I 82
n- sources (NSPS). II 5 IO II 911 - . .. .. -------·.... I 98 Mclllgrams
(a) Any new source subJect to th1s :~~:::~;: ·- . -·___ -_: .::..:-~·:· .. J 215
2,. per ...
• l 0 ar grea1ar -- - ----·--- - - 2 .. l~"··

sullpart must ach1eve the followmg new --< Tatat crwornum
Sllurce performance stand11rds (NSPSJ·
211
46456 Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 201 I Monday, October 18. 1982 I Rules and Regulations
Subpart E-lntegrated Subcategory (b) The limlls set forth in paragraph

(a) of this se-ction are to be multlphed by
1419.50 Applicability; descrfpdon of the the followtng factors to calculate the
Integrated subcategory.
maximum. for any one day and ,
The proVIsions of this subpart are max1mum average of daily values for
applicable to all discharges resuJtmg thirty consecuhve days.
from any facility that produces
petroleum products by the use of (1) Size factor.
toppmg, cracking, lube oil manufactunng
processes, and petrochemical
operations. whether or not the facility
includes any process m addition to Laa 111M 12411---· - · - - ·--·----· 0 73
1250101249 - · - - - - - • - · - - - - 078
topping, cracking, lube oil manuiactunng
150010 17• 9 - - - · - - - - · - · - - - - - 083
processes, and petrochemical 175010 19911------·--·-·-·-- 091
operations. zoo 10 244 9 - - - - · - - · - - · - - 0.99 coo . .CGn!DDIIIdS
PNnallc ... -· -· -------- ---,·
..____ .._ _ :318
0 040 1191
0 0192
225f6~--- liM
AmmanauN 234 I 101
§ 419.51 Specialized definitions. SulllcM ---j 0 35 ' ~ 1511
Toml crw- ·-- ·---i 0061 I 0032
The general defimtions. abbreviations. (2) Process factor. .......,u.nt c:rwar- - - - - - - -1 o0611 I o032
and methods of analys1s set forth m Part
401 of this chapter and the specialized Engl•sn """'
(DOundl I*
definitions set forth in § 419.31 shall 1,000 Dill of
1-.uDI
apply to this subpart.
I 419.52 Effluent limitations gu1dellnes 075
coo• . . ·---- .. ·- .._. 1380 j 700
L - 111811 8.49 - · ------- -·--·----- 1'11-oc com-.ncll . --·-· _ ---- -·- o 14 0068
reJ~resentlng the degree of effluent 1510H9--. ----- 082 ll
reduction attainable by the application of 7 5 10 7 99 - - - - - - - -..·--· - -
.0 10 149------------- • • - - -
092
100 Sullide ·-· - - - - --------1
- - 11 H - · - - - - - -------
To181 CftrOftiiUIII • · - - - -· - - • - -
83 I
0 124 I 00511
o 29 · 017
the best practicable control technology 8 5 ID 111-----·------ · - · - - 110 Hex....._ CIWQIIIo.jm - - · - - - - · --1 0 025 1 0.011
cunw~tly available (BPT). 10 10 9 • • - - - · - - - - - 120
(a) Except as proVIded in 40 CFR •-------------!
115 10 9
10.0 10 1048 •.- - - - -
130
1 42
•s- looUIOie tao~ taale .. f ••a 13(C).
125.3G-.32. any ex1sting point source IO.S 10 1099 154
(b) The limits set forth m paragraph
subject to this subpart must achieve the 1101!111148 168
(a) of this section are to be multiplied by
115101199 183
followang effluent limitations 12.010 12 . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-!
199 the followmg factors to calculate the
representing the degree of effluent 12.5 1111 1 2 . 9 8 - - - - - - - - - - 2.17
max1mwn for any one day and
reduction attainable by the application 13.0C.IJWU•--------·--·---·- ue
maximum aver.age of dally values ror
of the best practicable control th1rty consecutive days.
te.chnology currently avadable [BPT): (3) See the comprehensive example 1n (1) Size factor.
Subpart D. § 419.42(b)(3).
(c) The prov1s1ons of§ 419.12(c) apply 1,000 Dill 01 1-SICICIIIMI' III'Gim day I Size IICIOI'
pollutants attnbutable to ballast water L: 11'18n 124 9-----· -·- -·-·- --~ l 0 73
by a point source subject to the 125 0 10 149 9. - - · - · - - · · - - · - · - - · - ·
150010 1749. _ _ _ _ -- - - - - - - · 1
0 78
083
prov1s1on of th1s subpart. 17501a 19911- _.. -·--·- ____ · - -...- .. il91
(d) The quanllty and quahty of zoo 1a 224 9 .. --·-· -· •• --- • _ - 1 "I o99
225 01 er••1• ·------·- --·- ·-·---·-- , 104
attributable to once-through cooling Z) Process factor.
allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s section.
soo, ___________ ,. . 219 discharged w1th a total organ1c carbon
TSS. 373 237 Lftl 111811 I 49 ·- - - - --- - - - - 075
coo• 31180 198.0 concentration not to exceed 5 mg/1. 082
01-...-
JINiola---
171
040
Ill
0.182
(e) Effluent L1mitat1ons for Runoff--
8 5 1a 7 49 -·---- _ - · - -·--- ---·-
75!11799 - - · - - · - - - · ·-·-- ---...
8 0 Ia I 49 ·- - - - ----· ..--- • • -- ·--
092
100
--aN zu 101 [Reservedl 1510199 - - - - - - - - - -· • - · - - 110
Suii!M----
Tolll owa.- . -- 041
035
012
0 1511
§419.53 Effluent llm1tat1ona gu1dellnes
9 o 1a &49 - - - -------- - . ·- --·-·1
9 5 Ill g gg ·--· ·--· - - -· -·- .._ - - ··-·-·--
120
llO
----·--·--<I
. . . . _ c:rwar- · - - - - j
01181 0032 representing the degree af effluent 10 o 111 10 49 · - - - - - - - - - · - - - 1 42
pH----------·-------;1~1,~--~~~~~,~- 5
•o 10 •o 119-·-·-·--- 154
reduction analnable by the application of
Engllsll ....... (paunds II 0 Ia 11 49. -----------..·--·----·-~ 168
the besl available technology economically II 5 10 II 99 - - --- ·-- · - - - - · - .. - 183
,_._,
1M1 1.000 IIIII of
achievable (BAT). 12.0 10 12 49.--------- • --- - - · -
12 5 10 12.99---- - - - - - - · - ·--·-·--·
199
217
800'-· 19.2 102 (a) Except as prov1ded in 40 CFR 13 0 01 gnNII.... - · - - - - - - · - · .. -·-1 228
TSS
CQO I--
132
1:180
••
700 125.3()-32, any ex1sling pomt source
01- IliUM - - - - - - 10 32 subJect to th1s subpart must achieve the (3) See the comprehensive example m
~-------- 014 0011
following effluent limitations Subpart D. § 419.42(b)(3).
"'-UN 1.3 31
Sulllde - - -· 0124 00511 representmg the degree of effluent (c) The provis1ons of § 419.13(c) apply
............
TCIIal c:llnlrMn - - -
pH
~-----
029
0025
,,
0.17
oon
I 'I
reduct1on attamable by the apphcahon
of the best available technology
pollutants attnbutable to ballast water
1
S. ....._ follcMing !liN ft f 419.131CI.
economically ach1evable (BAT): by a pomt source subJect to the
'WIIIWI hi r...;e 1010 90. provisions of this subpart.
212
Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 201 I Monday. October 18. 1982 I Rules dnd RegulatiOns 46457
(d) The quant1ty and quality of

attributable to onct>-through 1.uolintc
water. drl' tl~cluderl from the dl~l.hoJrl(t'
aoo.s
TSS...
coo. -
·-
--1
Mellie -
••II
281
2950
lkdOII' ....
par 1000 m• 01
221
179
1520
controlled by th1s paragraph.
dttnbutable to oncc·thruuRh coohng
water. are excluded from the d1~charge
allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s sect1on
Once-through coohng water may be
allowed b~ paragraph (b) of thiS '>P.I.IIOII 0 1 - w - . - - - · --·
Phenolc -
121
0 :JO
117
0 ,.
discharged wllh a total orgamc carbon
Me--·- _- · _
Om.P·throu~h cooling water ma!' bt• -aN ·- 23• 107 concentration not to exceed 5 mg/1
discharged w1th a total orgamc carhon Sulfide - ----· ·- • ·-----· - G.28 0 12 (e) Efnuent L1m1tai10ns for Runoff-
('Onuntratlon not to P'ceed 5 mg/1 r - - .. ·-·-·-- ·--· oc;. 037
oosz ooz• (Reservedl.
11M 1'1 l'l
(e) Efnuent Limltdtiuns for Runoff-
(ResPrvedl § 419.57 Pretreatment standards for new
eng~~~~~- lpaunGS
"s- I 000 1101 Ol sources (PSNS).
~ 419.54 Eftluent llmatatlons gu1dellnes '--1 Except as prov1ded 10 40 CFft 403.7.
representing the degree of eftluent 711 any new source subject to this subpart
IIOO.f - ·-- • -· ---· - - . - . I. 7
reduction attainable by the application of TSS - - · - - -·. -- II 113 -
wh1ch mtroduces pollutants mto a
the best conventional pollutant control COO • - · - ... - - - - - -- Ia. 0 5-tO
tec:l'lnology (BCTHReserved) 01-~- - · - - · - - - .. •s z.• publicly owned treatment works must
0.105 0051
PllenoCc - - - - - - · • comply w1th 40 CFR Part 403 and
!i 419.55 Pretreatment standards for --H--·--·- 113
0013
311
oa.z ach1eve the follow10g pretreatment
Sulfide- - - - - - - - ·
ezlst1ng sources (PSES) T-----· . - - - ..--·--
......... ---·-·-
0220
0011
013
OOQ&II
standards for new sources (PSNS).
Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7 liM • - · - - - - - · - - - - - ·- I 'I C'l (a) The follow10g standards apply to
and ~03.13 an~ ex1stms source ~»btect tu the total refinery flow contribution to
th1s subpart wluch mtroduces pollutants thePOTW:
mto a publicly owned treatment works (b) The lim1ts set forth m paragraph
must comply wtth 40 CFR 403 and (a) of th1s sect1on are to be multiplied by
ach1eve the followmg pretreatment the followmg factors to calculate the
.r· "'='"
standards for existing sources (PSES).
The followmg standards apply to the
total refinery flow contnbution to the
POTW:
maximum average of da1ly values for
th1rty consecuuve days.
(1) Size factor.
·-
-lor,_
.lorUiy
..............1
- .. .L~~-
I ,::,
L--
,....
..... .
I 000 IIIII 01 . _ " ' - d a y
·T-
-
--
12•1 ..------·---- · - - - · · . 073
------1
far emllng
f ar..,
125 0 1D 1•18 · - - - - · - - ••
1500 1D 17•1 - - - - - · - - ·---~
175010 1 9 1 1 - - - - - · - - - - - - - - ·
200 ID 22• 8 ---·----------~
0 7&
0.113
081
0 88
Ool-gr-
-I8SNI-·--··
'WhereiN~ Ia
- . . . . . . - -·-i
IN P0TW
___
. - --· --·-- -· ......._
"j
-IS..,....,
Of soo.
1
100
100
.. -. ____ _l __•~-
I
225 01 tpWaler -------·---·1 I a. . . . . . IN -
-U.IImllor!Na..~y,..,.,.,.. _~
or _.,or 11aa IN 011101 Of _ lor
Ml 101111 ., t • 19 58 lal and Clll
...
-
YoliipN (2) Process factor.
"' (b) The followmg standard is applied
---+~·
(mg/1)
to the coohng tower d1scharge part oi
"'-~-
01 - . , _ _ · - · - . ------- __ __J 100 the total refinery flow to the POTW by
~CaNJ----------·1 .,00
mult1plymg: (1) The standards. (2) by the
'W.... IN -ve 1D IN IIOTW-..,...., 01 _ . total refinery flow to the POTW: and (3)
...._ IN - <:# llaa IN -
--IWMOIINCI.IIIY--1-IIOnlar
_.Ill'
Of =nt!llyonQ
LAD , . , 11•1 - -·-. -· - - - - • -- - - --·,
11510748 ---·-····· ----·- -·-·---- I
0 7!1
0112 by the rat1o of the coohng tower
- - tann 111 t•UI53 Cll-1111 751D 798--·------· ... - • ·-· •• - - - 092
IIOID8.•8 ...- - ·-· .. - · .. --- .... -·1 100 d1scharge flow to the total refinery flow
1151111198-·--·---·- · - ·-- -· --~ I 10
§ 419.56 Standards of performance far 9 0 1D 1•1 - . - ..-··----. - . • . . - .._ 1.20
9 5 1D 1 9 8 - - - - - - · - - - - - -·- • ·--·,1 I 30
new aourcn (NSPS). 100 .. 10 •I - - - - - - · - ·- - - - - · 1 •2
-
1051D 1081. - - - - - - · · ,_ ... --· __ j I Sot
(a) Any new source subject to this II 0 ID II •8 - - - - · - - . . . • ··-· - - - t I 1111 Prav•l·
subpart must ach1eve the followmg new 1151011!111 ·------- .. - · · - · - - .,
12 0 to 12 •8 • • - - - .
1113
I 98 Gtanclanll
source performance standards (NSPS): 1251D 12!111. - .. - ....· - - · - - . - - 2.17 tor._
13 o 01 vr•• _ . ___ _ . _ -·- __ _ 2.211
............,. sourc:n-
-------------·-----~ lor
aay
U1y I
13) See the comprehensive example 10 -- -- . ---· - - ·----

Subpart 0. § 419.42(b)(3).
-----·----- --~·-..;;;-;;;;;;·- (c) The prov1s1ons of§ 419.15(c) apply
loololhgrMII
I*
(mg/11
Ill•
to d1sr.harges of process wastewater

~- --~-= pollutants attnbutable to ballast water
by a po10t source subJeCt to the
T-cnr-
Pauuleoa 01 IIQIIUWit II'GI*tY I- vllueS 101
101=1 _,:_
.,.._
u.e Clayl
prov1s1on of th1s subpart.
(d) The quanttty and quahty of IFII Due. BZ·Z114111 toh'd """''~ 1 ~ami
1 pollutants or pollutant properties IILUNG CODE 1580--

------------- ~
213
Tuesday
August 28, 1984
Part Ill
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 419
Category; Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Pretreatment Standards; Proposed
Regulation
214
3-1152 Federal Register I Vol. 4!1. Nn. 16tl I Tucsuay. AuRuSI 28. 1!1fl~ I Prnpo!led Rules
EHYIAONMt:NT AL PROTECTION Ill. rru~ed A111eadmo:n11 Ia lhe l'etrvlrum C. SPUit!ment Agreem('nt

AGENCY Refiains Pnial Sourc• Calf"\Jorr
Rr~ru la1ios
On April 17, 19&1. EPA. NROC. Afll
A. llftl ""••'Able Trrh.,.,tnAr ~:mUC!nl and all ot!ter inten·eners to the l1t1J~ntinn
.CO CFR Psrt .cIt l.mulaliona Cutdrl•'ln entered tnto a comprehensne
B. Best Conventional Pollutant Tedlnolov Settlement Agreement "'h1ch resoh ed
IOW-FAl.·260&-ll Erfluent Lnn•tat1ons all of the issues raised by the petrhonPr
C. E.lnuent Lim• Ia IIon• Cu1duhnn for and all inten·eners. In the Settlement
Petroleum Refining Point Source Contam1na1ed Sturm Waler RunoCI
Category; EWuent Umfratlons Agreement. EPA asreed ~ pubhsb a
IV. £nuronmental lmpact ol the Proposed notice of proposed rulemalcing and to
Guidelines and Pretreatment Mod1ficahona to the Petroleutll ReRniq
Standards solicit comments ~garding certam
lnduatry ReiJUlallan modi1icat1ona to the final petroleam
V. Sollc11a1ion ar Cammenta
AGINC'r: En\o'lrOnmental ProteCtiOn V1. uecuun Order lZ::!II refining BAT ernuentlimllaiiORS
Agency (EPAJ. VIL Re11ula1ory Ftex1b1li!y Analy1i1 guidelines. In addition. EPA agreed to
propose acr emuentlimltalions
ACTION: Proposed regula lion.
SUMMARY: EPA proposes modifications

VIIL 01\.11 ReY\ew
IX. Uat al Subject•: 40 CFR Partu• guidelines for rour COn\·enttona[
pollutants and BPT. BAT and BCT
to the regulat1on wh1ch lim1ts einuent I. Legal Authority emuut limilataons guidelines ror
dischar,es to w11ters o( the Un1ted The amendments to the regulation contaminated storm water runoff.
Stales from facililies enga!;led 1n the descnbed in this notice are propoaed Petitioner NRDC agreed that 1! EPA
ref.ning and processing or petroleum. under the author1tv ol sections 301. 304. takes final acllon pursuant to and
EPA agreed to propose these 301, 308. and SOt o"f the Clean"\Valer Act consistent With the Senlement
modificalions in. a senlement agreement (the Federa~ Water Pollulicn Control Act Agreementthat1t .... 111 dJSruu 111
whic"h r'!sol..-ed the la".smt brousht Amendmen.ta of 1912. 33 U.S.C. 1251. el l&\\SUII chaJlengmg the nnal pPiruiPUin
against EPA by the Natural Rc!lourccs seq .• as amended by the Clean Water refinmg rcgulat1on.
Defense Councl. lnc.. challen-gmg the Act of 1977. Pub. L. 9Z517). These As part of the Selllement Agr~emenl.
final petroleum refining regula lion changes are also proposed in response the paruu agreed to seek a jud1c1al stay
promullJated b)' EPA on October 18. ro rhe Settlement Agreemen11a Natural of the r!.'gulatory pro' is•ons to be
198Z. Resources Defense Counc1l. Inc. v. modtiied. On July Z4. 1984 the Co:.~rt
The proposed modinc1111ons include: £n,·iranmenta/ Protection Agency. No. entered a stay of the ernuent limzto1t1ons
(I) Amendments to the "best available 83-112Z (D.C. Clr.J. for phenolic compounds. total clu'lm1um
n
technolngy"" (Dt\ efnuent Jim1tntJona
II. Backgrauad
and he:\avalent chrom1um for the
for pro<:Pss "·asrewater for the (oJio" ing portions o( the regula liOn
pollutants phenolic compounds. total A. Pnor Regu/at1on pending the rulemalo.ing· 40 CFR
cnromium. and bexa,·alent chromium: 419.13\11). 419.23(a}. 419JJ{a). 419 4J(aJ.
(21 '"best con,·enlional pollutant On October 18. 1982. EPA published and H9.5J(a).
tPchnoJ,gy·· (OCT] effluent lim1tations final efnuentlim1tallons gu1delines and
atandarda for the petroleum reflning IJI. Proposed Amendments lo the
(or preens "'"IISiewater: and (31 ''best
prac11ca!Jie technology·· (BPT]. BCT. and point soun:e category. That rei1Jiatlon Petroleum Rer&ning Point Source
BAT efnuentlirrutauons fOI' PTO\"Ided rutal effluent limitations lor Catezory Regulatioa
contam1nated slorm water runoff. '"best available lechnology economically The rollov.dng are the changes lo the
D•TE Comme!'lts on th1s proposal musl
ach1e\·able'"(BAT] and ntablished final petroleum industry re~ulatu~n lrat EPA
be subm1t:ed on or before September 21. pretreatment standards for e'ltlsting i.Ppropos1ng:
19R~.
source& (PSESJ and for new source•
(PS~S). The Agency retained ill A. Best A 1"0IIable Technology Effluent
ADDRESSES: Send comments lo: Mr. pre,,ously promulgated "new source Llm1tot/ons Guidelines
Dennis Ruddy. Effluent Gi.ndelines perfonnaace 1tandards"" !NSPSI and On October 18. 1982 EPA published
Oh 1s1on (\\"H-552). En\'lronmental also did not modify 1ts eUluent rtnal ernuent limitations Sllldelinr' for
Protection AgPncy. 401 M Street. S. W .. lim11at1oas guidelines for "best best ava1lable technologr Pconom1call)
\Vash1n11ton. D.C. ZOol60. Allent1on: EGO practicable control technology currently adue..-able (BAT) and C1nal pretreatment
Docket CIP.rk, Proposed Petroleum a\"allable'" {BPT). The Agency resen·ed etandards for uisllng !ource! !PSESI
Refinin,; RuiPs {Wl-1-552). co\"erage oC "best conunttonal pollutant and for new sourcES IPSNS) fur the
The supporting m!ormalion and all control technology·· (BCT) effluent petroleuJI\ refiRing 1ndustry 47 FR 46-IJ4
comments on this proposal \' 111 be lim1tallons g\ndelines. The IHeamble to The Nl!.tural Resources 0Pfense Counc1l
uadable for Inspection and cnp~·mg at the final regulation descrtbes the history ("!'ODRC'] filed a pet1t1on to rev1e1v the
the EPA Public lnronnRhon Reference or ltle rulemak1ng. 47 FR 46-134. October 18. 198Z regulaucn in the Un1ted
Unit. Room Z922 (EPA Library). The EPA Slalea Court of Appeals for the Outrzcl
information regulation pro·.-•des thai a B. Challenges to the Pr1or Regulat1on
of Columb1a Circu11. The Amer1can
reasonable fee may be chorsed ror The Natural Resources Defense Pl-troleum Institute (API) a.nd !even
copyina Councsl. lnc.I"NRDC"] filed a pelltion companies which own and operat'!
FOR III\IRTMER IHFORMArtON CONTACT: Ia renew lhe final petroleum refuung pell'Oieum refi.nenes mler.·ened in that
Mr. Dennis Ruddy. Einuenl Gu1delines re~larion. Natural Rt'~ources Defense proceeding. A number or ISSues were
Oi\lsion. at(202) 38Z-7131. Council. Inc. v. Em·uymmcntaJ n1sed 10 aetUement diSCUSSions among
SUPP\.UtENTARY INFORMAnON: Protect1on AgenCJ'. No. 83-1122 (D.C. the parttes in the loiwsu1t perta1ning lo
I. Leaal AuahoniJ Cir.J. The Amencan Petroleum lnstJhate the BAT efnuentlimilations gu1dehnes.
II. Back1round I"API'"J and seven indl\"ldual aaJ After e.atens1ve discuss1ons. the
A. Pnor Retulalian companies (hereina{ter referred to •• petllJoner. interveners and EPA entered
B. Challensu Ia lhe Pnar R~lallon '"lnten·enen"") anten·ened 1n llle a Settlement Agreement. ~htch prO'- Ides
C. Seulement Aveement lihgallcm. for spec1fied revisions to the BAT
215
FocJcral Register I Vt'l. 4Q. No. 100 I Tuesday, August 28. 1!1&1 ll'roposcd Rules 34153
emuent llmllallona Jllldrllnr.s. Thoat~ From the revised 11Ji9 mndel nowJ. BAT llmllallons for total rhromtum, while
revision• are set forth In today"a fur phenolic compounds (4AAI'l beins aomewhat more stringent than the BPT
proposal. proposed hJday is based upon option a emuenl limitations for total chromium.
In Octnber 198Z F.PA promulgated (a reduction of ZO percent from the are less atrtngent than those bascrt upon
BAT efnu"entlimitalions for the re,.lstid 19i'9 model now). option 8.
followms pollutants: (1) Non· Under today·a proposal the BAT The Agency has reevaluated the costs
conventional pollutants: chemical emuentlimilallans gwdelines for each or compliance for today" a proposed
oaygcn demand (COD). phenolic or the!'e there pollutants would be changes to the BAT effluent limitations
compounds (4AAP). ammonia (as NJ and suhstantially more str~ngent than the and estimates that the total industry
sulfide: and (Zl toxic pollutanta: total BAT emuent limitations guidelines costa of compliance would not exceed
chromlbm and hexavalent chromium. promulgated in 1982. The total allowable those pre¥faualy calculated for option 8.
The model technology for these discharge of total chromium Ia the EPA estimates that no more than 61
regulations was flow equalization. inalial natioa"a navigable waters would be petroleum refineries will have to Incur
o1l and aolids removal. advanced oll and reduced by approximately 288.000 aggregate capital costa no greater than
solids removal. biologJcal treatment and pounds per year. a 66" annual reduction sn millioa and annualized casta no
filtration or other final "polisbin!J atepa.'" beyond discharge levels allowable greater than $25 m111iaa (1979 dollars).
The Agency is now proposing to under the ex.ist&ng BAT emuent These costs translate to aa average
amend the BAT ernuentlimataUona lim&tationa guidehnes: the total Increase or no greater than one hal! cpnl
guidelines for total chromium. allowable discharge or hexavalent per gaHon or refinery product. No
hexa\•alenl chromium and phenolic chromium would be reduced by refinery closures are anticipatPd by the
compounds (41\AP). EPA is proposing to approx.amjlteJy 19.300 pounds per year. a Agency. Refinery capacty and
add flow reduction to the model 56<16 annllal reducbon beyond discharge consumption would remain unaffected.
treatment technology for the BAT levels allowable under e:cistlng BAT: tba Given these factors. the Agency believes
efnuenllim1lat10ns guidelines and IO total allowable discharae or phenolic that &Is earlier heavy reliance on coqta
base I he effiuentlimllationa for each or compounda (4AAP). would be reduced as the bas&s for rejecting more stringl!nt
these three pollutants on a more recent by approximately 75.000 pounds per emuenl controls in thJs industry was
data base. rather than the one it relied year. a 43<16 annual reduction be)•ond lnappropnate, and that the effluent
upon in the October 18. 1982 BAl discharge levels allowable under limitations guidelines for total
promulgation. That ndemakmg uttlized existtng BAT. These reductions are chromium. hexavalent chroauum ard
the same data base used by the Agency based on data in the Agency·a refined phenolic compounds (4A..\P) bemg
when it established best practicable BAT model. The refined flow model Ia proposed today. rather than the effluent
controltechnolo!)' currently available included ia the record for thia lim&lations gu&delines promulgated 1a
(DP11 ecnuentlimalation guidelines far rulemaluns proposal in a report entitled 1982. are app110priate for this mdustry n
the petroleum ref1111ng potal source "'Petroleum Refinmg Industry, the BAT level of controL The reVIsed
category. BPT level of control for this Refinements to 1979 Proposed Flow proposed BAT numericallinutalions are
industry was promulgi'llcd on May 9. Model." contained in the proposed regulation.
1974 (39 FR 16560) and subsequently. EPA believes that approx1marely one
amended on May ZO, 1975 (40 FR Z19J9). half or rcnnerJes which directly B. Best Conventional Pollutant
The BAT effluent limitatioa guidehnea discharge pollutants to navigable waten Technology Effluent l.Jautations
for other pollutanta would rema1n alread)· are comply1ng w;th the emuent Cu1deline•
unchanged. lim&tations being propoaed today.
The BAT effiuentlim&taliona f'urther. EPA behe,es that these effluent As part of the Settlement Agreement
guidelines for total chromium being limitations are economically" ach&evable EPA agreed to propose best
propoaed today are based upon the for the industry. con,·enllonal pollu(anr control
rP\"i&rd 1970 now model developed by 1n the preamble to the October 18. technology ("Bcr') emuent linutalinns
ttoe Agene'f to predict refinery nows. 1982 promulgated regulations for this gu&delines for the petroleum refimng
rather than the BPT 197-1 now model industry. EPA esttmated that cap1taJ 1ndustry. The 1977 Amendments to the
used in the Octouer 1982 BAT costs or SllZ m&llion and $37 aullion Clean Water Act ("CWA"") added
promulgation. The effi"Jent limitations (197'9 doUars)ln annualized costs would section JOl{b)(2J(EJ or the Act
for total chromium proposed today \\"ere be required 1n order for petroleum establishing acr for discharge or
deriv'!d by applying lhiS UJ:"dated now refiners Ia comply Wllh option 7. one or conventional pollutants from e~1sling
model to concentrations for total the BAT control treatment options industr1al point sources. Con\·enrional
chromium obaerved from plant samplins considered by the Agency (47 FR 46-IJB). pollutants are those defined in Section
in 19~1977. Likewi'le. EPA estimated that cap1lal J04(aJ(4l [b&ochem&cal oxygen ·
BAT emuent limitations guidelines ror custs or $:"1 m1llion and annualized demanding pollutants (BODs I total
he:cavahmt chromium and phenolic costs of S:.5 m&llion (19:'91 dollars would suspended solids (TSS). fecal cohronn
comJ:ouncb belnl rroposed today went be required in order for petroleum and PHl· and any add&lional rolluran!s
dPnved using the 198:! Dev•lopm~nt refinPrs to comply w11h option 8. another dcOned by the Administralor aa
Document concentrations and the or lhe DAT cnnlrollrralmenl opCIOna "conventional". The Administrator
revisPd 1!r.9 now madeira more cons1dered by the Agency(~;" FR 46-IJS).- designated o&l and grease as a
a~curately "'present emuent J"llducllons The revised limltat&ona being conventional pollutaat on July JO. 19i9.
ror the'le pollutants which !he Industry proposed today for phenolic compounds. 44 FR 44501.
was ~Pnl'rally achieving in 19i9 or could hexavalent chrom1um and total acr ia not an additional limitation t•ul
technolosically was generally achiev1ng chromium are not based on e1lher option replaces DAT for the control of
in 1979 or could technolosicall)· achieve 7 or op11on 8 alone. The efnuent conventional pollutants. ln addtllon to
by the final BAT compliance date. BAT lim1lations for phenohc compounds ant other factors spec10ed in section
!or hexavalent chrom&um beins based upon option 8. The effluent 304(bJ(4)(8) the Act requttes the BCT
proposed today is baaed upon Option 7 limitations for hexavalent chromium are limalations be assessed in light of a twG
(diacharp Dow reduction of 37.5 percent based upon option 7 The effluent part "cost reasonableness"' teat.
216
34154 Federal RcJi!ilcr I Vol 4!1. Nn. 168 I Tucsdny, August 21T. 1984 I rroposed Rules
Anu~nc:nn Paper lnst11ute v. EI'A. 6GO E-ln1"8rllled Since ltlat remand there haa been
fZd 954 (4th Cir. UM%1. The lirsc lese Then EPA calculated the incremental some confu.ion an rhe pert of pemut
:umparu lhe COlli Far prh·ate intlutlry Ia (beyond BPT) convenhonal pollutanl \Hiten and other~ aa to ""helhrr storm
redutlt ita convenllanalpollulanll ...,,,h rcm0\"'81& and the 1ncrcm•:ntal co~l• wa ler runoR {"runoO"'} emuenl
the casts to publicly 1lwned treatment ossocialed wilh these lecnnologuts ror lim•talians should be ca-nta1ned in
works for SlmLI&r le\'elt of reduction in each model planL Base-d oa thit permsts. There are lwo kmds or such
lhPtr dJsdai'Je O( the~e pollulanl$. The infonnation. cosl-per-pound ratios we~ runorr. i.e.. contaminated and
second lest examines the cast· calculated for each of I he 0\e BPT llncontaminated. rne purpose or lhis •
efTe<:liveness of additional induslnal subcalegories. ralemaking ia t~J ntabliab 'BPT. BCT and
trealm.ent beyond best practicable EPA enlualed reductions in lola I BAT eUluent limitations suideliaes far
CDnlrollec:hnoloJ1 currenll)' nadable lu8pended 1<Hid1 (TSSJ, biochemical contaminated 1tonn water nanoU. These
(BPT). EI'A musl rmd that limitations a" ox)·gen demand (BODs •· and o1l and proposed crmlaminated runoff ernueol
"reasonable'' under both testa before grease for each or these tcehnology lim1lalians would be included in
establishins ~em a1 BCT. In no case levels. Hot¥ever. 01f and grease was nol petrolewn refinery permits in addihon Ia
may Btl be less stringent than BPT.
EPA publi&hed a proposed BCT
considered ror the BCT calculations ror praceu waS1ewalar ernuent limitations.
NSPS for contami.aated runoff;, bemg
recycle/I"PtJSe for lhis industry.
methodololf oa October 29. 1982. [47 FR Addilionallv, BOO. waa not considered reser.~ far rutun ndemaklng.
4!n16)t T.,11 propased BCT methoualogy for the ncr" ca1C1Jiatians ror filtration for In today's ptVposal EPA 1s de£inms
explamalhe deta1la olthe two par1 c:aat· lhia industry. Thi1 it in accordance with contaminated l"'lnoff. for purposes of
reasonableness lest. le.. the "POTW the proposed BCT methodology in order these rqulations only. to be runoff
lest.. and llle ''industry cost tesr·. to avoid -dQKhle counting'" of the "hich comea into contact wilh ~~~·raw
Today's proposed BCT effiuent amount of poDutants remO\-ed by 1 ' rnalerial. intermediate proadtJc:t, fin.shed
limataliona guideUnea For the petroLeWD candidate acr lechao!ogy. prcduct. by-product or waste product
refilling industry an based on tbe The recycle/mJse tedlnolo!JY opt1on located on petroieum refinery prllperty.
proposed BCT n;elhodolot~Y· EPA i1 ldmbfied I'" BCT wae evaluated in Jhe Any olht!r storm water rue off at a
proposang thai DCT be set equa.l to BPT range ofYnna 2D to 40 percent reduction reline1'7 Is cons1dered uncontaminated.
rar the petroleum rera.ning induslty. in discharge now. The cast per pound In toda)'"s proposal. EPA also i1
EP-\ cun~ndered two leo:e1s of ranges from $41.00 to $0.77 (19i7 dollars] proposmg to amend the defirntion of the
technology ror incremental conlrol
beyond BPT oltotaJ 3u.spended JDJw
In the 6nl par1 orthe prllposed BCT cost term "runoff' c:ummtly found in -10 CFR
reasonableneu test (lhe "POTIV iesf1. fl9.ll!bJ !o cJeanfy that 11 m~ans the
(TSSl aad ail and srea.se. These ~ Acxordingly, lhe Agency found thai !he now of stonn water resulting CtVrn
lecbnolaiJY levels are re.:yc!e/reuse and add.i lion of ~rclel reuse technology precipitation coming 1nto conlad w1th ,
rec)·cle/~use followed by granular fails the first part o! the proposed BCT petroliMII refinery proper1y.
media filtration. These technalogaes &re cost reasonableness lest mall five Contammated runoff CtJnsUiutes an
already 1n use at cerlean &~tn in lite aubcategaries [!0.30 per pound in 1977' additional source of pollot1on 'l'll'nch
petrolewn rerinin& industry. These dollars). must be managed dunng periods or
lechnolOIJies wPre selecled u candidate The Agency also found thai the precipzlalaon along \\ith procesa
BC..I lechnoiC'gles bec:ause the 1\gency add1t1on ol recycle/reuse plus filtration wastewaler from relioery operations.
belieo:es they l"'!presenl the firsl levels of falls the firs) pari of the proposed BCT The regulations bemg proposed today
control bl'yond SFI' which coald effec-t cost reasonablenesa t~st 1n all D11a do not establish numencal ertluenl
reduction& in convenlumaJ pollutant 5ubcategD"ries. The recycle/reuse portio11 limalat1ons for uncoatam~nated rJnof'f.
laadinsll an trus 1ndustry. Filtrallan alana · of this oplicn was evaluated ia the range £r£1uent l1m1tation!. Jntluding but not
was nol selected 11 a candadate BCI' of rram ZD to 40 percent reduction in limaled 1o anocaliona. for
technoiO!IY because il it one oE the dJsc.IJarse flow. The ccst per poWld (J977 · uncon!aminaled runoff may be
e~astuta BPT treatmenl tec!malogurs. established by the pemit "'Tiler !Jased
dollarslranses Cram SZl.OO to SO.Sa.
Howe\er. the Aseney decided to compared lo the benc.hmark of $Q.JQ per on his/her best prafen1onal )od.gment.
cans1der the comb~at1on of reC}'cle/ pound (1977 dollars]. The A~ency behe\es that the best
reu'le plus iilrration as a candidate BCT Therefore. tbe Asency i• propos1ng pracucable control technology current!)·
lechnolo!IY. Th1& i.l becau!e the thai BCf be sel equal 1o BPT for the li,·e 8\'a1lable. the best can\enuonal
decreased h)·draulic loading rnulting subcatesories in IJ!is Industry. pollutant control technology and the
rrom recytle/~•• result& in the need A more complete discUSSIOn orthe best au1lable technolo~ ecoaoru1c11lly
ror sraaUer and lcs1 costly filtratioo selection or the candidate BCT achaenble for treatment of
equipment than that included m t~e BPT technologn~s. the detail& of tbe rLl'St par1 c:ontammated runorr are the same 81 the
trP.almenl modeL The BCT eosl !e.sl wa.e o( the proposed scr c.osf technalog'les 1dent•fied. far treatment of
then perronned on the cambina11on of I"P.asonablenessa lest (''rQnV lest"'), procen wastewater. The Agency has
reqde/nuse and filtrallon as a doubl• and tl\e b&lill (oc dectSIOD on lh11 not 1denhlied any feas1ble tech.nologaes
check on U\e effect• of the leu cn•lly propo&al are conta1ned in the capable of ach1eving pollutant
filtralian 11ep. administraliYe record of th1s rulcm11kana. reductions for contaminated runorr rrom
In order lo dercnnrne "ltether lhese rrfinenes to any greater dc!Zree tflan
canchdace !echnolog~es are "co&l· C. Effla.ent l.imrtation:s Cuirir!ines for lbose wh1ch are achanable by the
reasonableM. EPA developed one model OJnttJmmated Storm Water Runoff process wastewater treatment rac:llaty.
planl representative or a typical plnnl in In the Oc:tober 18. 1982 rulcm11kang Ike The Agency belieYes that the
each of the rive BPT auhcelqories. The Agency Wllhdre"' sloMTJ water effluent con,·entlonal poilutflnt oal and grease
fh·e BPT 1ubca1rgorie1 are: limalallons suidehnes Cor BPT. BAT and and the nonconventaonal pollutant
A-Toppins NSPS. because IJ'Ier were remanded by parameter total organ1c carbon (TOC)
8--Cracking the U.S. Cour1 o( Appeals in Amerrcan are appropnate measw-es to determme
C-Pelracbenuc:al Peuuleum ln.strlute "· £1',1, SolO F~d 1023 whether pollutantloadLngs 111
0-l.&lbe f101h Cir. 1976J. contaminated rano(( would be
217
Federal Register I Vol. 49. No. 168 I Tuesduy. t\uf(u!ll 28. lP84 I Proposed Rules 34155
mttusurably reduced hy the mortel pru~1osrd DI\T l'(nlM'Gt llmitllllon" measurement of land area where
treatment technologies used to dPvelup guu.leline•. Ius 1.11rinaent BAT precipitation would become
these proposed regulations. Under contaminated runoff numerical effluent contaminated. and (21 an historical
today·a proposal for DPT. wastewater limitations (or phl'nollc compnunds mPosure of precipitation for thtt
con11istins solely or contan1inated runoff (4i~AP) "'Ould be dl!'dved than under particular refinery location.
ma) be discharged directly w1thout today' a proposed BPT contaminated Once the mass based effluent
trea•ment1f it does not exceed 15 mg/1 runorr numerical ernuentlimllationa for limitation Is denved. II may be
011 and grease and 110 mg/1 TOC. based phenolic compound. (4AAP). The more incoll)Orated into a refinery permit in
upon an anafysia of any aangle grab or stringent effiuent limitations clearly are one of three ways. 11ie proper choice
composite sample. Under today's achievable and as a matter or law BAT depends on aile-specific factors. such u
proposal for BCT. wastewater consisting cannot be less stringent than BPT. local rainfall patterns and the ,design or
solrly of coni aminated nmoCf may be Today'• BCT proposal Cor runoll holding racililies.
discharged directly "ithouttreatmenL ii con lamina led runoff Is based on the The first method Ia a continuous
it dfles not exceed 15 mg/l oil and grease same concenlralsons and variability allocation. This pnsents lhe problem of
and under today's proposal for BAT. factors used far today'• proposed scr pro\·idint ao aUocation "'hea..no runoff'
wastewater consisting solely of process wastewater effluent limitations Ia preseat and ia appropriate only where
contaminated runoff may be disc:haraed guidelineL precipitation pal1ems are relall\'ely
directly without treatment &I it does not The Asency belieYes that the costa constant through the )'ear or whP.n
exceed 110 mall TOC. U contaminated attnbutable to today'• proposal will be holding raahtles are used to bleed
runoff (whether or nol it exceeds 15fD3/ aunimaL while provtdina for reducUons runoff into the treatment facility o\·er
I oil and grease or 110 mgll TOCJ is in refin'.nr pollutant discharges. This is most or an of lhe year. Tbe second
commingled or treated WJth process becaus• the Agency believes the method ls a vanable aUocaticn based on
wastewater. or 1f "astewater consisting Industry' as a whole already is (a) measurement or calculation or actual
solely of contaminated runofT which treating contaminated runoff with contaminated runoff volume. While th1s
exceeds 15 mg/1 oil and grease or 110 process wastewater or {b) is discharg1ng 1s the most ideal method. it may present
mg/1 TOC is nol commingled or treated contaminated runoff below today'• compliance measurement and
wtlh any other type of wastewater. lbeu proposed threshold for treatmenL Tbis enforcement complexities. The third
such runoff would be sub jeer Ia the proposal does not cover contanuaaled method ss dual wet weather/dry
altemati\·e BPT/BCT/BAT effluent runoff which is commingled with non· weather limitations tnggered by e1ther
limitations guidelines for contaminated process '1\'ash!waler streams. EPA time of yeu. precipitation events. or
runoff being pf'bposed today. as· believes that such 1nstances are actual contammated runoff' volume. The
appropriate. These oil and grease and infrequt"nL and accordingly. they are left method or determining contaminated
TOC numerical emuent lim1talions are lo the pennll "'nler'a discretion. runoff volwmt used to calculate the
based on the concentrations expected Unlike the efnuent lim11a11ons ernuent limalahons '1\,u vary dependin
from the properly des1gned and operated guidelines for process wastewater for on the method used and the des1gn of
modPitrealment facilities. th1s industry which are mass-based. any runoff holding raclhhes. Therefore.
The effluent limilalions guidelines in today'• proposed ernuent limitations it is left to the permit wnler to select an
toda)"s BPT proposaJ for contanunated gu1delines for contaminated runoff are appropriate method under tod-1y's
runoff are based on the same concentrahon-based. This IS because proposaL
concentrations and \'ariability factors stonn water volumes are not related to These proposed regulations do aol
used to develop the Agency's e~isting any measurement or refinery production. address uaconlami.naled runoff "hich IS
BPT process wastewater efnuent ' However. under today's proposal pemtit discharged through tbe procesa
limitations guidelines. ernuent limitations for contaminated wastewater treatment Cacilily. This is
Today'• BAT proposal for runoff are to be established on a mas'~ bec&~use the Agency believes !hat
contammated runoff Is baaed upon the ba11s. The mass-based effluent introducing uncontaminated runoff to
samP co:tcentralions and vanab11ity lim1talions for each regulated pollutant the process wastewater treatmrnt
facton used to de\·elop the Agency's Cor contamana ted runoff in a petroleum system may result 1D the discharge of an
exishng BAT process wastewater refining pemul are the product of (1) the mcreascd mass or pollutants to the
ernuenllimllalions guidelines. e:occept rl'spective emuenl guideline environment compared to the mass or
those fer total chromium. which are concentration ror that pollutant: and (2) pollutants discharged 1f no
based upon the same concentrattons the measured or calculated uncontamsnated runoff were present 1n
and variability factors used Cor today'a contaminated runoff voluma. the process wastewater treatment
proposed BAT effluent hm1tations L'nder today's proposal penn1t "'-Tilers system. Therefore. the Agency does nol
guidelines for proceu wastl'~ater. are 81\'en nexlbllily In detcrm•nina want to encourage th1s practice on a
Todny·s rropnsed BAT emuenl refinpry storm water volumes on a case nat1onal basis.
guidl'lines for phenolic compounds by case basis. The following factors are In the case of BPT. the emuenl
(4AAP) for contaminated runoff are among those appropnale ror pl'nnll limitations guidelinPs being proposed
b11srd on the same concentrations used "fliers to cons1der 1n detenn1ning \"hat today are for the following pollutants:
for today'a eXJsllng BAT efnuent crJnlammated runoff volume to use m (1) conunlional pollutants total
limilat1ons guidehnet for process calculating mass-based effluent suspended solids (1'551. oil and grease.
wastewater and the same vanabllity limitations for refinery p•rmils· (a) fi\·e-day biochemical oxygen demand
factors used for the Agency'• ex1lll1ng Measured difference betl'l.·een dry (DOO.,J and pH: (2) nonccnvenllonal
BAT effiuent Umitatmns gu1delin.es. EPA weather and wet weatht>r discharge pollutants phenolic compounds (4AAP),
has determined thai t.h1s approach ia new from the treatment facllil)' where chemical oxygen demand (COD) and
appropnare in this proposal because or conlammated runoff is the only runoff total organic carbon (TOC): and (3)to·
the specifics ol each data base ava•lable present 1ft the treatment facllil)': and (b) pollutants total chrom1um and
to the Agency. If EPA used the o,·olume of contommated runoff water hexavalent chromium. ln the case of
variability (acton from today'a calculated from the product or (1) BAT. the amuentlimalalions guidelines
218
34156 Federal Rc~i:o;ter I Vol. 49. No. tr.o I Tucsqily, August 28. 19B4 I Proposed Rules
being proposed today are for Ill "major"' 11nd ther,efON sub1ect to 1he word .. reserved.. In paragraph (e) and
Nonconventional pollutant• phenolic requiremrnt of a Rlgulatory lmpRct adding the following text:
compountlll (-&t\AP). ch.!m1cal o"~ gen Anol)•s••· This prnrt'sed reguiRtann it
drmdnd (COO) andlul.11 orgnnu~ r..rrbon nnl m11tor be~use .i dun not fall w1than I 419.- Etnuent nmltallons guidelines
(TOC): and (2)toXJc pullutants totdl the "crileria for major-regulations "'"'"enllng the degree of elltuent
reduction •nslnetlle tty the •pphc3tlon of
chromium and hexavalent chrom1um. 1n established in Exe~:ulive Order 12291 tfte belt practicable control tecflnolovy
the r.ase of BCT. the emuent limlli!tlons curNntly IYiilatlfe (BP'T).
gu1dehnes being proposed today are for Vll. Regulatory Flexibility Anlysis
the conventional pollutants TSS. o1l and Under the Regulatory Flex1b1hty Act. 5
(e) Ernuent Limitations for
grease. BOO. and pH. 1n the case of U.S.C. 601 et seq .. EPA must prepare a
Contaminated Runoff.
COO. there may be instances where Regulatory Flexability Analysis for aU
extrl!:nely high chlonde 18\·els (greater pmp,sed l'"'gulations that han a The following effluent limitations
constitute the quantaly and quality of
than t.OOO mglll w•ll interfere w1th lhe sign1ficant in1pact on a substantial
COO anal••lical method. In this evenL pollutants or pollutant proper11es
number of small ent1tieL The Agency
the Agency believes that TOC is an does not believe that today's proposed controlled by this paragraph and
acceptable substitute parameter for attributable to contamanated runoff.
amendments will have- a ••sn•ficant
COD. A TOC limitation shall be based impact on any segment of the petroleo.un which may be discharged after the
upon ernuent data &om lhe particular refining industry, large or small. The applicallon of the best pracllcJble
refinery which correlates TOC to DOC.. A~ency Is not. therefore. prep;mng a
control technology currently ava1lable
Where adequate correlation data are nol rormal analrsis for lhas regulation. by a point 1ource subject to thiS subpart.
ava1lable. the permit1Jn5 authority may (1) If wastewater cons1sts solely or
Vm. OMB Review contaminated runorr and is nol
est~tbhsh a TOC lim1talion on a ratio of
2.2 to 1 tn the applicable DPT IBCT This regulation WdS submilled to the commlrtiled or treated with process
emuent lilllltalions for BOO.. Th1s ratio Office of ManOJgement and Budget for wastewater, 11 may be discharged 1f it
is based upoa emuent data analyzed by re\"18\V aa reqwred by E.xecuUn Order doP.s not exceed 15 mg/1 oil and grease
the Agency. 12:91. and 110 mg/1 total organ1c carbon (TOC)
No effluent limitations guidelines for baaed upon an analySIS of an)' ringle
IX. Usl of Subjects ia .IQ CFR Part 419 t~rab or compos1te sample.
contaminated runoff are being proposed
for lhe nonconvenlional pollutants Petroleum. Water polluuon controL (2Jif contaminated :unoff is
ammonia (as 1'11 and sulfide regul;~ted Wastewater treatment and disposaL commingled or treated wilh process
under existing BPT and BAT levels of wastewater. or 1f wastewater cons1sting
Daled: AUIJUII 13. 19&t. solely of conlammated runoff wh1ch
control. William D. Ruckelabaus. nceeds 15 mg/1 011 and grease or 110
1\•. Environmeatal Impact of lhe A d.·:u ni$11'Dtor. mt~/1 TOC is not comm1ngled or lrl:'ated
PropoHd Modification• to the Petrolewn For the reasons set out in the w1th any other type of wastewater. lhe
Reliniaa Industry RI!IUialioa preamble. EPA is proposing to amend 40 quantity of pollutants d1scharged shall
ErA's estimates of the reduct1on in CFR Part 419 as follows: not exceed the quanllty detenn1ned by
indu•rry-wide direct discharges of
PART 411-{AMENCEDJ
multiplying the now contaminated or
pheMiic comp,unds. hexdvalent runoff as detenn~ned by the penn1t
chromium. and total chrom1um for 1. The authonry c1tatmn for Part 419 wnter limes the concentrations listed 1n
prote!'s waste,vater fror.t those allowed con:inues to read as f.11lows: the followmg tab!e:
undl!r the final petroleum industry Aulbonly: Sec.s. JOt. 304 Cbl. (cJ. (eJ. and
regulation to those alto" ed by th1s Ia I. JOB (bJ and (cJ. 30:' lbl ind (cJ, 308. and BPT-.....;..-.o.....,..
prnposed modification 81"1! presented SOl. redPral Waler Pollull•m Conl,..,l Acl i l
....,.....
·-·~Of
-.,... -
below. amended {lhe Acr). 33 USC 1ltt. IJH (bJ. ~
•cr JO
(r.J. (~J. and (g). 1318 (bland (c) 1317lbl and
-.... - . ......
~::\<
ReoucnOHs '" Au.ow,ai.E 0\.so::H.aA-& (r.). 1318. and ll81: 88 Sial. 818. Pub. 1.. 92-
__
~
,...,....,. ~
D--
500: 91 Stat. 1567. Pub L 9s-Z17.
~
I Z. Sec11on 419.11 IS amended by
rev1s1ng paragraph (bland add1ng
• 0011- _~
... ..... '
,Of"""'
.._
~
To.-~
paragraph(~) to read as follows: !IOOo. - - - - - - - - . . ... 2S
MOCO
,___ II:JOQ
"000
1 41 t. 11 Specialized deflntttona.
TSS - - - - - - - -
C(IQI - -
COlli,..,.,
-----·-l
.... __ --· -
:J:I.
l&Q
15
21
180
•
• _ _ _ , • .....,. Ol5 017
(hJ The term "n~nnrr· "hall mPr~n 1he r- - _ . ·- . _ a ,., oq

V. Solicilalioa or Cotnmeat. now or sturm water resulting from ------
... 00&2 0021
•. - -· -·-- - -·-· '--..;.''.;.1_--L_.:.;I'I;....__
EPA in\"ttes public particapallon in prPC1p11Bllon comrng into contAct "1!h
this rulemakang and requests cumntenls pPtroleum refinery prnpPrty.
on the proposals discussed or set out1n ..----,----·
____ _
Po."'Q, - - - . - · - __ .... __ 0.00 022
lhas not1ce. The Agency asks that any (qJ The term "conlammared runufr' '55 - 021 a II
deficaencies 1n the record olth1s shall mean runorr which come• into Ceo'- - • ··-··-.. - - · - ~a IS
propos.tl he po1nted to w1th specifiCity
and lhat suggested revis1ons or
contAct wtlh any raw materrdl.
in!E'nnedhtle product. fin1shed product.
....T a w - · - - - ·
t'"_;r_ -
, . . . . . . _ - I•AAPI.-
013
a QQ;t
a 00110
a 0111
aoo••
aocns
corrections be supported by data. b)· pmcucl or waste product loc::~ted on 0001152 ~~~~
pP.troleum refinery property. """-- ---- -----· -- 1'1 1'1

V1. E~ecutive Order 12.."'91
l Sectio:u 419.12.-119.22. 419ll. ._..._,.,.,o-.ea
Under E.ucutive Order 12291. E~A .,..'"'-
__ u•.,_......,.,....,,...-
_.,,.. ~ c.o ~""t• •._,coo
.__....,. -..too-
41 ~ 42. an•J 119 52 are amenderi by
must judge whelher a nog~allon 1s "'1'~
I' 0011 _., """ ~
remov•ng the para@raph head1ng and the 'OC••-.,-•t.OO "roc.-.. ......._.
219
Ft!Ucral Rct(istnr I Vol. 49. No. 1G8 I Tucsduy, Au~tusl :!8. 1984 I l'ropo1ed Rules 34157
1 --
- ............. - - dAle . . _ -
.....11 CllfOW-
-ttoo~J
rue .., aco.. " .. .,. -
..,._.., - . ...
· - .. __,
~ rA ...
car•••- """ •• - ...._ ::.~"'-~-~-
. . . . . cl
- .... . - . _ _ 11ar roc.,.., a. ... _ •
""':,·~
I r11'1D
~
:J1 2 2 Ill I Ill N - - - - ....., _ liar " - ' - fJI ...,. _ __., ..._._.......
-~-
............
4. Sections 419.13. 419.23. 419.33'.
I -----
-~-
419.43. and 419.53 are amt>nded by
remo\·iniJ the entries and ernuenl
-.............. ____
lim1talions for phenolic compounds. T - - __., __ ,' 021
total chrom1um. and he::\avalent __....!CAN't
""-*
chromium from the tables in parasraph
(al.
-
coo• -
- - -- -
--- --~......;;--:---'--lea
_0021
_
....,._CPaonll_ 01.-
0 _.,. Q.a:n'
O•tl
0001
0102
__..
A SP"'ttl"
...- .,.. - 02211 0051
-----........ ....,....__
--- ---------
5. Sections 419.13.419 23. 419.33. I.CXIDga--tlclool I 056 0257
419.43. and 419 53 are amended by O.:IT7 0092
rede~1sneting paragraph (e) as (C).
""-'C ~
r.,.._ c•.!W'I ·-
·- 01121
00!0
"
r.,_
oon
~ 00311
redes1gnatin1J parasraph (d) as (e). _.....ern----+ 10
aaau c.---. 03-10
0 t'.D
0 It I
cap-------~~ A OC&I
redes1gnatins paragraph (c) aa (d). and ...-
_..,.
·--
0155 0297
re\'ISiniJ the redesignated paragraph (f)
........
"o- 0::105 01011
to read as foUow~:
§ •19.- Effluent tlmltatloM guideline•
representing Ute degree of effluent u.-
_____
......_.
~ aNI--.--
.... ...,.....
.. _ _,
OOOtl
00211
Q.OII7
00509
00009
00091
000!>3
002&8
reduction etta:nable by tile application of
the best available tedlnology economically
11 OOtae
- occae
achievable (BAT).
a. Sections 41913. 419 23. 419 33. and ""-'--~
(f) Efnuent Limitations for ~
0003
Contam1nated Runoff. The lollowms
419.53 are amended by adding a ne\w c..c-v----·----~
... _.,_ 0013
0 1&1 OOJII
T--
paragraph (c) to read as follows: ~--- 0079 0019
ernuentlimltaiiOnS COnstitute th-.
quanhty and quality of pollutants or
L..- , __
~ ....-----1
...,....._ o..-
o 132
00110
Oo:l2
pollutant properties cuntrolled by this

paragraph and attributable to
1•19.- Effluent llmitallane guidelines
,..presenting the degrH of effluent .... _..,__
~·------
~
0011
0 Ill
000&
~OU
contaminated runoff. WhiCh may be

reduction 1ttaln1ble by tile spptlcallon of
tile best 1vallabte technolo;y economically
w--------1
...- - ·--· ----
Olleol
0211
ODD
0 lOt
discharged after the apphcallon or the
best a\·a1lable technology e1:onom1cally
ac:l\levable (SAT). ....._.....
~~~-.,..,..-
~
0 ta7 00'37
ach1e\ able by a pomt source subject to • • 0...------

C>wcv'l CIIMOI--
oaaar 1 • 0 000"'
O'liX'
th1s subpart. "-------
111'111
ooo••l
ooou 000
(1 J If wastewatPr cons1sts solely ol
(cl(l) In addition to the prO\'ISions
contamed Above perta1nmg to COD.
...- ------ -
~-...,.-
OOift
0 00111
OC'O&
oca:u
cuntilmlnated runorr and is not
ammonia and sulfide any exasting point
commmglt>d or treated "'1th process
waste" ater. it may be discharged 1f 11 source sub,ecl·to this subpart must (2) See the comprehensiVe e:tample in
does not e'tCeed 110 miJ/ltotaJ organiC achieve the followang eCfuentlimatations Subpart D. I 419.4~(c)(2).
carbon (TOCJ based upon an analrsilr ol representing the degree of effiuent 7. Section 419.43 is amended by
any Slnl!ll~ grab or compos1le sample. reduction allamable by the arplication adding a oew paragraph (c) to resd 3s
(Zlll contammated runoff is ol the best a"·aalable technology follows:
comiTiin!!!led or treated \\'tth process economically achienble (BAT):
For each ol lhe regulated pollutant
f •19.•3 Effluent llm1tatton guidelines
wastewater. or 1f "astewater consishng rcpntaent~ tne d89"" ol etnuent
solely of contammated runoff "h1ch parameters listed below. lhe ernuent reduC11an tttalnable by the appheaUan of
e'lceed 110 mg/1 TOC 1s not commangled lim1tahon for a gh en refinery 1s the swn tile best evallable tec:nnalo~y economically
or trPated w1th any other type of . of the products of each effluent . actuevable (8A T).
wastPwater. the quantity of pollutants limatalion factor limes the apphcable
discharged shall not e'ceed the quanllty refinery process feedstock rate. (c)(l)ln add.itaon to the provt'"tons
detennined by multiplymg the now of calculated as pro\ 1ded in 40 CFR contamed abo\ e pertamang to COD.
contamznated runoff as detennmed by
______
1::Z.4S(b). Applicable productaon ammon~a and sulfide any exish.ng po1n1
the pennal wnler limes the processes are presented in Appendix A. source subje1:t to this subpart must
concentrat1ons listed in the follow1nR h)· process t)pe. The process achie"·e lhe followtng ernuent
table·
..., .
Identification numbers pre!enled 1n thiS
Appendix A are for the con\ enaence of
lirrulations representing the degree or
ernuenl reduction allalnable by the
application of the best ava1lable
..... --- ....,.._ the re11dPr. They can be cross-referenced

in the De,·e/opment Doc;;mcnt for technology economically achtevable
--
- · lfw'JO Effluent Ltmltatlons Cu1delmes. 1\'ew (BAT):
a .. .,... Source Performance Standards. and For each of the regulated pollutant
Pretreatment Stnndards for the paramPten listed below. lhe efOuent
..--~·
I.CXID- ,_., ell ,.,_.
Petroleum Refinms PrJml So,;rce
Cai~OI'}' (EPA 440/1-al/014). Table Ul-
lim1talion lor a ga,·en reOnery Ia the sum
or the products ol each effluent
"'-''I:~~ 7, pp. 49-54. lim1tat1oa (actor tamn the applicable
220
3.&158 Federnl Rc1l~trr I Vnl. 4tl. No. 168 / Tm•suay, Ausust 2n. H1R4 I Proposed RuiPs
.._
refinery process reedstock rate.
.......... (21 Procesa factor.
calculnted as provided In 40 CFR
12:!.~5(bJ. Applicable production
rrocenes are prc11ented in Apprndix A.
by process type. The process I .. ~- . .- · : -
........ - -------1
··- 'lie I GilD
100
. ---- -j
1-:=
_
~~ au
... _____
50 L--2&1
identification numbers presented 1n this ' " ' - - - - - .:r._· ___ , 7S 251DJ•1--
.,., -------- 017
Appenriix A are ror the con,·enience or ,_, _ _ c·. .:.._ -·-·
.. _
m
,,., __
JSID&&I_
.
010
.... _....
at5
I "-1 ca...,_~------·--·
the reader. They can be cross referenced 25
--- 107
.. ••••••
tQ. 1... - . . . . • :.,_ ..:___ -l---ID:; 117
in the [Jpvelopment Document fol' ,.~
127
IStlllll
Effluent Limitations Guidelines. Neu1 1111-------- ~--
Soura Petformonet! Standards. and
.,..,, __
IIA--~T-..
--- ·--·-- ---...... _

70tll7 . .
75111711.
---
Ill
,..
151
Pretreatment Standards for the
Petroleum Refining Point Sourr:r~
Category (EPA oW0/1~/014J. Table ID-
" ,.,o...,•• ,_....__cu._
I C.WW.: ~ TGUI
..,._,_""-------~
'*'-'I ....
10
I
I
......
IOtlll.._
15111111
••••••
........
100 . . . . . .
-----
171
lt5
Ill
__
Zl•
7. pp. 4g....s.a. IO.S.tCIII- z!t
...,.._ .. ,. "" ·- z 73
._......--...,._
ne
. .. -- u•
IIOtll II,. .
_...
a. Secttoa 419.14 ia reYiaed to read as
rollowa:
IU•tl.ll
tJOtiiiJ . . --
--
ls.J
l ..
....,I
---- •••
IUtll &:Ill
lclr:IO f 411.1~ ~nlllmltattona
,,,._..m.'h; ttte ~,.. of efftuent
guldeanes
••oar..- ••
reduction attainable by tM a""cattofl of (3) See the comprehensive eJ~~ompleo In
1tte best con•entlanal polluWnl control Subpart D. l419.42(bJ(3).
---=-et..--.--
l.aaD•'IJI-a
tecftnoiOVY (BCT). (c) The rollowtng allocations
(aJ Any exiatins point source subject conat1tuta the quantity and qualfty of
to this subpart must achieve the pollutanta or pollutant properties
a....,--
---~
Cn.---·· 00117
ca.•••
110111
ataz rollowins elfluent limitation• controlled by this paragraph and
.....--
.._
~ 0.221 01155 represent.iq the degree or emuent attributable to ballast. which may be
~ .... ...,....._ 1051
11.271
0257
0011
of the best conventional poUutant
dischafled after the applicahon ar beo;t
conventional pollutant control
au. Oa:ID 11011 control technology'(BCT1: technology by a point source subject to
er-.-.....- 0 :)ool this aubpart. in addition to the discharge
---
..... .... ...,_,_ Cl.ll:l 0OCIM
"'
0156 aa7 allowed by parasraph (bJ of this SPCilon .
~ Olall CltCII The allocation allowed for ballast watttr
au. __
..,I....
flow. asks/cum (lb/1000 gal). shall be
OfJOII 0 ClfJOI
.._ based on those ballast waters lrealed at
~·--.-
O.GIII II 111111
.._
........,. .... .,.__ .....
00117 000$1 the refinery•
--_,._
OOSole ooz..
0~
ICT~-~...,..
lf"'iill'- ....... -
'GilD-"' . _ _ .
a-.;eiJI
........ _...... lolo'W't IIOQ,, _ _ ··------1 227 ItO
......_.... _.,.._
en..._ 01-.,._____ _, •• .. _ . . , lclrlO
OOIJ -------1
TSS - - til n
10 t
-ac-
OO!D .... 1 . . _ ...
~
o••r Clo:JI dl•l "'. .
.....
p.._... .... ..,..__
0071
a ..
0131
aOtl
0 O!JII
aG:I2
~--------L--!''LI_L_ _JI~'I_
!fiiJ"''II-
IOIID . . . -
'--1-
ToW-
Oudl _ _ IIOQ, _ _ _ _ _ _ _---1
·-- .... ---- ,.,,

.
0011
c:..:u. ........__ OODI
a on
eo
-----1 a a.. a 021
l .... _ _ _, aCM
Ull
0.107
.....
aCIZ2
00117
~--------~
Ol .... . _ ,_ _ _,_....j u
l.S
I' I
eoa._ _ _
01-.------
TSS---·----1
_
IIM-----------L_~I~~~j_--~1'~1-
OCD:I
GOt~
0021
a?:"e
"-'--"
"--~ ._._,.... .. u.eo.
en.. 00fJ07 0 CIIIID E...,..,.-~
oane
~----- (b) The limits set rarth in paragraph
IICXDA ' GilD - Gl ...,...
~ OCIIMI OCIIUI
.................,_,_
L..... aatll
00081
00017
OO!Dt
(aJ of this section are to be multiplied by
the roJIOW1ftl·factors to calculate the
maximum far any one day and
aco,._.- -· · - - - - --·
01_.,...._____,
TSS_- - ---- _
04
CUI
ala
a 2'
0•7
,.,
a C'!7
maximum average of dally value• for ~-------- -- rl
(2) Example Application of Emuent thirty consecutiVe days. · - ............ a.eo
Limitations Guadelines aa Applicable to (1) Size factor.
Phenolic Compounds. Hexavalent (d) The quantity and quality or
Chromium. and Total Chromium. pollutants or pollutant properties
The followins e:oc.ample prnenca the I GilD- .. . _ . . . - - - . . controlled by this paragraph attributable
derivation of a BAT phenolic to once-through coolins water. are
L -•
250 ..
•.,,,
2•1
_ _ _ _ _ __ 101 excluded from the discharge allowed by
compounda (4AAP) emuent limitatioa ICII parasraph (b) of th11 sect1on.
(:JO day averaseJ for I petroleum 500tll 7&1 - - - - - - - - - - - I II
(eJ Ernuent Umitations for
7!0 . . . ._ _ _ _ - - - · - - - - - - 1211
refinery permit. This methodology is 100 Ill II&. - - - - - ·- - - - · - ---- Ill Contaminated RunofC. The fallowing
also applicable to hexavalent c:hrom•um t25a. , . , , _ . - - - · - - · - - - - - · - - · 150
effluent lim1tataons constitute the
t500 ar . - • - · - - - - · - - - - - 1.17
and total chromiwa. quantity and quality or pollutants or
221
Federal Rowister I Vol. 49. No. 168 I Tuesday. Augual 2R. 1984 I Proposed Rules 34159
polh1tnnt Jlroflertlrs controlled hy thla

.. The followtna emuent llmllatlnna
paragraph end Rllributuhle Ia
contaminated runoff which mny be
discharged after the applicollon or the
best conventional pollutant control
technology by a point aource subject to
---- ---- -
...,_
--..
... ..,1 ..,._
larlD
con11111ute the quanUty and quality of
pollutant• or pollutant properUea
controlled by thia paragraph and
attributable to contaminated runoff
which may be discharaed after the
this 11ubpart.
(1) If wastewater consist• solely or
.....t.-....
-~ ......, application of the best conventional
pollutant control technology by • point
contaminated runoff and Ia not -. a.a tso aource subject to this aubpert.
....-...--
fSI,~-------f tiS tU
comminaled or treated with procesa 01.;;. u u (1) U wastewater conaiata solely of
waatewater. II may be dlscharaed if il -"--------------~----ll'liL-.....~1~'1 contaminated runoff ud ia aot
does not exceed 15 mg/1 oil and area.. t _ _ _ ......_ COIIUIIingled or treated with proces1
based upon an analysis of any ainale
grab or composite aample.
(ZJ If contaminated nmoff Ia
--
TSa
01 ...
••...
u ..
1.1
••
,
wastewater. It may be discharged if it
doea not exceed 15 111811 oU and grease
based upcm u anal)"'is of any •iftale
commangled or treated wllh process
wastewater. or if wastewater consiatina
solely of contaminated nanoff which
..................... I'I I"I grab or campo1ite temple.
(ZJ U contaminated runoff Ia
or
commingled treated with process
exceeds 15 mall oil and p-ease Is not (b) The limibl aet forth Ia parappb wastewater. or If wastewater consistina
camminglttd or treated ";th any other (a) of this section are to be multiplied by solely of contaminated nmofi which
t)-pe of wastewater. the quantity of the rouo~ factors to calculate the exceeds 15 ms/1 oil and p-ease Ia not
pollutants discharaed shall not exceed maximum for any one day and comminsled or treated with any other
the quantity determined by multiplyma maxpnum averaae or daLly 'Yalun for type of wastewater. the quantity of
the now of contaminated runoff as thirty coneecutive daya. pollutant• discharged shall not exceed
---
dete'rmined by the permit writu times (1) Size facto;r. the quantaty detennined by multiplymg
the concentratioM listed ln the the now of contaminated nmoa as
follo\Ying table: t.aao ....... . _ . _ . . , _ _ determined by the permit writu times
the concentrations listed in the
a.. .... a•• Oln following table:
acr.-..._. JSa••• o•
-... .. 100• 7••
7'10··· IIC1'------
ICM
..,_
.,. .....
-.......
tt:l
ICIIUt• I,. I tZI
larlD 1ao• t411 t.35
~
~~-
-
tso.oar.- t., " - ' - ar ..-_......., ....._.
..,t., -
......
I.----·...
----IUD9WN- (ZJ Process factor.
.___UC".:;u:_ .....-~
r--!-------~1 ~ I -
t.CICID--. 01 _,.
a
z,. ... a
I .I
100-1
&
..
...... liiiiiiil
1'1 u•~-
u ....
O.!e
OCII
0 ,.
TSS
01 . . . . , Zt.
•••••
s.s•s•
o•
tOO
11M I' I I' I
1£,..._,....,_.....,
e.o••• toe t.-_...,.,
~-----·---~
TSII'--------i
0411
CL2II
CUI
CUI ........
70·7·ilz.l..
••••• "'
...
01 ... . , __ _ _ ~
01~ o.au 7.1. 7ft

t.ZI
t .,
~ 0411 0.22
011
....................
TSS CL2II
'" 1'1 t$1
..._.............
01 ... ~ Ot:l 0087
I.S • ••--------------~
tl7
••----------------! t•
.... .-w--------------i
10. tU 11M 1'1 I' I
9. Section 419.%4 is revised to read u 10. Sectioa 419.34 ls revised to read as

follows: (3) See the comprehensive example ln
Subpart D. l419.42(b)(3). rona"-.:
I 4 11.2• Etnuentllmltaaon. gutctell ... (c) The provtslons of I 419.14(c) apply I 411.34 Effluent llmttatlone iVIdell""
NPNMnttnt tfte Mgrwe of effluent
reduction attaiNitH tty tfte appllc8Gon of
to dlscharaes or procesl wastewater
pollutants attnbutable to ballast water
repr....,tlftlltte d...- of affluent
reduction analnatH by tfte application of
.... bat camrentfoMI polllltMt control by a point source aubject to the ttle beat corwenUOMII pollutant contrae
lectwlolotJ (BC'Tlo provisions of this aubpart. tecflnoloVr (BC'T).
(d) The quanllty and quality or
(al Any existing point source subject pollutant• or pollutant propertle• (a) Any existina point source subject
to thas subpart must achieve the controlled by thia parasraph. to this subpart must achieve the
followin1 efnuent Ji~tatiOM attributable to once-throullh cool ins followina emuent limitaUons
representing the dqree or effluent water. are excluded from the discharae representans the degree of emuenl
reduction attainable by the applicatiaa allowed by parapph (b) of thla secttoa. reductaon attaaaable by the appUcatlon
of the best conventional pollutant (e) EfTluent Umilatlona for of the best conventional pollutant
control technology (BCT): Contaminated Runoff. control technoiOSJ (BCT):
222
J:.lt60 Feden~l Register I Vol. 49. No. 168 1 Tuesday. August 28. 1904 I Proposed Rules
-
8C9-------
..,_
constitute the quanttty mnol qu"lity or
pollatan1s or pollutant 1Jro-rerties 8CT----
............. ....._...
...... ..,_
..., ... .,
A~f/# "-1191 Cll
----~.-..
-·- -
.._ ...
-~
..__.....,_._
larlD
... .._.
IJIOD ..... _ _ _ ,
conlroUed by this. pan~pph and
annba1able to c.oatamlna~d runoff
whu:h may be discharged .after the
a ppli ca ti o n of fh eb es I cq nventional
poOutant control technatogy by a po1nl
..__
~----~
-·-
u:uwu e
a.c-. ..... ...._,

ftC'eR
source tubject &o this subpart.
.~I :::
f.-.---d lfoglle_.....,._ (1) If wastewater cunrist1 soJety of
c:aataminated runoff aad &. DOl ~~:::::::::::j
01 .... ------~
·::1
, • .2
=~••
f't - . f't mmminaled 01 treated with Jb'ocen
,____1_..,....
IM-----------1_____~1~~~--~C'I
1!fo911' __,...
.....
•c-.••-a
waalewater. it may be discharged if il
does not exceed 15 ma/1 ail and ~ase
.,
-~
baed upoa an analyaia ol any •insle
·-......-..... »l
IODo.-------1
01_.,_ tsa_.;.·;;;==::::i
·-...............
TSS pb or cam.paaite sample. 10
liM------~ (2) If c:antaminated nanofl ~

coiiLIDingled or trealed with proc:ns
...
01- 10
f"l
wastewater. or if wastewater canaasUaa

solelf Gf'CUIItwnriNtrd ranaliwbicb (b) The limitw .at forth an pa~gratlh
(b) The I~ set farlh In parasrapb
(a) of this section •~ 'to be mul'tlplied by exc:eeda 15 rq/1 oil md sreue is 111111 (a) al dua section are to be m..!trpled bf
the follaw•nl factors to calculate tbe commqled qp lreated with any other the follaw.ia& ladon to cal~lala the
maxirrrum fur BITJ cme day and type of was'"'aler. tbe quantity of ma:r..imwa fur 8DJ one day and
maximum aversge of daily vahles fur poUutants discharwecf shan not exceed maximum a\-erqe of daaJJ valaa for
the quantity determizl.ed by 'll'lultiplyi'lll tharty caasecu~-e days.
..--
thirty consecutive daJS.
(1 J SiD factor. the now of contaminated runoff aa (1) Size factor.
determiAed by tbe pennit ~ler times
........ ,.. _
IJIOD..._ .. . . _ _ _ _
the c:ancentn.tiaa. listed ia tile
raUowtaa table
0"
zsaw .. • '" .cr----.-
ou
........
OJ'll 01'
sa.o• 7U o.a
.•...-
rso••• 011
,. _,_
0.11 017
ICIDO. 1. . . _ 011
.. ..,1_ -I- IllS
__
1250WMI.I 101
- -
.,._
'ai!O
,.._..
I IC
I II
,.._.,_._
(ZJ Pracesa factor.
____ I.CIIII _ _ _ __ (2) ProceSa factor.
L_._ ....
••••••
,•• ,II
..._
--
..._
.
0.71
0111
.....
T'SS
01-·
I I
...
Jl.
,~
rt
a
"·..
f"t
01'
,.....
•••&••
. . . . . 11
.......
75.711-
o..
••
101
I 17
I .II
1.-.-...... e..-- ..... -
au
100
lt't
I II
I.,
'~
.·-........... .., ..,.

I .:I Ar'ft. . 04 a.z:r
. , . . . 11
~·
I.SI 0.11 t.51
••••••
•.s•..- 1-
•• 7a
01-w- 012 01187
('t
...
I 17
Ill
21!
n•
(3) See the comprehensiw ninnple in zu
Subpart D. I 419.4Z(b)(3J. 11. Section 419.44 ia revised to read aa
{c) The provisions of 1 n9.14(c) 'PlJiy follows
to discharges of process wastewater (cJ The provis1ons or I 419.t4(cJ appl>·
pollutants attnbu.table to balla.c water I 41SM E,._.. lnlaallan8 guldellnea
to disc.harsn of procesa wulewater
by a pain& source subject IG "'-
,..cw._llna 11M deog,... of atnuent pollutanta attnbalable to baUut w.aler
rwctuctlan ·~by ow .ppllcaUon ol
pro\"isians of this 1ubput. 1M beat con""tlonlll polutant contra~ by 1 paant eource subject to the
(dllbe quaatitJ aad quality ol tectmology ~ proviuODll of tJua aubpzrt.
pollutants or pollutant propertia (d) The quantity and quality ol
controlled by thi• parasraph. (a) Any e:r..istint painleource tubfect poUutanta or poUutaal propertieS
anribatable to once-throqb cooHng to this subpart must achieve the controlled by this parqrapb.
water. are excluded fram the discharge followans emueat limitation• attributable to oace-throu.gb coaq
allowed b)· pangraph (b) of this eection. represeaf.ml the desree of ef.fluart water. are exc.haded from the discharge
(e) Emu~t Lrmatatiana fur redactiaa attaiDable bJ the applicattoa allowed by parasraph (b) of ~is section.
Contamanated Ranofl'. ol the best c:anntioaal poUutaal (e) Emuent Limitatiana for
The foDawtna eft1uent limitations !=Ontraltechnalogy {BCl1: Contaminated Rua.aft
223
Federal Re-ister I Vol. "9. No. 168 I Tucstllll·· AuRusl :a. l!JM I l'ropnsed Rules 34161
......_
cr.._ _ _
-... ..
..,. --
The lullow1ng elnuentllm1tatlons pur.agraph and allr~butable to
- ----
constitute the quanlily and quality of contam1nated runoff which may be
- di5charsed alter the applicataon of the
~,..,.,..._.,
!arlO
controlled by th11 parA8r:t'Ph and best con\·entionAI pollutant control
attributable to contaminated runoff technology by a po1nt source subJrl"t to
which may be discharsed arter the this subpart.
application of the best co1nrentional ....,. - 1'-.r-'"' (1) If wastewater consists solely of
:-------- ::
I.CXIOM a l ' - l
1
pollutant control technology by a point contamana ted nmoff and is not
-~' ~~I
source subject to this e.ubpart.
(1) u wastewater conaists solely or
contaminated nmofF and i.a not
01-·
11M
- 171
I,
.,
I,
commingled or treated Wath process
"·astewater. It may be diacharsed if 1t
does not exceed 15 mall oil and grease
based upon an analysis of any smgle
comminsled or treated with process ~----
I.CXIOIIII_.._.
grab or composite sample.
wastewater. It may be discharsed If It
(2) U contaminated runoff is
~-------t Ill 10.1
does not exceed 15 ma/1 oil and greue
based upon an analysis of any tinsJe 01- . - - - - - - l .,
tU
u ••u., comminsled or treated wtth process
wastewater. or if wastewater consisting
grab or composite aample.
(Z) U contaminated runoff Ia '"....... ,....-u.&& solely of contaminated runoff which
exceeds 15 mall oil and grease is not
comminaled or treated with proc:ese (b) The limlla set forth Ln paragraph commingled or treated with any 'Jther
wastewater. or If wastewater consistiq (a) of thJa section are to be multiplied by type of wastewater. the quantity of
solely of contaminated runorr which the foUowjna factors to calculate the pollutants discharsed shall not e,.;ceed
exceeds 15 mall aU and grease is not maximum'for any one day and the quantity detemuned b)· mulhpl) antt
commingled or treated "·ath any other maximum average or dally values for the now or contamana ted runoff aa
t)l)e of wastewater. the quantity of thirty consecutive daya. determ1ned by the pemut wr1tcr tame ..
pollutants discbarsed shall not e:xceed the concentrations listed in the
---
(t) Size factor.
the quantity determined by multiplyina
the now of contaminated runorr ••
determined by the permit wnter limes
the concentrations listed In the
ICXIO ....... al
. . _ 111ft ••••
........ " ' - -
on
following table:
__ -&CT.---.-
...,._
.
~
---
follow1natable: 1250 . . . . . . 07W
..,,_ !arlO
..
150.0•17•1 oa
-·I'C-
17'5.0• 1911 011
&CT ...... -... z:ao,.,_
zz- t
,
.. -----
21.'0 0 • 011
........
..__.. ,__........., ....._ ... _,_ .-
.., .,.._
!arlO
(ZI Process Factor. aoo..______ ... ze
ICXIO _ _ _ _ .._. I : 1 1M
TSS----
01 .... . - -,
JJ
1$ .
21
1'1
----~-
1'1
............. ~ U'J
E~-~
~,--.----------~1 §I u.... - -,
a oa
•s•7··~::::::::::::::::~- r:-w~
.....----.---
I,..
7.5. 711_ 012 I.CXIO - - -
......
:rt
100 eoo..._ .
a••::=========_j
0.00 0 22
I 10
TSS --------~ 021 C! II
'I.,..
~ 1.& -~
I.
0 IS
t.s•••
10 • llQ
01.,...-
~- --- I' I
100.1041
105111 •091. ~ ,,.
IQ
e~------ 0«1 OZI 110.1141---- _

rss. ---·,-----1 o.a 011 115•"•----- IU
13. 40 CFR Part ·119 1s amen.:ct.IIJ~
.-'-----!
()o ....
I,
O.IJ
I,
O.oe7 11.0. 1 1 . 4 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - l
••z•--------- '"
111M-------~ 11.s ===i
IJO, .,...,._ _ _ _.
217
U'l
adding the Collowmg appendix:
• • •
w--. .. ..,.ao•to
(3) See the comprchensi\·e el'l.ample in Appendix A-Processes 1acluded in the
tz. Section 419.54 ia re\"tsed to read aa Subpart D. I 419.4Z{b)(3J. Detenilination of BAT Effiucat
follows: (c) The pro\·isions of l419.14(c) apply Limilatioas for Total Chromium.
to discharge~~ of process wastewater Hexa,·alent Chromium. aad Phenolic
pollutants attnbutable to ballast water Campouads (4AAP)
1411.54 Elftuent Rmttaaon. guldlllnft by a point source subject to the Crude Processes:
~ntlnt ltle d.;rM of efftu.nt
provisions of this subpart• 1. Atmospheric Crude Oistallation
.-uctlon .n.trwt~~e by 1M application of
(d) The quantity and quality or Z. Crude Desalting
1M bftt canvwndOMt poflutMt control
liCMo!Oft' (BC'T): pollutants or pollutant properties 3. Vacuum Crude Oistallatton
controll•d by thia. paragraph. Croclcins and Cokms Processes:
attnbutable to once-through cooling 4. Visbreaking
(a) Any existing point t'Ource subJect water. are excluded rrom the d.ischarse 5. Thermal Crackang
to this subpart must achieve the allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s section. 8. Fluid Catalytic Crackina
ron~ •ns effluent limttationa (e) Effluent Limitations For 7. Mo,·ins Bed Catal)·llc Cracking
r.prcsenting the degree of emuent Contaminated Runoff. The following 10. Hydrocracking
reduction attainable by the application emuent limitations constitute the 15. Dela)·ed Cok1ng
o; the best con,·enUonal pollutant quantaty and quality or pollutants or 16. Fluad Coking
r.r.ntral technology (BCT): pnllutant properties controlled by this 54. Hydrotreat~ng
224
34162 Federal R~sler I Vol. 49. No. 188 I Tucsduy. AuKUIII :a. 1984 f Propoaed Rula
,bplrrJ/1/'n.Jt:e!ltct"!f: %4. Duo Sol. Solvent. T.,.111fng. Solvent 35. Wax Plant (wtda Neuwl
18. A!lrhall l'rodurtion E:Atraction. Duntrealins. Sol\'ent Separation)
3::. 21'Q F Sonenifta Paint Unfluxed Dewa•uns. Solvent Deaapheltins 36. Furfural Extrachan
AtcphAil 25. Lube Vac Twr. Oil fractionauon. 37 Clay Contradina Peccolafion
43. Asphalt Oludizins Batch Still (Naphtha Strip). Bnshl 38. \'Vax Sweatiq
89. Asphalt EmulairY'na Stock Trealins
Lulte Pf'Ol'"'Pflses: 39. Acid Treati111
.211. Centr•fuse • Ch•llins 40. Phenol Extraction
Z1. tl)drofuu113o HydraSaiab.iaa. Labe %7. MEX DewaXJna. Ketone Oewa:xina.
Hydrofuaiq MEK-Taluene Dewa:xina. Reformmg and Alkylation jl'rocp5s~
Z1. Wh1te Oil Maaalac:hlre za. Deoilins (wuJ a. HtSO. Alkylation
23. Propane Dewaltina. Propane 29. Naphthenic Lubea Producliaa 1Z. Catalytic Refonni111
DeasphalUq. Prop.ne Fractionh'lo 30. SO. £xtr.c:tion .,. 0.. ...z:au ...,..,_ - - ·
Propane Derninina Sl. Wax Prenina ~~-----
225
•12-15
fol. 50 No. 134
Friday
July 12, 1985
226
Z8Sl8 Federal Register I Vol. 50. No. 134 I Friday, July U. 1985 I Rules and Regulatiorus
EH~RONMENTALPAOTEcnON Tho•• portio.aa of the exiatlna a18o dld aot modily ita ei!'lueat
AGEHC'Y petroleum re.6.a.iaa efnuent Umi.tattoaa lJmitatiO.D.I guidelines ror "best
pidelines and 1tandarcl.a that are aot practicable control technoloiY c:urnntly
atCFRPut411 aubsta.adveJy amended by t!u. aodc:a available" {BPT}. The A~eacy reserved
are cot aubject to judicial nvtew aor Ia coverase of "best eonvenllonal pollu:ant
(ow-f!RL•ZII~ theU' elrectiveaeu alland by this a.odcL control techaalogy'" (BCT] effluent
ADaRUSU: The record for thia llmitatiotul guidelanes. 1't1e ;Jreambie of
~ A•flnlng Point Source
Nlem.lr.iq wUl be available for the 1982 final regulations desc:1bes the
C.tevorr. Effluent LJnUtaaon8 laapecdoa ud c:opyiq at the EPA history of the rulemalcing. (47 F'R 463'-tll
a~
PllbUc Wormatioa Relereace UniL B. Clttlllengn tD the Prior Rqulat:c:r
ACIGCY: EavtroammtaJ Pratecttoa Room :9ZZ (EPA LibraryJ, 401 M Street.
A3eacy (EPAJ. SW .. Waahiqtaa. D.C. ne
EPA Oil January 'Z1, 1983. the Natw-;1
Resources Delenae CGunal Inc.
ACTIOIC FIDal rule. mtarmatioa fl!l\lladoa pravide• t.bat a
reucmable ree may b. chaqed far ("NRDCj filed a pention to reVJew the
..,.~~Aft: EPA Ia ameadfna the copyiaa. 6nal petrolewa refinint re~atlon.
replatioD which limit. efllueat POll PUimiiR DIPOIIIIA"ne* COIIIrACT: Natural /Wsourr:H Defense Cc.u<~~o·:J. Jr.c.
diacharge1 ta waten of the l11litad Mr. Demua Ruddy, Induaaial •· Envwnmenta/ Protectzon Agency.
State• from !acilltin eqased iD the TedmaJogy Divuion. al (20ZJ382-T131. No. 83-11.2.2 (D.C. Clt.). The .4tmencan
refiaiq ud pracesa&D~ ol petroleum. IUPII'I.DIIXTMY IIIPOIIIIAT10IC
Petroleum Institute (''APf') and sevan
EPA prapased these madilicadaa.s oa. ladivtduai \lil 'omp.l.Qle- .:o:c. .•u.e:.! 1.1
AUI\IIt 28. 1984. (49 FR 34152) ID L Leial Autb.aritJ the litisa tiaa.
accard&Dce with a eettlemeal apoeemea.l a. Elackgraund
A. P!1or Repiadoa C. Setllement A.sreement
which resolved a lawswt brausht
I. ClWia~~tta Ia. tb Prier RegWadoa 011 Apnl17, 1984. EPA. NRDC. .~f
Sl!&inllt EPA by the Narural. Resources C. S.rt.leme.al Ap'etlmeat
De!~m:~e Cowu:u. lac. T.be lawsuit at C!a&aan from Pl'oi)OseJ IDd aD otbet interveners to tile lillsz .. ronn
challe113ed the fla.al petroleum refiD.i.Da IV. Amecdmmta 10 lbe Petraleum RaBzlia:t entered into a comprehensive
replatloa pramulgated oa October 11. Poult Saun:e CIIIIIOIY Replalioll Settlemeat Agreement. In t.'te Settlo!m.ent
1982 (47 FR 46434). A. Belt AY&Ilable Techa.olog E!DIMIIlt Aareement. EPA agreed to publish a
Tociay's fiDaJ rule ia.carporates t.be Umatalioaa Cwdelliln • nauce ol praposed ru.lemalung and to
praposed amndmenta which lll"r. (1) B. a.c Call¥1!11Dcmai Pollulaat Techllolog aoliat camme.a tll l'e!arding certa •n
Modilicalioaa to the '"best av81lable Emual Uzmlaaallll Cu.idellnn modifications to the 1982 ileal petru:eum
tedmoiOSY ec:caamically achievable"' C. Emueat LmutadCIIlll Cwde1111n lor reiinuJs BAT e.iDuenl iim.laUons
Caata~~~ma&ed St.carm Walar RUDG4
(BAT) efnuent Umitattana for procese guidelines. [a add.lboa. EPA agreed to
V. Ezmroameat.allm~act oll.be Amndmnta
wastewater for the paUutaata flheaollc vt Rn~ to Ma1cr Cammecta propose BCT l!mlll\.'tt limatauc:1s
campauada. total Chromium. ud V1L Executive Order 1%291 gmdeli.aes far four convenbanal
bexavaleatchromi~(2J.beat vm. Rewu!atary F'tax!.bdity Aulyaia J)ollutants and BPT. BAT and SCi'
coavenboaal poUutant control CC OMB Revtew e.fllue.at Umztations gutdeli.nes ror
tedmology'' [BCT] efDueat 11mitatioDII X. Liat of Subjecta: 40 CFR Put 419 contaminated storm water runoff.
ror pracesa wutawater: ud [3) "best L t..pl Aadladty Peationer NRDC agreed that Lt' EP.'\ took
practicable control techaalogy CW'!"eDtly fiDa.l actioa punuant to and consa.stent
avadable" (!PT). BCI'. and BAT eflluem 'Tbe ameadmea'- to the regulation With the Settlemeat Agreement that 1t
Umitadoaa Cor caa.tami.Dated 1tarm dncnbed 1D thla aatice are pramulsated wUl dismiss Ltlla"awt challeng~ng !he
water ruaoa. Ameadmenta are &JaG mder lbe authonty of sectiona 30'1. :304. 1982 fiaaJ peO'Oleum refuung regu.iat!on.
made iD tJU. &a.l rula. wtw:h wt1l 307, md .501 of the Clean Water Act (the A. part of the Settlement AgreemenL
correct elTOra idmtifted LD the October Federal Wate.r PaUutioa CGacrol Act the partie• agreed :o seek a judlclal .stay
za. 1984 rule. lbe Aug\l.lt 28. 1984 Amadme.ata of1972. 33 U.S.C. 1251. et of the regulatory prov1saons to be
Proposed Rule. aa weU as errors aq.. u ameaded by the Clean Water 111.adi.fjed.. On July Z4. 1984. !.he Ccu..~
caatamed iD 40 CFR Part 419. revtsed u Act of 1977, Pllb. I. !12.-.517]. Theee eatered a 1tay of the effluent limllauons
of July L 19&4. chaaan are alia promuisated ill far phenolic campounds. total chronuum
DATU: lD accordance with 40 CFR .rnpoa.e to the Sertleme.at Agrei!menl iD. a.ad hexavalent chromium !or !.he
100.01. the rquiatiou dii'Yeloped iD !hi. Naturai ltaourca1 Oefeu• Counr:Jl. lm:. foUaW1D3 J)OZ'tloaa of the f"e!lllauon
ndemaJanc shall '1M conaadered ia.ued V. £nVII'DIUIIIIDUJi PITJtst:titm A.fency, pe!!clina the m.lemalung: 4(1 en
for PutpOM:I of julilcaJ rwmew at l:DO No. 83-ll.ZZ (D.C. Clr.]. 4l9.13(a). 419.2:3{a), 419.33(a), 41!M3(a),
p.m. Ea1tem time oa July 2:9. 1985. TheM II.~ and 4li.S3(a ). 0a AWlUSt 28. 1984. E?.A.
resuJatiODI aball became eifecUw pablilhed lbe proposed amendmenta to
Aup1t za. l98S. A. Prior Rsgulati011 the 1982 eaiueat limitations gwdeiines
Uader Seetiaa !09(b)(1} of t.be OHII Oa October 18. 1982. EPA published Ill accardanca wtth the Serdemenr
Water Act. judicia! review of theM 8Da1 eflluac l.lzmtatimtl suidelinea ud Atzreement (48 FR 34152). Public
rezulatioaa ia avllllable only by lill.na a 1tandard.. tar r.b.e petroleum refinma caaunenta were rece1v1!d anri con·w~~~d
pentiaa for review ID the Uait.ed Staa.. point aourc:. cat&~ory. Thai regulatioa ID iaauiq this final rule.
Court of Appeal. witfua maety day. provtdeci B:aaJ efllueat limJtatto.a.s lot
after these :egu!atiollll are can.sadered "best avllllable techaoLou ecaa.omicaDy
m. C&aapa F!'GIII Propo.a1
luued ror
purpose of judiaal re-new. ac!Wrvable" (BAT) a.ad e•tabUahed 8D.al Today'• BnaJ rule amends lhe effiwent
Under aecttoa S09(b)(2) of the Clean pntreatmeat ataadarda ror exiatiDS lhmtatioaa guideline• for the p...uo!aum
Water Act. thne requirements of the IOW'Cea (PSESJ a.ad lor 11ew IOW"Cft l'8.fia1n8 pomt aowee category: Lt 1:1 !~e
replattaa.a 1Z14Y aot be c:hallensed later (PS&"IIS]. The Aaacy retained iti IQII.e ulhe AL18111t ZS. 19&4 propuaed
LD dvil or c:riDuaal ~CNrllnp brauabt proevi0111ly promulaated "'aew IIOUrc. 81181ldmeata. However. cenatn cusl
by EPA ta calcm::e d2eM reqwre.me.aca. per{Cinllo&DQI 1ta.adard.l" [NSPS) and dftenam11tiaaa wsed to develop the BCI"
227
Rules and Regula tiona 28517
dlaeat llmit.cla• pideljllee MW bees a.lfida Ill Sebpertl A eel C ad for chramiam. hexavalent chromium and
I'8'ViMd aiDcl lfle prapoeal bal cia Dat he:uvaJem c:bzom.hDD IB Subpart A. phenoHc c::ompoauda (4AAP}. EPA II
.&ct the~· cxipl&l Cllllldwiae wbida appeared Ia tbe ,..._.. R.,.._ &ddiq fiow l"educti011 to tbe model
U..t BCT llhoaid be aet
tbia iadusa,.
eq_,
ta BP1' far nattca of Octaber 1& Hm (41 PR 48434)
-.1..,.. Jept:bated tD 40 aR Part 411
treacment technology lor the BAT
e11lumt ltmitation:s guidelines and i.t
EPA pablilllecl a propcwed BCr
methadolou [47 FR 48'178) wbic:b •t
datad }ldy t. 211M ta carrect ba•mc the eftJuent l.mutattmu for each
t)Pft4iiiphiciiJ errors. Becnse these of these tl:un poUutanll ou a more
fords • procedara far ..,.hultiq tbe CIIMt limitatiaaa appeared b:l botb metric and recent data ban• .rather me tbe one it
~aiBCT·effJumt Enslisll .Uti. me typo• 81 aphical emn relied apoa ID the October 18. 198% BAT
Umitatiaaa B"ide"n• 'The p ClpOii16id have been obvtaa. Alao, ameadmena promulpdon. That r'lllemaldng utilized
BC'!' !bnita tiona !or tbe petroleum .,. -..de ta CIOiftCt typographical m'OJ'I tbe aame data bued a.sed by the
re1iaiag iJ:IdlutrJ ..,. baaed upaa cut 1D a pti*8l&tAl l'l!'fermce that appeared Aaency when ft ntabliahed best
pubUabed aetboclcMogy. wbicb illclwda ID Subpart~ 0 u:d !! far NSPS. ad ID a practicable control technology currently
die "'PPTW ,••- ad tbe .bub.wtr7 c:aat reftnery capactty J'&DI8 ID a li:le factor available (BPI') effluent Hmltatioaa
Int.- n. ~ wlected and table that appeazed ill Subpart! far .,Ude!ines far the petroleum refi:tu:13
evaluated rwu lefti.s al t-=hDo!ogy fbr BP!'. "ntese uneDcime!lb 8'ppe8l' ill the pomt IOUr'Ce catesory. The BFI' level of
tt. c::aaaral of c:DIIftDtiaasl paUumaa ameaded repU.tlaa that faUOWII UU. conrral !or this lnduatry waa
from peUaieum ra6Denea f&.&.. ft!I!..,C./ preamiHe. pramuqated oa May 9. 19'74 (39 FR
....- md ncyde/...-..e phD IJ'BDIILar IV. Ar 'wbi tD lhe ,_,.,..._ 115801 aad aubaequently amended on
media .&ltntion faDowUJ.a BPT). Re8niq PaiBt Saan:e C. hPJ May ZD. 19'75 (40 FR Zl939). The BAT
lncremeiHal (beyanrt BPI1 c::aa,..,...,...el dllueat llmitationa guideline• Car other
pollutaat rem:oftb &Dd ca.aa ~ lleplatiaa
poUutanta remain uachanged.
...nth the caDdidate BCT b!cbaologi• The milowial are tbe c!tsqeos ta tJte 'The BAT effluent limllaaoaa
were caJadatl!d far 80del plaats petroleum indasay Pepladon dsal EPA suidellDe.s fer total chromium be.u1s
Npresa.tatiwe of each al tile fhw JU"DPPHCi 011 Aasat z:a. 19M: promulgated today are baaed upon the
petroleam NfiDiDa ..bc:ateaanea. n. A. IJBM ANilabl11 T~ E[JbMuit NYiaed W9 flow model developed by
...Wti.a& '"'cD8t pet' peua.d riiiDO+Ed" l.iiiJiiGIJDu C.•irfeUner the AaeDCJ to predict refinery flowa.
ratio. faded dle BCT c:aet tat. The rather than the BFI' 1S7-4 .llow m.odeJ
Asency therefore pt01)0Md lhat acr be On OdDber 1& 1911.2 EPA pwblllliled
ued iD the October 1982 BAT
Mt equal ta BPT b all fivw petroleam tina1e8luent !imitation.a.,Udelinee for
beet available ~ ect:IDOGIIic::IUy p'l'D&DI&lq1ioa. The e.flluent lizzutaticma
refiDinl•ubcateaanes. for total chromium be1.01 promlllBs ted
Sllbeeq•aeady, EPA ~a DDtic:e acbievllble (BAT] aDd fiDa1 poetreatmeDt
today wen derived by applymg thl8
of data avaJJability c:a~ the SCr ataMard.a far aiating .oaJ"CCn (PSFS)
ad for aew IOUI'Cia {PSNSJ few the ~dated flow mod.el to coaC~~mcratloaa
metbadolOSJ" aa Sepe.mber .ZO. 1984 (49
petroleum l"'!fini.a& iDdustry. 47 Fll 484.'M. for total c:lzromium obeerved from plan
FR 37018). Tha AJeat:Y b.iu reviled ita
Tbe Natural Reaoarca De.ieDM Council IIID1p~ in 1916-191"7.
BCT =-t evaluaboa for petr'oNNm
re1izl.iD& to IIICDrparate tbe gpdated ("'NRDC"') !led a .,.-tion tD review the BAT eBlue.at lbzutaaaas rwdeli.Des Cor
lniormatiaa raiveaced ia &be ao0ce ol October 1& 1SIBZ ~ in the Uaited hexavalent chromium &DCI phenolic
data avaal11.bality. 'I1Ia raviaed co.& ratio. States eo-t of Appeala for tbe Dt•lrict compounda beiD:8 promulsated today
for the recyde/reuae technology opeiou of Col11111baa CrcwL The American went denved IWnl the 198Z
widl 2D tD 40 percll!lll redlldioa.a ill Petroleum blldhlte l.API) aDd ..,... Development Doc:wzteat ccucezuraaoca
diacbarie flow raqe fram S50.48 to .$1..38 c:amparuee wbicb owa a.ad operate aud tbe reY!Md 197'9 flow mode! to a1ore
(197'7' doUan). The revised a.t ratio~ Cor petroleum refiuerin interveaed iD that &CCW'IItely repaueat affluent reducaoaa
the recyr:J./reua pW. filtratioaa aptiQill prac:.eediq. A aamber o1--. wue far tbeee paUutaD.ta wtucb the ICdustry
ra~ from SZ7 JJ5 to 1'1.11 (197'7' ciollan). faiaed Ill letdament diK881~ 81110118 wu ~Y adue'IU18 in 1979 or c:ouJd
The beDc:bmark m 'W'1 doUara for the the partie• ID the Ltrwwait pe~ ta tec:::bno.ogically achieve by tbe 5Da1 BAT
P01W ca.t Lest baaed 011 the Ageacy'. the BAT dlueat l:lm.itatiool pidelina. ccmplla=:e date. BAT far h.exnaleat
reprapaae.c:i BCT nLethodolau i.l Alttlr ataain di.c~~RioD.I, tbe chromium beiDg pramulsated today 1.1
approximately S.78 per pou.a.d of petitiOIM!I', iuta tea en aad EPA eatlll'ed based upoa optloc 7 (cibc:harp flow
pollutaal removed. The Aaency i.1 • s.tt.ement Aareemeut. wbJch ptUYidee rwduc:zioc ol ~ .S percent &om the
p1'11&troliy nmains the BCT meth.acb.lel)' for lpec.6ed 1"11'9biou tD the BAT revised 1911 model fiow). BAT for
and expect. tbe benchmark to c:haaae· efll'Dfttllaubltloall pjdelines. no.e phenalic c:ampoaada (<IAAP) be1.01
BaNd on preiimmary anaJysiL tb.e NYllioaa are let .farth in loday'a pramulpted today 111 baaed upoa opaon
Apacy expect~ tbat tbe randid•te Ml•ded ,..,.,W.Uoa. I (a redactiazl ol21l percent f:oam the
ti'!Cbnolft!ie• w11J (JUl uader futurescr ID OctaOer 191Z EPA proal11!phld nrnMd 19111DIOdel flow),
cast taU. nus. the Aanc:y baa deeded BAT eff111eat liDUtatiou for the Under today'• rulem•lwts. the BAT
tD eatablisb 8CT effluent lizzut.atfa:na foUoWUJI poDutaJltr. (1) etBuent linUtadons suidelines for each
suideJfnn equl ta BPT eftluent NonconveftUoaal poUatanta: chemic:a1 of these tbzoee poUuta.ata are
Jimfttrtf"'!''t mside!ines far the Petroleum oxyaen demand (COO), phenolic aubetaneially more stnngent than the
RtsiiAuJ& lnd1.1.1try !.II thia rulema.king. compoandt (olAAP). ammoaia (a• N) and BAT effluent J.imJtallona guadelines
Se9oenll typopaphical aad sulJide: and (%Hoxie poUututa: total promalpted In 1982. The total allowable
tranacnpaoa ernms appeved in dJroomium and bna't"'l.leftt cbromnua. dischafl'! of total c:hromaum to the
419.43(c)(2). U9.14(a), 419.34(b)(1) aDd In The IIIOdei ll!dmoiOSY lor these aatioa' 1 aavigable waters 1s reduced by
Ap~M!ndix A. iD th~ Pl""1'1M'd r'llle regWatfOM waa Dow eq11alization. IDitial approximately 288.000 pounds per year.
pubU.fted on AIJIU.st 28. 1984. f9 F1l oil and .,lida l't!'IIIO'nL a~anced oil &Dd a S percent annual Muc:tlon beyond
341SZ. 'Tboae mou hne been cai'T"eded soUda l'miOV8l. biol011cal trntmeut uzd disc.barse levels aJJowable wtder the
in the amendments wt fartb below. lBtntion or ocher &aai "polishma st~ps. • UJsdft! BAT effluent li.autaaons
In addition. COday'• notice amend• the 1'1le ~ i. aow amendina d:le BAT guidelines: the total alJowable discharge
BPT effluent lbad&tiona PdeJines for dftuent JbaitaUons aWdeline• for total al bexa'f"'llent c:hnmuum 11 reduced by
228
Z8S18 Federal Rftlister I VoL SO. No. 134 I Friday, July U. 1985 I Rules and Regulations
approximately 11.300 pauada per yur. a per pllaa of raftaary product. No reuoaablmea test. I.e.. the ··POTW
5I percent umuaJ reducUaa beyond rabery daa111"n are auddpated by tU teat'" aad the ""tnduatry coat test." ID
dlac:harse levela allowable IUJder Aaeac:y. Rehary capacity md additlaa. the Agency publtahed a .. no bee
exiadq BAT: tbe total allowable CGIII'IIIIlpdaa would ntmaizl --.Bectad. d data availability" c:aacenWII the
diacharp of phenoUc compa'&llld.8 Clvm theM !acton. the ApacJ bellrres propoaed BCT !Dethadology oa.
(4AAP). il reduced by app.ra:ximately that ttl earller heavy rallance aa c:aata September .zo. 1984 (-48 FR 37048).
7S.QOQ paunda per year. a 43 pen:eDt u the baaia for reiec:tinl more •trtaceat Today"a promulgated BCT efDueat
aaauaJ reductiaa beyoad di.sc:barp eBlueat coatrola ill this iaduatry wn limitatiaaa suidelian ror the pell'Oleum
leveJa allowable llllder exiatia& BAT. taappropriat.e. U1d that tU efflueat reihliq iadu.try are baaed oa the
n ... reductioaa are based Oil data lD llmitatloaa guidellDa for total propoeed BCT methodology. Today'a
tbe Apacy'a rebed BAT flaw model. c:!:lramium. he:xavalet chromiWII md fblal replat:foaa eatabliab BCT equal to
ne reftned flaw made! Ia illcluded lD phenolic c:ampaunda (4AAPJ beiq BPT tor the petroleum refinJns induatry.
tbe record rar tbia rulemaJdna ill • report promuJsat.ed taday, rather th&a the EPA coaaidered two levela of
eatided '"Petroleum Rafinins lDdu.etry, af!lueat limitadoaa guidellDu tec:haolOJY for iDcreamental control
Refillemat. ta 1979 Prapaaed Flaw promuJsated Ill 1982. are appropriate rar beyoad BPT of total~U~pended aollda
Madel." tbia lzldu.etry u the BAT level of caatraL (iSS} usd oil aad greaae. These
EPA believ• that approximately ou n. revtaed Bat D1111lerica1limitadou techaolov levels are recyde/l"'!aae and
half of the re&eries which dlrec:!ly azul coatamecliD the fiDaJ repladoa. recycle/reuse (allowed by graaulu
disc:.barga pollutallta ta aavilable waten media filtraaoa. Theae teclmolog~ea are
already are complyiq with the efiluaat
B. Bat CDnnntionoJ Pollulllnl Clmaul
T«:luuology £Fnusllt LimitDtiOM aJready ID uae at certaia s1tea iD the
llmitatiau bein& promulgated today. Guidlliina 'II·· petroleum refiaia& industry. These
Further, EPA beUev• that the aflluent techaalojie1 were selected as can.didaur
limitatioa.a are ecaaamically achievable A. part of the Setdemmt Asreement BCT tecbaoaog~ea because the Agency
for the IDduatry. EPA qreed ta propose bnt believe• they represent the fint levels of
Ia the preamble to the October ta. coaveatioaal poUutaDt coatrol coatrol beyond BPT which could effect
198Z promulgated regulatioaa ror ttu. teclmalogy (..BC'Ij ef!Jueat limitatfoua reducdoa Ia coaventional poUutant
illduatry, EPA estimated that capital guideliDes far the petroleum re.fiDiq laadlap 111 thia iaduatry. FUtraaon alone
co.a of StU miWaa aad S37 miWaa illduatry. The 1977' Auumdmeatl ta the WU DOt 1elected 81 8 candidate Bcr
(1911 d.aUan) ID IIID1I8liz.ed coalS would Cear Water Act ("CWA'•) added tecbnalogy because it ia one of the
be required iD order rar petraleam MCtiaa 301(b)(2)(EJ of the Act exiatiq BPT treatment tec.'malosses.
reflaera ta comply wttb optiaa 7, OIUI of establlabms BCT for diacbarp of However. the Agency deaded to
the BAT cautrol treatmeat optiona caaveadaaal poUutaata from e:xiltiDs caaa1der the cambi.aatioa of recycly/
coaatdered by tbe Apacy (47 FR 46138). illdutrtal poiDt aoarcn. Coaveatiaaal reuae plua iiltratfoa as a candidate acr
Libwiae. EP.-. estimated that capital poUutallta &1"1! thoae defiaed IJa aectiaa tec:haology. Thia ia becau.ee the
c:aetl of S'J7 aullloa 1111d IUIDaalized 304{a)(4) (biochemical oxyga decreased hydraulic loading resulting
co.tl of SZ5 aullloa (1919 dollars) would deDWidin& poUutB.Dta (BOO.), total from recycle/reuae reaulta 111 the need
be required ill order !or petroleum .upeudec:laoUd.s (iSS}, Cecal coUlana far smaller md lesa costly filtration
reben ta comply wtth optioa a. eotber U1d pH], md my additioaal poUutaDt:.
equipment thaa that included in the BPT
of the BAT coatrol tnatmeat optioae deflaed by the Admutiatrator u tnatmeDt model. Tbe BCT cost test waa
coaaidered by the Apucy (47 FR 48438). •coaveat:foaal". lhe AdmiaJatratOI'
n. reviud limitadaaa beiq daipated oal md gre8M u a thea performed oa the c:ambinatioa of
recycle/reu.. 1111d filtration as a double-
prcnaalpted today far pbenollc coaveatiaaal pollutaat OD July 30. lml.
check Oil the effect.a of the less cosily
campcnmda. hexavalent c:hraauum md +t FR 44501.
total cbramimD are aat baaed oa e1ther BCT Ia aat madd1Uaaa111mitatiaa but Sltradoa 1tep.
optiaa 7 or opdoa 8 alaa.e. na ef!lueat l"'!placea BAT far the caatrol ~ bl order to determine whether these
limitadoaa Car pbeaallc compawub are caaveatioaal poilutaDta. ID addition to CBDdldate techaologin are ·cost-
baaed llpOD opdoa a. lhe ef!lueDt other ~eel ID Sect:ioa 304{b)(4)(B) I"'!UOnable", EPA dewloped one model
limitat:foaa !or huavaleat chromium are the Act requirn the BCr limitatioaa b. plaat representadve of a typical plant m
baaed upOD opdoa a. The ef!lueat uaeued ill li&ht of a twe>part "co.t each of the five BPT subcatejones. The
llmatadoaa Car buavaleat chramiWD are reaaoaablaaesa" test. Amencan Pa/)fll' five BPT 1ubcatetarie1 anr:
baaed upoa opdoa 7. The efDuent lMtitut11 v. EPA. eeo P2d 954 (4th Clr. A-TOPlJIDI
llmatadoaa lor total c:.bromiwa. wlula 1981). The Bnt tnt comparn the co.t 8-Crac:kinc
somewhat mara saiqeat tbaD the BAT !or private iDduaC1'7 ta reduce it. c-Petrachemical
efDueat limitadoaa !or total c:hramium. couveadaaal poUutaata wtth the caab ta D-Lube
are lesa •Cl"iDaeat thaa thaN baaed 11pa11 publldy owned tntatmeat warb for B-1Dt"'"8tecl
opdOD a. aimi1ar leve.J. of rwciw::iaa ill their lhea EPA calculated the illcremeata!
Th8 Alacy hu reevaluated the c:aaa dlacharge of these poUutaatL 1h (beyaad BPT) canvendoaal pollutaat
of c:ampliaace !or today' • chBJI8ft to the aecoad tnt exammn the coat- removal• md the illcremeatal casta
BAT efflueat llmitadoaa aud esamatn effecttveaeu of additiaaal laduaaial usoaated with these lec:haolog~ea lor
that the lataJ iDduau-y coats of tnatmeut beyoad best practicable each model plmL Baaed on tlua
compliaace would aot exceed tho.. cantroltecbDoiO!IY c:urready avllllable illfarmadoa. cost-per·pou.ad ralioe wei'IJ
previoualy calculated for option a. EP.._ (BPT). EPA mu.t fiDd that limltadoaa.,. calcualted for each ol the five BPT
esdmates.that DO mare lbaa 81. -reuoaable"' ander both testa befara lubcatesanes-
petroleum re.fiDertea will ba ve to iac:ur eetabllahiq them aa BCT. Ia a.o c:.ue !PA evaluated reduction. ill total
agresate capital coats ao greater thaa may BCI' be leu •czmaeatthaa BPI'. IWipended 10Uda (TSS). b1ocheaucal
$i7 aullloa aad aftDualized casta no !PA publlahed a prapoeed BCT oxysea de!D8Dd (BOO.). and oLl and
greater thaa SZ5 aulliaa (1979 dollL-s). methodolov oa Octabe!' 29. 198Z. (47 FR poease far each of theM techaoloc
Tbe.. casta traaalate to all average 48178J. Thia pnrpaeed BCT methodolOIY levels. However; ad and grease was cot
ilu:reua of no greater thaA oae half cent explaina the detaJla of tU two part co•t· caruidt!J'ed far tha acr calcula dona for
229
fWieral R.,.u.t.r 1-YeL 50. No. 134 I Prtday, July U. 1985 I Rules md Regulations 28519
recyde/rwue ror tJUa lDduatry. nmoff. i.&. contaminated and treatment if it does not exceed 15 mg/1
Addltioaalty, BOO. was not caaatdered u.acoatamiaated. ail aad grease and 110 ms/1 TOC. be'
far tbe BCT eaiculaUaas far BJtraUaa Cor ne purpoM of this rulemaking ia to upon an analysis or any sangle grab
tbia illducry. This is tn accordaac:e wttb ntablia BPT. BCT and BAT effluent composite sample. Under today's fin.
tilt pf09oaed BCT 111etbodology La order liDutatiCllll gu.idellnes Cor contamiDated rqulations for BCI'. wastewater
to •void "-double cauttq• or tbe atorm water runoff. Today's coaai•uns solely or contaminated runoff
amOQftt of pollutants removed by a pramulaated contammated runoff may be discha.rsed directly Wlthout
candidate BCT technolav. .ttluent liautationa are to be included in treatment. if it does not exceed 15 mg/l
'11le recycle/reuse technoiOSY option petroleum refinery pennita in addition to oal and grease and under the rmal
Identified Cor BCr was evaJuated lD the process wastewater effluent limitations. regulations for BAT. wastewater
ranee of from zo to 40 percent reduction NSPS far contamiaated runoff is being_ consisting solely of contamana ted runoff
ill cii.ac:hu1e flaw. The ca•t per pound reserved for future ruiemaJdna. may be discharged directly Wllhout
raqes Cram $41.00 to S0.77 (1977 dollars) ID today's fiaaJ regulatio111 EPA is treatment il it does not exceed 110 rng/1
(SS0.41 to $1.38 (1977 d~) based de.flaiD& coatamiaa ted nmoff. Cor TOC. Il contamana ted nanoff (whether or
1IPGD the September zo. 1984 notice of purposes of these replationa only, to be not it exceeds 15 mg/1 oal and. grease or
data availabdity) in the first part ol the runoff wbich coma mto contact With 110 ms/1 TOC) is commmgled or ll'eated
proposed BCr cost reasoaablenesa test any raw matena1. iDten:aediate product. With process wastewater. or u
(the "POTW last"), Accarding.ly, the finished producL by-product or waste wastewater cons11t1ng solely oi
Aaency faud that the addiboo or product located on petraleiDD refinery cantammated runoif wh1ch exceeds 15
recycle/reuae techaology faala the first property. AD.y other storm water runoff 11'18/1 oal and grease or 110 mg/1 TOC 11
part or the proposed BCT cost at a refmery is considered not commingled or treated wtth any
reasonableness test m all five aDCOntammated. Today's final other type or wastewater. then suc!::t
eubcategones (50.30 per pound in 19'7'1 regulations also amend the definition of runoff would be subject to the
dollars) (capproxuaately $0.76 per pound the term "ruaolr' c:urreatJy found in 40 alternative BPT/BCT/BAT effluent
in 1977 dollars based upon the CFR 419.11(b) to cianfy that it meana the limatanons guidelines for contammated
September 20. 1984 notice of data Dow of storm water resultins from runoff bemg promulgated today. as
avadabLiity.J precipitation cam.inl into contact with appropnate. These oal and grease and
The A,ency alaa found that the petraleum refinery property. TOC nwaencal effluent limttat1ons are
addition ofrecycle/reuae plua fUtrat1on Contammated runoff constitutes aa baaed on the conce~trat1ons ex-pected
fads the first part of the proposed BCT additional source of pollution wb.tch from the properly desagned and opera ted
cost reasonableness tnt m aU five muat be managed durin& penoda of model treatment fac11ities.
eubcategaries. The recycle/reuse portion preapatauon along with procesa
of this option was evaluated in the ranse The effluent liautations gutdelines tn
wastewater from relinery operauons.
of.&om ZD to 40 percent reduction m today's BPT regulation for contamanatPd
Today's final regulauona do not
discharge flow. The cast per pound (1977 runoff are based on the same
establlah aumencal effiuent Um1tations concentrations and vanab&hty fact&
dollars) ranges from S21.00 to so.sa. Cor uncontammated runoff. Effiuent
compared to the benchmark of SD.JO per used to de\·elop the Agency's ex1star.,..
Umatations. mcluding but not limited to
paud (1977 dollars) (SZ7.0S to S1.11, allocauona for uncontammated runoif BPT process wastewater effluent
compared to the benchmuir. of may be established by the pemut writer liDutations gutdelines.
approximately $0.76 per pound (1977 based oa his/her beat pro£esa1onal Today's BAT regulation for
dollars) based upon the September 20. judiment. contazrunated nanoff is based upon the
1884 notice of data availability). The A,ency believes that the best same concentrations and vartab:hty
Therefore. the Agency 11 promulgat1D8 practicable control technology currently factors used to develop the Agency's
BCl' equal to BYI' for the five available. tbe best conventional exasnng BAT process wastewater
subcategories in this mdustry. pollutant contra! technology and the effluent liautations gu1delines. except
A :n.:lre :=mplete discussion of the beat av81lable technology econoaucaUy those (or total chromawn. whtcb are
selection or tbe candidate BCT achievable Cor treatment of based upon the same concentranons
tedmologies. the details of the Brat part contammated runoff are the same as the and vanabtlity factors used for today··
of the proposed BCT cost tedmologJes tdeaufied for treatment of promulgated BAT effluent limJtanons
reasonableness test ("POTW test"), abd process wastewater. The Aaency baa swdelines for process wastewater.
the basas for deasaon are contaaned in not tdenbfied any feaa1ble technologies Today's promulgated BAT effluent
the admuuatrabve n!COrd of this capable or achae\"1D8 pollutant guadelines for phenolic compounds
ndemaklna. reductions For contaDWlated runoff from (4AAP) for contamanated runotl are
refinenes to any sreate.r degree tban based on the same concentrations used
C. Effluent Lim1t.tztlons Cuzdelines for
CJntommoted Slol'fll Water Runoff those wtuch are acluevable by the for the eXJsnng BAT effluentlur.ttauonl'
process wastewater treatment facility. swdelines for process wastewater and
ID the October 18. 1982 rulemalcina the ne Agency believes that the the same varaab•hty factors used for the
Apncy Withdrew stonn water effiuent conventional pollutant oal and grease Agency's eXJsting BAT effluent
limitations guidelines Cor BPT. BAT and and the aonconvenuonal pollutant limitanons gwdelines. EPA has
NSPS. b'!cause they were remanded by parameter total organic carbon (TOCl detemuned that thas approach LS
tbe U.S. Court of Appeals in American are appropnate measures to determine appropnate becanse of the spec:fic.s oi
Petroleum IMtztute v. EPA. 540 f'.zd 1023 whether pollutant loadings tn each data base avatlable !o the Agency.
(lOth Cir. 1916). cantazrunated nanoff would be 1f EPA used the varaabtlity factors from
Since that remand there has been measurably reduced by the model today's promulgated BAT effiuenr
aome con.fus1on on the part or pemut treatment techaolog~es used to develop limatations gutdelines. less stnngent
wnters aad others as to whether storm these final regulations. Under today's BAT contamanated runoif nu.mencal
water runoff' ("runolr') emuent ftnal rqulaaona for BPT. wastewater emuent limatallons for phenohc
limitation. should be coataaned in canaasuns solely of contanunated runoff' compounds (4AAP} would be den\
penaita. There are rwo kmds of such zuy be diacharaed directiy without than under today's promulgated 8P'l
230
Fadud RePstv I VoL 50. Na. 134 I Friday. July 12. 1985 I Rules ilDII R..galatiGall
coatamiDated runoff aiUUI'ical eftluem measure of ~!atia.a lor the demand (COD) and total oraaaic c:arboa
lilllitaticma for phe.oolic c:ampowuia partfc:u.lar refinery localiOA. tTOC}; aa.d ~~ taxioc pollutama: total
'4AAP). Tbe more sumaezu efilllellt Oace tAe ID&U ba.d effluea& c:hraauum and hexavaLeat c.'uwliwa. La
illlitaticma dearly are achievable a.ad u limit.atioa is denved. it ID8l' t. die cue af BCT. the efBuenclimltaaoa.s
a matter aflaw BAT C81111at be leu ~ iata 8 re&.ery penmt .ill JUidelir.es bema promulgated todav are
ICriqent thaD SPT. oae of three way~ The proper cbot01 for the caavenuoa&l poUutaats TSS. au
Today'• BCr resulatiaa fc.r depends oa site-tpecmc fadan. such .. and gre.He. .BODi aad j)H. Ia :he cue oi
coatam111ated runoff Ll baaed aa the loca! raia.fall pattenu aad the desip al COD. there may be iData!'ICes where
same c:aaceatrauaa.a aAd vanabaliry ruaaif holdinl fac:illbes. extremely hagb wonde level.a (JI"'8fer
tJiaa 1.0C0 mg/J) wUJ iDt.erfere With the
factors uaed for today's promuJs8ted
BCT pracesa wutewater efllu.eD.t
lilllitationa &Wdeli.aes.
The fi.r.t metbod is a CDIItiaaoU
a.lJocadaa. This preswta tbe pro(Mem al
providina an alloc:atioa when ao nmoff
COD
the
.-,ucaJ
A~eacy
method. In tha. evea.t.
believes dlat TOC La aa
T1le Aaency believes that the coac. is present and i.e appropriate oaJy where KCI!ptabh! substitute pa~ fO!'
attnbutable to lod8y's regulatioaa will precip1taticm pattema are reJatively COO. A TOC liautabaa shall be baaed
be IIWiimal. while praV1diq !or CDII8tallt thraqb the year or wha upoa ea!ueat data from the parucular
redw:tiODa ill refiDery polluraat holdbls !aallties are I.-d. to bleed re&.ery whu:h coneiated TOC to SOC..
dischal"'es. 'This il becauae rhe Asency raaff iato tbe treacmeat faality aver Where adequate correiauoa data are aat
believes the mduscry u a whole akudy ma.t or all of tbe ye-. !lie s-=ad available, the penmt1:iq aatbanty :u~y
is (aJ treating COAtaauaated rwJOa With method 1.1 a vanabH! allocaQQ!l ba.d aG establilb a TOC J.imJ.taucm oa a rauo of
procest wutewater ar (bl~.t discbargins IZLellSUr'l!'meat or calc:Watioa of a~ z..z ta 1 ta thL' applic~e BPT /BCr
coataa:Uzlated nmaif below today'• c:ontammated nmaff volwne. While this effluent limltauaas !tlr BOO.. This raoa
pramulsated threshold Cor treatmeat. is the moat ideal method. it may preaeat is based upoa eiflaem data aaaJyzed b7
Today's riDal reguJatioas do aot cover camplJauat me&SIU"'!m.eat .and the A3eacy.
c:ontam.iuted NDOif wtuc:h ia ealcn:enseat comph:xitia. The tttird No effluent limat.aaoa. gmdeiiaes fat
commmsled wtth aoaprocesa 111edlod is du.a! wet weather/dry concamu~ated nmaif are bems
wastewater stream.a. EPA believes that weather limataban8 trigen:d by etther pramu.lp.tl!d Cot the JlOIIC.Onvetttional
sw:h inacaaces are iAfreqaent. ~ I1IDe of year. predpatation evenc.. ,. poUutanta ammarua (as N) aa.d awfide
accardinsly. they are left to tbe permit actual canta.mmated nmofl' '90Nme. n. regulated aDder existln8 BPT aDd BAT
wr~ter's discrea~ method af detenmru~~~ coataminated Ieveii of controL
Unlike the eftlwac llmitadaaa · runoff volume 11aed to calaJete the
V. Eavizooameatallmpad ol dae
gwdelines Cor proc:eu wastewater fc.r einueat lDmtabDIUJ will vary dependiJ!s A••ncfmente
thia mdu.stry which are mua-baaed. oa the method ll.led aDd the design al
today'• pramulpted eill.&&eat limitabam any ranoff holdins facilities. Tben:fure. EPA's e.timate. af the redudoa in
guidelines for coatammated rw:loif are it 11 left to the permit wnter to select a iaqustry-wide direct disc.lta1"8~ of
aa.ceatratioa.-baaed. Tflia ia because apPI'Ot'nate method auder taday's pheaotic compJQnds. bexavalem
lanD w&ter volumes are aot related to rulemaJcins. chromsum. and total cftrot!UUI22 for
aay mea8&1l'e1Deat of re5aety producbaa. These ~anon• do not address process wastewater !rom those aDawed
However. under today's regulatuma UDCafttaDUnated ranoff wb:ich i::a under the 1982 5.aa.l petroleum Lndusay
permit eiflu.eat liautati.a!M for disc:barsed duoqb the proa:ss regulatioa ta !.bose aUOWftl by today's
contammated ruaaff are to be wastewater ~tment facility. nus i• ameadmeats aoe presented below.
established oa 8 mass basi.S. Tha ma.u- because the Asency believes that
based emuent limltatioas Cor each iatrodU'Cift3 am:aatammated nmcrif ta
regulated pollu1aat for coataaunated the pracese wastewater treatmeat
runoff' iD 8 petroleum re£i.am8 penmt are system may resuJt mthe disch~ af m
the produ.c:t of (1) the respecnve emuent ia.cn:ssed man of pallutana to the
gwdeliae caacentrati.oa far that !ll'liranm1!nt conrpan:d to the :nasa of
---- -
pollutant and (2) the measured or r-~--------;
pollutants discha~ tf no ~CIIQ-
cak:ulated crmtammated runoff volume. azJc:ontammated rtmaif were present ia

Under today's regulabana pe..nmt the pTDa:ss wastewater treatment
writers an pven tlex1bili.ty m '1ystem. Thendare. the Agency doe.a aot
determiDIDg re.finery starm water W1lDt ta encourage d'Ds practice aa a
VL I. II p 1- tD Ma;.r ear---a
volumes on a case-by-case basl&. 'nle aatiouJ baai~ The A&eacy encourases pu.bUc
CoUowmg factoa are amaas tha&e la tbe case of BPT, the emueat partldpation m the rulemaklns process
apprapnate rar :-rm•t wnten to limltatfcms 1\lidelinea promuLgated and sa.Ucted commeata em :he propaee.d
coa.idet I.D d.etarmiauzs wbat today are for the folloW\DS pollutaata (1) amendmeacs. Ptlblic t:OI!!mrnta were
contaminated nmoft' volume to ~ m coaventioaal poUutaata: totaJ suape:loded n=cesved aAd c:oaaadered LD LU1WlC this
calculatiD& mus-baaed einuent aolida (TSS). au aad grease. five-day fiaal tuie.•-\summary ol all tAa
limltatioas far reiiaery petDUts: (a) b1ocheaucaJ. oxygen demand (BOO.) .aad. caauaencs received and the A&eacy's
Measured dif!'e.reru:e be rweea dry pH; (2) aoac:aavrmuoaaJ pollutants: rapoaaes to r.haae cammeata are
weather aad wet weather discharge phenolic compowuis (4AAP}. cheau.cal ~ded IR a ~ titled; "'Responses
flow &am the treatment facility where oxygen deawul (COO} aad tatal orgamc to ~blic C4mmmt.a on the Propoae.d
caatami.Dated rwaoff is the oaJy rua.oif' carbon (TOC]; aad (3) to:u: pallutaats: Amendments to the Efflueat Luzutaaon.~
present ia.the treacmeat facility. and (bJ total c:.htanuum aa.d hexavalea.t Cwdellae• far the Peaolew:a R.eiiruaa
volume of cantammated runoff water c.!m=ium. lA the c:.aae of BAT. tha Point So&&ree Catepy", wiuch,.
caladated from the pradw:t of (1) effluent liautations swdeliaes besna iDduded iD the public record !or th.La
measuremeat oi laad area wb.ere praawlpted today am !or (1) regula boi'-
'recipatatiaa wcruld become llOac.oavmDoaal palJut&Ata: ~ Moat oi d» c:omm.enten ~
.ont81D1Dated. aad (2) aA b.JstancaJ compaua.da (4AAP). chemacal OXYpD 'ull aupport for !be proawlsaacm ai tbe
231
Fedanl Register I Vol. Sl. No. 134 I Friday. July 12. 1985 I Rules and Regulations 28521
amllllded replatian.~ •• propaaed. The eflluent limitations gwdeliaes aew process grouping in the BAT no··
Altbaqb aoae of tbe·caDUDentei'S developed for the petroleum refinins model. lD such Instances. the result
diaqreed wtth the Apacy's adioa. IDdustry are production based. Although pemut limitation. would be the mo1
10111e believed it necesaary to comment previous permits may have been issued afl'iqent of etther the calculated BPT
oa the backpoWld and development of oo the basis of procesa capaaties. llm.ltat1ona or calculated BAT
the proposal aad to seek clanfi.c:a baa oa permit limit& baaed oa the revised BAT llautations. nus IS because BAT pemut
the A,ency's intended procedures for repletions should be calculated on the liautanons may not be less ~ngent
appiYlftl the effluent Umitat1ona basis of actual productloa ~tes. For this than BPT. lD order to make a proper
pideUaes. The ma1or commeata are reason. the pemut wnter ahould comparison. the BPT liautatlona should
addreued below. andertake a thorough review af a be recalculated using: (1) Production
refmery's b.Jatoncal process utillzation data from the same lime penod that are
A. Bat A vaiiablt1 Tecilnalasy Effluent. rates aad process groupings to
Limilllli'on• Cuidelina (BA. TJ used to calculate the BAT lim..ltauons:
determine a reasonable measure of and (2) the BPT procesa groupings and
Some of the cammenten argued that actual production proJected for the aubca tegonza tion.
wutewater Dow reduction 1.8 not aa penod the permat would be in effect. In an effort to provide gwdance on the
appropnate basis upoa which to base This method of detenzwuna appropnate application oi the proposed amendmenls
eilluent Umitatioaa gwdelina far dus proc:esa feedstock rates for use m to the BAT effluent liantallona
iDduatry.lt was c:Wmed that other calculatan& mass efJluent limits is in gwdelines. the Agency held workshops
poUutaat apeafic control tec:hDaques will accordance wtth 40 CFR 122.4S{b). The iD San Franctsco and Dallas for pernnt
be u.eed. il necessary, to achieve the IndiVIdual process feedstock rates wnters dunng November aad December
proposed diac:haqe Umita for proc:eaa established should be based on data 1984.
wastewater. from the same time penod. i.e.. aU
The A,ency has dOCWDencation that producnoa data for the same time B. Best Conventional Pailutant Control
Oow ~duction is an acJuevable period. Generally. this time penod (e.g.• Tecirnology Effluent l.Jm1tat1ons
technology for this mdu.try. Industry calendar year) could be that for wtuch Gu1delines (BCT)
aad Apncy studies that coalirm this the sum of the crude proceaa feedatock
ract 111"11 included ill the ruJemaktag rates i.a the greatest. but Ia still
CotiUilenters agreed wtth the
approach that was followed by :he
record Cor this regulatioa. These representative of anuapated feedstock
iDvestiptioa. conclua•vely AgenC"J m 1ts BCI' cost evaluanon and
rates for the duration of the NPDES that the two candidate technologies
demaaatrated that reiiaenes have pemuL
numerous methada available to reduce selected are the most cost e.ffecnve
The next step m this method is to beyond BPT. Even though the A.!Jency
procea wastewater generation or calculate a dally averqe feedstock rate
dlscharp volumes. These studies also found that none or the four regulatory
for each refmery process included in the options that were cons1dered passer'
demoaatrated that the casta and specific determination of effluent limltataoaa.
methods avlllleble are heavily These values may be calculated by
scr coat test for any of the five
dependent oa sate-spealic factors at subcatl!!ones. commeatera argued t..
dividing an luatoncal annual feedatock
each indivtdual refinery. The Agency 'tllte for each process by the number of the actual cost per pound of pollut.ant
has alao aoted that there is a substantial removed would be greater than those
days the procesa was in operation.
downward tread in biatoncaJ water estimated by EPA. It was argued that
These same averase dally process
usage/discharge rates mduatry-wtde the removal cost ratlos presented ll\ :hf
feedstock rates should be used ill the
ft!8ardJeas of en'YU'OamemaJ regulatory calculat1oa of both dally maxamum and Agency's ong~nal BCI' cost evaluatlon
requiremenca. 30-day averase BAT efiluent limitations. report were under-esumated !lecause
There may be aome n~iineriea which This method 11 cona1stent Wlth the filtranon casts were understated and
have already ac!ueved a low Oow procedure the A3ency used to develop removal efficenc1es were overst.: ted. It
condition or CIUlDOt implement Oow the effiuent limltataon factors for the was also pomted out that the scr
reduction due to aite-speafic factors. lD amended regulations and Wlth 40 CFR evaluauon should ~ncorporate ava1lable
1hese cases. improvements to the 122.45. Adchnonally. the da1ly maXUDum updated iniormauon.
exiatiq treatment system des18" or aad 30-day average vanability factors. ~ discussed 1n Secaon III oi r..'u.s
operatioD. or in reiiaery operalln8 which are components of the effluent preamble. the Agency bas revtsed 1ts
practices. may be necessary to meet limitation factors used to denve penzut BCT cast evaluauon to ~ncorporare the
today's amended BAT effluent effluent limitations. reflect short-term updated information referenced 1n the
liautadons. It should be further danfied (i.e.. monthly and dally) dev~ationa from aot1ce of data avadabality publisned on
that the regulation does aot preclude the loq-term (annual averqe) performance. September 20. 1984 (49 FR 37046). The
lmplemencation of other control optioaa The amended BAT limlta for phenolic Apncy also believes that the fiitrat1on
auch as pollutant specific control compounds. total c:hroauum and coats and removal eific1ences used 1.11
tecluUques or other techruques wbich a hexavalent chrolruum are based oa a tla onganal evaluation are reaiisuc.
refinery coaa1ders the most cost- flow model and dally IIWClmWD Nonetheless. 11 coats were understated
efl'ec:tive method to achieve ita pemut vanabdity factors wtuch ere differ-ent and pollutant removals were overstated
ooadibona. than those used to estabUah the BPT as argued. then removal cast ranos
Clanficatioa was sought by regulationL Some BAT permit would fall the BCT cost test by an even
commenters on the method that .Could limitations could be less stnagent than wider margm. wh1ch would not c.ltange
be followed to detenzuae the tbe BPT limitations for a g~ven refinery. the ~ency's OrtiJnal conclu.s1on that
appropriate refinery production rates for even thoqb the BAT and BPT BCI' should be tel equal to aPT for UllS
calculattq maa effluent lilllits. liautataons are calculated uain3 the Industry.
Qu•tioaa were &lao raJ.aed about the same procesa feedatoc:k rates
pouibillty of BAT pollutaat liauta beiq C. Effluent l.Jm1tatJons Gu1delines {r'
determaned ~ accordaace With the Contammated Storm Water Runoff
lea stringent than BPT levels due to proV18aoaa of 40 CFR l.Z:Z.45. These
differences m the procedun:s for oc:cwrences can be caused by the Commenters supported the
calculating BAT and BPT pemut limita. lnclus1on of additional processes and a rematitubon o( allocations for the
232
Federal Reptar I Vol. so. No. 134 I Fnday, July 12. 1985 I Rn.les and ReguLation&
diacharp of contaminated stan~~ watl!r IDUM Jadae whetb.el' a 'f'l!llllatiaa W (g) l1le &enD •eontammated nmotr
nmoff c:.otllmingled wtth proceu '"maior" and tberefOI'II IUbject ta tM ahail mean nmaif which comes into
•aatewater and treaeed IDa reiiDer'• requiNmeat gf a Rqu1atory lmpact contact with any raw matmal,
muent treatment aystem. Comme.aters Analywaa. This ~aticm LS not mlljar intezwediatlt pradact. fintshed product.
recopized tkat storm water nmaff c:&D becal.lll! it does aat fall-,.nthin the b,-product en" wash! product located on
have a s1pificu:ll impact 011 a criteria for major regulatioas estabUahed petroleum minery property.
wastewater treatment syslelll aDd m Excal:h'e Ordf!'l' 12291.
f41L12 L' · n
arsued lhat ailocation• ue appropriae.
for both caatamia.ated and vm. Repla.tery Fluibili.ty AA.U,- 3. ID I 419.12{a), the tabla ia amended
uncantamulated runoff. In additiaa. Under tile Regalatary FlexiballtJ Act. 5 aa fallows:
clanficatiGna were requested oa the U.S.C. 8D'1 et aeq.. EPA must pn!pare • A. UDder ibe headin1 ""En8fish 1IJ'D'ts
Agency"s definitiaa ol COAtammatad Regulatory FUuubtlity AnaiysLSfor all (pounds per 1.000 bbl of feedstock)-. ill
nmolf and ill iDcuUaas ID i:Dclude oaly replabana that ban a aipuftcant the first column apposate "'auifide··.
water which comes into direct coar.ad impact an a sabatantial number of smaD '"0.53" ia revtaed ta read "O.o53"'.
wtth raw maaenab rx pea'OI.euza entitles. Tha Asency does not beiieYe
produc&s (Le.. apaaad or sp&lled aal) ar that today's MlemaJdnt wtll ha•e a
B. Under tbe headina "'EzuJUsh mitl
to extend its caverap ta nmaff from (p01111da per 1.000 bbl of feedatac:k)",
•i8mficant impact on any segment of th. oppos&le "'salfide'" 111 the second caiman.
staraae areas ar taak farma where. petroleum refmina mdusay. larse or
1deally, ao dired can tad~ "'.Zt" ia nmaed Ia read '"tl02t".
smaD.lbe Agency has oat. therefore.
The A&eacy"s intent iD promulpq prepared a formal analysis for thzs C. Under the headin1 ''English anits
storm water runoff limltatlona •• to regula tioa. (pQund.a per 1.000 bbl of feedstock)",
provide a mechanism Cor the control of opposite "hexavalent chromium"'. m the
storm ...'" wbea mia waste srreem ia. IX. OMB llariaw 6nrt coluam '"O.tcr is revised to read
or is very likety to be. contaminated bJ This replation wu mbrmtted to tbe "0.01.".
direct contact with raw. intermediate or Office a( Management and Bud3et for 'f4~ [,I.IRald'J
final products. The collection and nrview u requued by Execuuve Order
treatment ol storm water runoff that ia 12291. Any commenta from OMB to EPA 4-6. In § 419.32(a). in the second
uncontaminated caD be costly and and any El'A responees to thoee column o{ the table. ~nder "'Metrn: !.lmt3
burden the refinery's wastewater CODUDe!IU ant avllllable !or public (I(llograma per 1.CDOm.ll of feedstock)",
treatment ~tem. For this reuoa. the inspectlon at Roam MZ-104. U.S. EPA. oppOSite "sulfide•. '"O.SZ'" IS revtsed to
Aaency wtaha to eDCDW'Ille reBneries 40'1 M Street. SW ~ Washington. D.C. read ""0.22".
which segregate unc.oatamiDated s&mm tram 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday
water nmaff from contaminated 14~2 (AI!Mitdlldl
t.hrausb Friday, e:ic:!udiaa Federal
wastewater streama fa continue this holidays. 1. Tbe table in I 419.S2{b)(1). ander
nactice. The regulation. however. does the column ~.000 baZTels of feedstoclc
ot require sucb segregation. x. Li.al ol Subjacta ill • aR Part m per atre!Dil dar.~ the figures 125.0 to
Oue cammenter arsued that the total Petrolem"L wale!' pollution cantral. 124.9'" and ""%CD to Z44.9" are re9'ued to
organic carbon ('TOC} and ail and grease Wast.,.,uer treabnem and dispoeal. read -us.a to 149.9" and ""200..0 to
discharge C'!tena Cor the control of Dated: July 1. 19BS. 224.9." respec:tzVeiy.
contammated nmaff effectively aets
storm water runoff lirrutatians. A. Jam-a-. H 4a1z. 41S.ZZ. .,.._ 41t.a, .-,,._a
The 110 ms/1 TOC and 15 mg/1 oil md Aez&ns Adllr11U1rll"alllae [AmencMd)
grease applicability cntena far BAT/ For the reuaaa • t 0111111 the a. Secticms 4l9.1%(e). 419 Z!!te).
BCT ef!luent tiuutatlons apply only to preambi& EPA • amead.iJ:I8 40 CFR ~ 419.32(eL 419.42:(e), and 419.SZ{e) are
cantammated nmaff as defined at 419 u failow: amended by remavtng the paragraph
l419.11{g). These wtues are mtended to headfns and the word •reserved" and by
serve as threshold c:ritena !or tncludins PART 41~ETAOL.EUII ~FIMING
addina the ronoW1ft8 text
contaminated runoff effluent limitaeiona POINT~ c.ATEGOAY
(e.a.. phenolic :ompounds. total f•1t 1"'-"t .lw'LdON 9'11~
1. The rn~thon"'ty
d'tation for Part 419 ,...,. . . . .lll tftll e.;r.. of ~
chromnnn. total suspended sottcb) in
NPOES permits. These C'!twria or odm-
ammmes to read as follow.: NCSucUon ~· t.y tt1e aJ~ p r =•non ,.
~S.C.. 30\. J04 (bl. (cl. (eJ, and . . IM.a ptaC*** ~ lliiChlil' ~ 11'
hm•taaons may be applied to such
discharres oa a ca...by-caae basis at (11. JOe (bJ ami (cJ. m (bJ ~d (c:J. md 501. Ciiil . . . . . . . . . . . . ~
the pemrittlft! authonty's disaeuon. For

Federal Water Poauliaa Cwa1r0l Acz u • • • •
anended (dle Act!: 3:1 U.S.C. 1311. 1314 (b),
exam9le. a parttcalar starmwatf!'l' f"'mVif (cl. (at. and (aJ. 13tts (bl ami (cl. 13'\7 (bt md (e) E/flaftrt LiiiUtlrtkm~ trw
discharge that normally meets the (ct. ad 131'1.: • S!tlt. II._ .Ptlb. L.IZ-600: ft ContrnnmafJI!d Runaf!. The fallowq
threshold cnteria may be of a nature SiaL 1567. PliO. L. ~Z17. efflueat limilatioa.s camt1tutw the
where it coald become 'l'f!rJ quat~tit'y and qn.ljtJ of pollutants M
Z. Sectiaa 419.11ls amended by
contaminated by an accidentaJ sptD. In revtSlftl paragraph (b) and addin&
poUutant prope.rtles controlled by tttiB
suc:ft 11tuattoM 1t may be &pp!'O'lmate to paragraph (8J to read as Coilawa: paragraph md llttrrbatabl-e to
1mpose the TOC. oH and grease and/ ar cantaminated nmaff. wbJc may be
othf!'l' values as effluent liuutatiOM or to
at least reqaire periodic smnplint md
t •11.11 _.dllt.ud
• •
tdiiDiftlo-.
•
dlacbarsed after the a'P'Piicat1an af :he
best pnc:ticabie eantrol tedmolou
analysis rar such pollutants to IDOtlitar (b) Tbe term "nmolr' shaD asea.n tba
currently aftrlab}e by a point soarce
the ucure altuch di.lc."aarps. now alatonzl wa.tu reswtma .era.. 1ub;ect to dzia sabpcrt.
preapitar:ioa comiq 1ft~ conta.ct w.da. t1) If was&ewatar a:Jnst.ta solely of
"II. Executive Order ~ centa.adnated :"'IDOi! and ia aot
pea'Oieua .refiauy p.ropertv.
Under Exacutive Order 1229'1. El'A • commanlfed or tZ'eollt.ed wtth process
233
Federal Register I Vol. 50. No. 134 I Friday, July 12. 1985 I Rules and Regulations 28523
lllodStewcner. 1t may be d1scharsed if it 1411.-EHiuent limitations guidelines 419.23(a). 419.26(a). 419.32(a). 419.33(a).
does not exceed 15 mg/1 oil and grease representing the degree of effluent 419.36(a). 419.42(a). 419 43(a). 419.46(a).
and 110 mg/1 total orsanic carbon (TOC) reduction attalnllble by the application of 419.52(a). 419.53(a), and 419.56(a) are
the best available technology economically
based upon an analysis of any smgle achievable (BAT).
amended by re\'lsang footnote (1) to the
grab or composite sample. • table to read " 1 See footnote following
(2) If c'Jntaminated runoff is table in § 419.13(~ tl.
(f) Effluent Limitations for
commingled or treated with process Contaminated Runoff. The following H 419.13, 419.23, 419.33, and 419.53
wastewater. or 1f wastewater consisting effiuent limitations constitute the [Amended]
ROiely of contaminated runoff which quantity and quality of pollutants or 13. Sections 41913. 419.23, 419.33. and
exceeds 15 mg/1 oil and grease or 110 pollutant properties controlled by this 419.53 are amended by adding a new
mg/1 TOC is not commingled or treated paragraph and attnbutable to paragraph (c) to read as follows:
with any other type of wastewater. the contaminated runoff. which may be
quantity of pollutants discharsed shall discharged after the application of the 1419.-Effluent limitatioN! guidelines
best ava1lable technology econom1cally representing the degree of effluent
not exceed the quantity determined by reduction attainable by the application of
mulbplyins the Dow of contaminated achievable by a point source subject to tile beat available technology economically
runoff as determined by the pennit this subpart. achievable (BAT).
writu times the concentrations listed in (1) If wastewater consists solely of
the following table: contammated runoff and is not
commingled or treated with process (c)(t) In add1t10n 10 the prO\'ISions
wastewater. il may be discharsed if it contaaned abo\·e pertai.nang to COD.
does not exceed 110 mg/1 total orsanic ammonia and sulftde. any ex1shng poant
carbon (TOC) based upon an ar.alys1s of source subject to this 5ubpart must
any single grab or compos1te sample. achie\'e the following effluent
(2) If contaminated runoff is hmlt&llons representang the degree of
comm1ngled or treated w1th process effluent reduction attamable by the
wastewater. or 1f wastewater consisting application of the best a\'a1lable
Meine ...... (kdei!J8ms per
solely of contaminated runoff which technology econom1call~· ach1e\'able
1,000 m• OIIIOwl (BAT):
exceeds 110 mg/1 TOC is not
1100.---·- <18 26 commingled or treated with any other (1) For each of rhe regulated pollutant
Tss ______
33. 21
type of wastewater. the quantit~· of parameters listed below. the effluent
coo• --- - - - - - - 360 180 limitation for a g1\'en refiner'} IS the sum
pollutants discharged shall not exceed
=~(iM~-·1
15 8
035 017 the quantity detennined by multiplying of the products of each effluent
TOial ctwvnwuon -·- · - - -1 073 oa the flow of contaminated runoff as limitation factor times the appi.Jcable
HuavUIN c:IWOmun-- - -
pH-------- ,.,
0062
,.,
0028
determined by the permit writer times process feedstock rate, calculated as
pro\'1ded i.n 40 CFR 122.45(b). Apphcable
the concentrations listed in the
Engllsll '"" (p0uncllp81' following table: production processes are presented in
1,000 gallans 01 llowl
~ --- ---i- o.co

028
11.22
0 Ut
........
Append1x A. by process type. The
prucess 1denhficahon numbers
presented an this Appendix A are for the
-.....
coo ·---
01 MIS.,_ _-
_-_-_ -_ 30 1.5 A-.gaot convenience of the reader. They can be
013 0087
cross-referenced in the De~·elopment
~~~·~~
00029 00014 lor 30
0.0060 OJIOCI5 Document for Effluent Limitations
Cllr-.rn - -
Heuvalen1 0.00052 Q.00023
Guidelines, New Source Performance
IIOIBIC88CI
pH -- • - - - ·-- (I) PJ
Standards. and Pretreatment Standards
1 1n ............ (UOgrams pat
any caM IR...-.:tl ... epollcenl C8n d&iRUiGII&Ib ll'al
1.000 m 1 ol llowl
for the Petroleum Refimng Point Source
me c:llland& - conc:enllaiiDn n .,. - . - - 1 000
Category (EPA 440/1-82/014). Table 111-
mgll (1 000 1111"11. IIIII llllfl'llllllnV autroonr, may SUIIShlllle
·oc ;a a ;.a;-..,-~ , on hau 01 COD A TOC eflluenlllmllabOn
7, pp. 49-54.
Shall 1111 lleMICI on _,.._ c1111a 1rom 111e PllfiiCUI8t remery Pllano'tc: - loiAAPJ-r. Q.35 0 17
c:orre:atn TOC 10 BOO.. II ., IIIII ~~ 01 lie Tow ctvomoum -- 080 o.21
-
pemoo~~mg 8UIIQIIy, aaeauate _.eta101 c1111a are 1101 avail-
able lh& ellluenl .............. lor TOC 11181 be~ M
~110 or 2 2 111 1 10 uw 111111a111e atrr.-t ~ tor
HeGvalam ctwam:um _ _
COD ' - - - - - - ·---
0062
9110
0 028
110 I BAT attr=:,;orn•!a'-
1~ me range o1 a.o 111 9 o
99 419.13, 419.23, 419.33, 419.43, and 419.53 Ptlanohc CQmiiOIIIIdS 14MPI
TOW c:toroiiiiUm • _ _ __
Engllsll -
00029
(llcluncllpat
1,000 (llllons ol tlow)
00014
Ponuta
;.,or~l'tiiBIJIQII8'1Y I Mammurn lor
111r 1 day
A-age ol
~~
,.,._
cansacub¥8
clllys snaM
(Amended] 00050 00018
" - * " c:llrOmun - 000052 000023
9. Sections 419.13, 419.23. 419.33. COO'-- 30 15
u.mc ..... {kll0gr81111 pat
419 43. and 419.53 are amended by • 1n - ..noct1 me appllcafll can d8m0nslnlte 11181
C8!l8 on 1 000 QbC meta'S ot
remuvang the entries and effluent 1118 chlonCia IIIP concenll'aDOn ., lhe aHI&Ianl axe-. 1,000
mg'l ,, 000 ppm) ... permllllng IIUIIICJnly may !IUIISIIWtll
,._IDCkl
limitations for phenolic compounds. TOC u a INII'-81 ., .... ol COO A TOC ~-liOn Prlanoloc compaundl I•MPJ. ~~---
111110 1111 llasad on a111uan1 11111a tram ._ pariiCular refinery
total chromium. and hexavalent WI'K:'I correlates TOC II! BOO. II on 1118 IUdgemanl 01 ""' Crude 0 037 0 003
pent'IIIII'IJ BUI/IQnly -=amta c:orTIIIallon dala 818 1101 8¥81~ Cradung and c:alung 0 •19 0 102
chromiUm from the tables in paragraph able ll'.a 111111111'11 hrnllaDOnll lor TOC 1111811 be 811811hshad .a Aspllall - - - --·- - · - 0.226 0 055
tal. a ratiO ot 2 2 Ill 1 Ill lila IIJIIIaiiiB 11""-1 11m1111110111 lor Lulie - • - - - - ·- 1 055 0 257
BOD. Aalclmwlg and ..~ 0377 0092
10. Sections 419.13. 419.23. 419.33. Total C11r-.m.
419.43. and 419.53 are further amended 11.Sections 419.23. 419.33, 419.43, and Crude - - 0030 0011
419.53 are amended in newly designated Cr-"'9-~ 0340 0118
by redesignatmg paragraph (e) as (f).
redesignating paragraph (d) as (e). paragraph (d) by changing "419.13(c)" to Alpll8ll --
Lulie-. - ----· -
-=-· . 0183
Q.855
00&1
0297
read "419.13(d)". Aaformong - lllh'.alleln ., 0305 0 1()6
redesignating paragraph (c) as (d). and ......... CIWomounr
rev1smg the redesignated paragraph (fl 12. Sections 419.12 (a) and (c). 419.13 Crude 00019
to rPad as follows: (a). 41916 (a) and (c). 419.22(a). Cracklf'IJ 811C1 COI<•"I(I I 00218'
234
Federal Repater I Vol. 50, No. 134 I Friday, July 12, 1985 I Rules and Regulations
BAT .._.llnlllallan
llaar
... ..,_.,.. ........... --.Ill...

........ -
l'lllullniiJI ....... ll"ll*lr
*'t,~
.n,lellr a. c:a.IWIIc: .........·------t.__,:'o
_.. TOIII ......... _. llllyldon . . -
. •CAJ---------1
-
LIM-----
0.0117
005CI
CI.CI053
0.11248
Mill!: . . . ~ lllr
1.000 m•c1 ~ Note: 30 day averqe effiuentllmJtalion for
10
Rlilanl*lg llldllkyldan- 0.0118 0.111188
0....
_,._.. ~
01137 DDDI
phenolic compounds (4AAP),Ib/day=(0.003)
(225)+(0.038) (45)+(0.019) (5)+(0.0110)
~ ... ca~q_ D418 D.I02 (3)+(D.032) (tO)=Z.98lb/day
11.228
""-* ~ C4MP): u.. I 01111
Q.Diill
D.257 • • • • •
0.... G.O'I3 ........... dlyldan_ D.3T1 00112 15. Section 419.14 is revised to read as
a--. ......._
........._
011031
0.147 CI.03I r.-. ~ foUowa:
Allplllll_ 0078 0.011 0.... D03D DOll
~ CI.340
LIM Cl.388 Q.IBJ 0.111 §411.14 Effluent limitations guldellnee
0.132 D032 Alplld 0113 01114
r.-."""""""'
CllnlmUII:and dy!llllan - LIM 0.155 G.297 repreeenUng ttle degree of effluent
0111111---
a.a.g ... eolw'll-
.-.-.
a.-
............
Don
Dill
CI.D84
Ull9
G.OD4
0041
0022
0.101
a..._
~
AIINII-
......__
Alllamwlg Md ....,.... -
c:flnlllam
CI.3Dii
D0011
00211
0.0117
D 108
DDODI
DODI8
00053
reduCtion attainable by the application of
the best conven:lonal pollutant control
tec:tlnology (BCT):
(a) Any existing point source subject
Aelarlllng ... lllllyl8llan -
0....
~
a.a.g ...... -
D107
ODCI07
Dll37
DODCXI =-. ... ...-: Dos.q

00118
D02.a
00088
to this subpart must achieve the
following effluent limitatrona
.-......
LIM .
D0078
00011
00182
D110314
D0011
001117
representing the degree or effluent
Aalarnlng . . . .ayla1lan- CI.DIIII 0.0031
Plwlalc _ _ . . . ~ of the best conventional pollutant
(2) See the comprehensive example in
0....-
~ .........._ 0.013
Dl47
D003
11.031
control technology (BCT];
----
Subpart 0, l419.43(c)(2).
14. Section 419.43lsamended by
............. ...,....._
LIM
T«**~
0071
D.3111
0.132
DOll
DOlO
D032
8CT-"'-' llmllallafle
A..agecl
0.... 0.011 0.001 lar30
adding a new paragraph (c) to read as ~ ... ca!q_ G. I l l DCMI
.....
......,.. ... ...,.__
follows: D.DI4 0.022 ~
LIM 11.211 D 101 Nil l!llallld
0.107 D037
§411.43 Effluent limitation. guldellnee
,..,. ....tlng ..... degree of effluent a... _____
.......... c:flnlllam
DDD07 DODCXI
reduction lttalnable by ..... application of Cw:lung ........ _ 00071 D 110314
AapiWI 00041 0.0011
..... bat 8V8IIable techiOiogy ecGIIOI'I'IIcally D0112 DODI7
aoo. - - - - 227 12D
LIM·-·----· 151 ID1
echiev-. (BAT). TSS - - - - - - - - - -
Alllarn*lg ... dlyldan- CLDD68 D0031 01_,
pH 0...---·-
_ _._ _ _ __ •• 37
• • • • • C'l
L---.....L.---
1'1
(c)(1) In addition to the provisions Engbll - (pauroda par
contained above pertaining to COD, 1.00011111111~
(Z) Example AppUcation of Effluent
ammonia and sulfide. any existing point Limitations GuideUnes as Applicable to aoo,, ________ 10 425
source subject to this subpart must Phenolic Compounds, Hexavalent -------1 Ill 3.1
achieve the following emuent
limitations representing the degree of
Chromium. and Total Chromium. ,.
TSS
01 ... ca.-'------1 2.5
C'l ,.,
13
Tbe foUowing example presents the W'. . . lfte . . . . IJI6.Q 10 l.fl

etr:ueul reduction attamable by the derivation of a BAT phenolic compound
I
application of the beat available (4AAP) effluent limitation (30-day (b) Tbe limits set forth in paragraph
technology economically achievable average) for a petroleum refinery permiL (a) of this section are to be multiplied by
(BAT): The methodology is also appUca ble to the following factors to calculate the
(i) For each of the regulated pollutant hexavalent chromium and total maximum for any one day and
par=t"'''teters listed below, the effluent chromium. maximum average of daily values for
limitation for a given refinery is the sum thirty consecutive days.
of the products of each emuent (1) Size factor.
limitation factor Umes the applicable
process feedstock rate, calculated as .........,..,_ -
"'-
lllecllllacll
1.(1110 1.0110 lltll Ill ....... l l l r - dly
provided in 40 CFR 122.45(b). Applicable 11111/CIIr
production processes are presented in 100
&..aDIInl4.8 102
t. AlrnalpiWtc: ...... - 250111481 118
Appendix A. by process type. The a. a........,. 110 100 Ill 741 1.111
process TcTentifi"cation numbers a.v-~ ...... 78 750 Ill Ill 1.211
100 Ill 1241 1.38
presented in this Appendix A are for the TCIIIIIC!!$..-CQ Zl5 125.0 Ill, ....., 1.50
convenience of the reader. They can be I. Alld 111111W11C cnddng 25 150.0 . . . . . 1.17
cross-referenced in the Development IO.Itwdlaa..,lll Ill
Document for Effluent Limitations r.-. __... .., ODIIilll . . - (Z) Process fador.
Guidelines, New Source Performance CIQ 41
Skmdards, and PretreGtment Skmdards 18.AIINI ......... s
for the Petroleum Refining Point Source TCIIIII ..... . . - s
Category (EPA 440/1-8Z/at4). Table DI- II. . . . . . I
7, pp. 49-61. TCIIII._ . . - CIJ I
'-111111 :t.•---------1
1.5111 SAl _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___. Da
017
235
Federal Register I Vol. 50, No. 134 I Friday, July 12, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 28525
351DU8.
"'-~
··-
...
..._
010
best conventional pollutant control
technology by a point source subject to
this subpart.
•.5111 SG OJI5 (1) If wastewater consists solely of
5.5 Ill 5.1111 107
contaminated runoff and is not
IIOIIIUI .•
11511111.1111-
-------- I 17
1.27 commingled or treated with process
701DH8 1.38 wastewater, it may be discharged if it Ool .... . - - - - - - -
7,10711(1 - · -
10 Ill • • - - - - - - - - - - · -
---- '51
1 .. does not exceed 15 mg/1 oil and grease IIIH-- - - - - - - - - ·
II! Ill 1.!19 - 171 baaed upon an analysis of any amgle
IOIDIG 185
15111111
100111 tOG
----
---
1.12
1.31 (2) If contaminated runoff is aoo. . - -· ----- - ... 55
10.5111 101111
11.1: 1D .1 48
tt 5111 ttJII
·--
2.51
2.73
218
commingled or treated ";th process
wastewater. or if wastewater consisting 01-.--------
TSS · - - - - - - - - - . ••
II
------ solely of contaminated runoff which pH---------·- I 'I
,.
12.0 Ill 12.41- 3.2•
12.5 Ill 12.11 3S3
exceeds 15 mg/1 oil and grease is not
13 0 1D ISG - - - - - - - - - - - ·
13 5 Ill IS.IIII ..
3 ..
commingled or treated with any other
'WoduD 1M ..... of ILO 1o 1.0.
••oor~w 431
type of wastewater, the quantity of (b) The limits set forth in paragraph
pollutants discharged shall not exceed (a) of this section are to be multiplied by
(3) See the comprehensive example in the quantity determined by multiplying the following factors to calculate the
Subpart D. I 419.43(b)(3). the flow of contaminated runoff as maximum for any one day and
(c) The followms allocations determined by the permit writer times maximum average of daily values for
constitute the quanbty and quality of the concentrations listed in the thirty consecutive days
pollutants or pollutant properties followmg table: (1) Size factor.
controlled by this paragraph and
attributable to ballast, which may be BCT~~Ior
OOiialiiW4IIiCIIIIIICIII
t.ooolllllor....._....,__ I s-1-
disc!:n:e;:ld after the application of best
conventional pollutant control ..... ,.,::141 .. -·- -- 011
250 ID G I - - - - - - - - - ---- 095
technology by a point source subject to 50.01117•1------- - - - liM
this subpart, in addition to the discharge "0 1D IIIII -·- · - - - - - - - - ---· I 13
ollc•:..ed by paragraph (b) of this section. 100 0 Ill t2• 9 --- -· --- --------·--
125 0 Ill 1 • 1 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1.23
I 35
The allocation allowed for ballast water 150.0 or.- ,.,
flow, as kg/cu m [lb/1000 gal), shall be
based on those ballast waters treated at
the refinery.
~~~-=----~----::::-_=:1
IIH---- -···
___--f
--~.___ __ I__.. _
?,
...
')
_._
-
2t
(')
(2) Process factor.
..,._
-.....
4--veOI .._ , _ Z.G · - - - . - - - - - - - 051
2.5 Ill 3 G · - • ·- - - - - - · - - · - - · -- 083
10r30 07•
aoo.- - - - - - uo 351D •All - - - - - · - - - - · ;
01111
•.a Ill 5 •• ·- - - - - - - - - - - ;
IICIIUCMCI TSS------------,
01- ar-·----;
G.2l
013 5.5111511 - - - - - - - - - - ;
1.0 Ill e.•--·-----------1
100
101
IIH--·------t I 'I 1.5 ID 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - i 111
70 Ill 7 G - - --·--- - · - - - · - f 1.29
_ ' Wcthon the raJ11f! of aD Ill 114
75111711-----------
e..oID L • 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - i
'.,
IS3
BOD.---- - - - - - t 0 oq CI.02II 18. Section 419.".4 is revised to read as 187
TSS-------
()ol_.,__- -
---- 0033
0015
0021
00011
follows:
1.5 Ill Ill -------·-- - - - · . --· -
IOIDIG - · - - - - - - - - - - · · .
15 or .-a• ·----- -------
112
1811
~------t __~~·~,_j~~r~l-- §411..24 Effluent llrnltatlona guldellnea
n~~~rnentlng the degree of effluent
reduction attainable u
ate eppllcatlon of
(3) See the comprehensive example In
the beat conventlonlfpoftutant control Subpart D. l419.42(b)(3).
rss ______
BOD. -- .. -·. - - -_- - 040 0.21 lec:hnology (BCT). (c) The provisions of I 419.14(c) apply
G.2l 017
""' !!"'! ;:w:a
. -- - - 0121 0.1167 (a) Any existing point source subject to discharge of process wastewater
~ ·-·------~ I' I 1'1 to this subpart must achieve the pollutants attributable to ballast water
•w-. 111e qng~~ or e.o 111 1 o following effluent limitations by a point source subject to the
representing the desree of effluent provisions of this subpart.
(d) The quantity and quality of reduction attainable by the application (d) The quantity and quality of
puoulanLH or pollutant properties of the best conventt~ollutant pollutants or pollutant properties
controlled by this paragraph attributable control technology ~): controlled by this paragraph.
to once-through cooling water, are attributable to once-through cooling
excluded' from-the discharge allowed by water. are excluded from the d1acharge
p::~cg:o.t:!':. (b) of this section. allowed by paragraph (b) of th1s sect1on
reJ Effluent Limitations for (e) Effluent Limitations for
Contaminated Runoff. The following Contaminated Runoff. The following
emuent limitations constitute the effluent limitations constitute the
quantity and quality of pollutants or quantity and qu&lity of pollutants or
pollutant properties controlled by this pollutant properties controlled by this
paragraph and attributable to paragraph and attributable to
contaminated runoff which may be _____ j contaminated runoff which may be
BOQ,.-
discharged after the application of the TSS-- ·-----l discharged after the application of the
236
28526 Federal Register I Vol. SO, No. 134 I Friday, July 12, 1985 I Rules and Regulations
best conventional pollutant control BCT ....,_ limlaDOnl technology by a point source subject to
technology by a point source subject to this subpart.
-
A.-.geol
this subpart. daJIWva--. (1) If wastewater consists solely of
lar30
(1) U wastewater consists solely of contaminated runoff and is not
Clays UIBD
contaminated runoff and is not IIIII aC88CI commingled or treated with process
comminaJed or treated with process wastewater, it may be discharged if it
wastewater, it may be discharged if it 011111111 g r - . - · · - - 111 51 does not exceed 15 mg/1 oil and grease
does not exceed 15 mg/1 oil and grease pH.------------ I 'I (')
based upon an analys:s of any single
based upon an analysis of any single grab or composite sample.
grab or composite sample. (2) If contaminated nmorr is
(2) If contaminated runoff is 121 15 commingled or treated with process
commingled or treated with process BODo - - - - - · - · - · - -
TSS. ---..··-·------1 83 5.25 wastewater, or if wastewater consisting
wastewater. or if wastewater consisting ()d and.,_ .... --·-- 31 2.1 solely of contaminated runoff which
solely of contaminated runoff which pH--·-·---·----- (') C'l
exceeds 15 ms/1 od and grease is not
exceeds 15 1118/1 oil and grease is not •w-. .. rang~~al6.011110. commingled or treated with any other
comMingled or trea!ed with any other type or wastewater, the quantity of
type or wastewater. the quant&ty of (b) The limits set forth in paragraph pollutants discharged shall no: exceed
pollutants discharged shall not exceed (a) of this section are to be mult1phed by the quantity determmed by multiplying
the quantity detennined by multiplying the following factors to calculate the the flow or contaminated runoff as
the flow of contaminated runoff as maximum for any one day and determined by the pennit writer times
determined by thP permit wnter times maximum average of daily values for the concentrations listed in the
the concentrations listed in the thirty consecutive days. following table:
following table: (1) Size factor.
1,000 IIIII al feaclllocll per etraam day
.._ .... 241 - - - - - - - 0.7:1

2!5 0 to 481 - - - - - - - - - - - - - · 078
!500 to 741 -·----· 083
750 1D I l l · - - · - - - - - - - - · ; 081
1000 1D 124 8. - - - - - - - - - - - · 088
1250111 1 4 1 1 - - - - - - - - - 101
llaDic- ~per 1500ar ~--------- 11:1
1,000 111 1 alllalll
aoo. --- -·- ---- --

rss · - - - - - - - - -
...
33
21
21
(2) Process factor. SOO.----·------
TSS • ... ... •
48.
33
21
21
8111_cr-
pH _
01 _ _.._
--··---·
_ _ __ 15 8 011 IIIII or- --- ·--·-· 15 8
(') 1'1 pH --· -·-·- - 1'1 1'1
En!lfisll lftll IIIOUA!IS par
, ,000 gallonl 01 Howl
.._ lllan 4 41 -- - - - - - - - - - - 07:1
aoc. -·- - - - 040 022 4 SID 5 49 - ..._ .. ·-·-------1 010
011 aoo. ·- ------- 040 G.22
G.28 011 5.5 ID 5 88 -·- - - - --·---------- TSS ·-. -- ·-·. --·---- 0.28 011
TSS
pH ..
·--- · - - - - -
011 and 7GIII8 - - - - 013
I 'I I,
0017 10 ID 141 ....· - · - · - - - - - - - -
6.51D811------·--------I
7 0 1D 741 --- ... -· -· - - - · --·---
011
101
117
011111111 . , _ - ---·----
pH --------1
013
1'1
0017
1'1
· - ... ,... 11/18011110 80 1D

------1
7.5 1D 7 88 - - - - - -..
141-·--·-·------·-
121
131
I Wilfwllhe I8JI08 11/180 to 80
151D 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 1 151
17. Section 419.34 is re'\ised to read as 10 1D 1 4 1 - · - - - - - - - - - · - 1.111 18. Section 419.44 is revised to read as
Fnllnw!' 15 ar . . . - · - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 172 follows:
f 419.34 Effluent Umltatlons Guidelines 1418.44 Effluent llmltatlona guidelines
representing the degree of effluent (3) See the comprehensive example in representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the eppllclltton of Subpart D. t 419.42(b}(3). reductton attainable by the application or
the beat conventional pollutant control (c) The provisions 9ft 419.14(c) apply the best conventional pollutant control
technology (BCT). to discharges of process wastewater technology (BCT).
(a) Any existing point aource subject pollutants attributable to ballast water (a) Any existing point source subject
to this subpart must achieve the by a point source subject to the to this subpart must achieve the
followms effluent limitations provisions of this subpart. following effluent limitations
rPpresenting the degree of effiuent (d) The quantity and quality of representing the degree or effluent
at=UUL.uUD attainable by the application pollutants or pollutant properties reduction attainable by the application
of the best conventional pollutant controlled by this paragraph, of the best conventional pollutant
control technology (BCT): attributable to once-through coolins control technology (BCT):
water, are excluded from the discharge
acr...._.......,. allowed by paragraph (b) of this section. BCT .,..._.. linlllallelna
A--seal
(e) Effluent Limitations for A..agt~OI
......... -:.w:--
---
Contaminated Runoff. The following ~1,...
• ..,1 - - emuent limitations constitute the Garii8CUIMI
- CIIIY8.,.. quantity and quality of pollutants or clays 1111811
lllllhceaa
pollutant properties controlled by this
. . . . . . . ~per paragraph and attributable to
1,000rn 1 al~
contaminated runoff which may be
:·---·----~ Mil
234
114
14.11
discharged after the application of the
best conventional pollutant control ~--·--_1
237
Federal Register I Vol. 50, No. 134 I Friday, July 12, 1985 I Rules and Regulations 28527
BCT llf!Wnlllmllallanl technology by a point source subJect to BCT ...,.,..,. lmllallana

this subpart.
- ....
A-.geOI A-.geat
~ 01 _,..,.. praperty
tar.,
Maximum
1
-&~luea (1) U wastewater consists solely of
-t~
1117 contaminated runoff and is not ~
~
ftlll..-d commingled or treated with process ~--1
Nil eiiCII8CI
wastewater, it may be discharged if it 01...:1 . , __ _ _ _
()II !fld Gnla!9 18.2 1.5 does not exceed 15 rng/1 oil and grease 171 a1
aH · - - - - -··---- I' I I' I based upon an analysis of any single pH 1'1 1'1
(2) U contaminated runoff is
commingled or treated with process eoo, ________ _
~--------~
178 8.1 182 10.2
12.5 80 wastewater, or if wastewater consisting TSS .. _, - -
0111111.,_ _ -_
-_-_
-_· 132 84
.:a....--.-----
:;, .u...
pH
5.7 3.0 solely of contaminated runoff which LO 3.2
1'1 I' I pll - - - - · - ·-------·- • 1'1 1'1
exceeds 15 mg/1 oil and grease is not
1
I Wllhn tile fW9I 0180 fD 80
commingled or treated with any other W'GWIIII8 . . . of 8011190
type of wastewater, the quantity of (b) The limits set forth in paragraph
(hl ThP Jh.,it!l RPt fnrth in J1Rregraph pollutants discharged shall not exceed (a) of this section are to be multiphed by
(a) of this section are to be multiplied by the quantity determined by multJpl)ing the following factors to calculate the
the foilowing factors to calculate the the Dow of contaminated runoff as maximum Cor any one day and
maximum for any one day and detennined by the permit writer times maximum average of daily values for
maximum average of daily values for the concentrations listed in the thirty consecutive days.
thirty consecutive days. following table: (1) Size factor.
(1) Size factor.
1,000 bill at ,_.IOCII par 111raam day I SaetaciOr
L.IISII r-.an 4118 - - - - - - - - - - - · - - 0 71 .... lllan 124 9 - - --· --·· 073

50 0 Ill 74 9 ----·- 0 74 1250 Ill 1489 - - - - · . _., __ . - - -· 0 76
75.010888_____ 081 1500 Ill 1748. ·-- - - - - - - ---- -·-- 083
10110 Ill 124 9 - - - - - - - - - · 088 175 Ill 18811 . - - - - · -----· - · . -·- 091
1250111 1 4 8 9 - - - - · - - - - - - 097 200 0 Ill 224 9 ----- -- .. - - -· • .. -- 099
1'i00 1t1 1749 . - ------ I 05 o
225 01 "aa1ar _ ·- --·-- -· ·- - . . _ 104
-
17501111999 - · - · - - · - - - - - · - - 1.14 Melrlc unl1 (ldlciiJarns per
2011.0 Ol.,.alar-------· ·--- 1 19 1,000 m1 of flow)
(2) Process factor.
(2) Process factor.
8001-------·
TSS---·-·-----1
48
33 21
Oland .,.... .• ·- - - - · • 15 8
pH·---------- 1'1 1'1
Less lllan 84a ·-· - - . - 075

85111741---·---·--- - - · - -·-·- 082
U-;a L"l;i."\ 849
L51D749 __ --
_-_-_
--_-
_ -_
-_-, 081 0112
088 7.5 Ill 7 9 9 - - - - - - · - - - . - --·
7 5 Ill 7 99 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.00 eoo. ---- -··-----· 040
028
022
018
80111849 - ·--- --- . __ .,__ _ 100
108 TSS - - -· - - - - i 8 5 Ill 8 99 - - · - ·--· · - · - -·- ·-·---- 110
!1 C! Ill 8 49 -·· - - -·-·- - - - - - 01 81111 1PUM - - - - -·- 013 0087 8 0 Ill 1149 ..... ·-- .. -- ,_..__ 120
8 5 ID 8 99 --- --· -· -- ·--·---·-·- - 119 111 1'1 130
a o ~~"• 9 49 __ . __ - - - - - - - · - - · 1.29 pH - ·-----------·------·. 115 111 a 99 .... -------- _ --- -·-·-·
100 Ill 10 4 1 1 - - - - - - - - ·-- . - 142
8.5111 a99 - - - - - - - · 141 I Wl1rwl tile . . . , at 8 0 Ill 8 0 154
100 Ill 1049 - - - - - · - - - - - 153 10 5 Ill 10 99 - --- - - - - -·---. -
11 0 Ill 11 411 - ·- --- --· · - - .. • .... • 168
10 SID 1099 - · - - - - - - - - - - - 187
110 1D 1U8 .• -- 182 19. Section 419.54 is revised to read as 1151111199 •• - - - - - - - · - - - - •. -- 183
199
1151111199 ---------~ 198 follows: 12.0 Ill 12.49 ·--- - - - - - - - . . ·---
217
2.15 12511112.99 · - - - - - - - -
120 Ill 12
,.,. •c- 411 · - - · - - · - - · - - - •.
... QQ 13 0 01 graelllr --·-·- -- • • • • • • .• 228
2.34 §419.54 Effluent Dmltatlona guldellnea
130 011P81118r---·----..- 2.44
reduction attainable by the application of (3) See the comprehensive example in
(c) The provisions of l419.14(c) apply the best conventional pollutant control Subpart D. l419.42(b)(3).
to discharges of process wastewater technology (BCT). (c) The provisions of l419.14(c) apply
pollutants attributable to ballast water (a) Any existing point subject to this to discharges of process wastewater
by a pomt source subject to the subpart must achieve the following pollutants attributable to ballast water
provisions of this subpart. effiuent limitations representing the by a point source subject to the
(d) The quantity and quality of degree of effiuent reduction attainable provisions of this subpart.
pollutants or pollutant properties by the application of the best (d) The quantity and quality of
-=c.1.:: _:!;;.:! !:.,; :..'lia pard81'aph, conventional pollutant control pollutants or pollutant properties
attributable to once-through cooling technology (BCT): controlled by this paragraph,
water, are excluded from the discharge attributable to once-through cooling
allowed-by papagraph (b) of this section. water, are excluded from the discharge
!:-! ~~r;J~r 'L!,-::ilaiJC'nsfor aWowed by paragraph (b) of this
Contaminated Runoff. The following section.
emuE'nt lim;talions constitute the (e) Effluent Limitations for
quantity and quality of pollutants or Contaminated Runoff. The following
pollutant properties controlled by this emuent limitations constitute the
paragr~tpb and attnbutable to u.tl:.nls~l* quantity and qu8lity of pollutants or
contaminated runoff which may be 1.000 m 1 of '-111c:kl pollutant properties controlled by this
discharged after the application of the paragraph and attributable to
best conventional pollutant control =-======::!] 288
23.7 contaminated runoff which may be
238
28528 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 134 I Friday, July 12, 1985 I Rules and Regulations
discharged after the application of the 15 Delayed Cokmg

best conventional pollutant control 15 Fluid Cokmg
technology by a pomt source subject to 54. Hydrotreatmg
this subpart. Malnmum
far any I Asphalt Processes
(1) If wastewater consists solely of dey
18. Asphalt Production
contamir...Jted runoff and is not 32. ZOO"F Softenmg Point Unfluxed Asphalt
commingled or treated with process 43 Asphalt Oxid1zmg
w3s~ewater. it may be discharged 1f it 89. Asphall Emuls1fymg
does not exceed 15 mg/1 oil and grease OoiO 022 Lube Processes
BOO I
based upon an analysis of any smgle T$3
-·-
• ••
--- • -
-·-----
---- -
11.28 018
grab or composite sample. Oilllllef grease_--- -- 013 0087 21 Hydrofining. Hydrofimshmg. Lube
(2) If contaminated runoff is pH-·----------- 1'1 1'1 Hydrofimng
22. Wh1te 011 Manufacture
commmgled or treated with process ' WIIIWIIhe range of 6 0 ID 8 0
23. Propane Dewax1ng. Propane Deasphdlttng,
wastewater. or if wastewater consisting Propane Frachomng. Propane Deresmmg
soleiy of contaminated runoff which § 419.ot& and 419.56 [Amended) 24 Duo Sol. Solv!!nt Treating Solve:1t
exceeds 15 mg/1 oil and grease is not 20. In §§ 419.46(c) and 419.56(c). Extraction. Duotreatlng. Solvent DPwa'l.lng.
C~:':l::::::.:;!~d or treated w1th any other "419.15(c)", is revised to read Solvent Deasphallmg
type of wastewater. the quantity of "419.16(c)." 25. Lube Vac Twr. 01l Fractionation. Batch
pollutants discharged shaiJ not exceed Still (~":aphtha Str~pl. B~•ght StocJ.. Treallng
21.40 CPR Part 419 is amended by 26. Centnfuge and Ch1lhng
the quant1ty determined by multiplying adding the followmg Appendix A: 27. MEK Dewaxmg. Ketor.e Dewaxmg. MEK·
the flow of contaminated runoff as Toluene Dewaxmg
determined by the perm1t wnter times 28. Demhn3 (wax)
Appendix A.-Processes Included in lhe
the concentrations hsted m the Detenn.ioatioo of BAT EfDuent Limit•tions 29 Naphthemc Lubes Production
following tabie: for Total Chromium, Hexavalent Chro1D1um, 30. SO: Extrachon
and Phenolic Compouads (4AAP) 34. Wax Press1ng
BCT elfluenl loiMIIbonl far 35. Wax Plant (w1th Neu1~al Separation)
camamonalad runo11
36. Furfural Extraction
Crude Processes
--
A¥enlge"' 37. Clay Contactmg-Percolahoo
.............
lor any I
cfllllyvelues
tor30 1. Atmosphenc Crude Dl&llllauon 38. Wax Sweaung
aay daysllhal
2. Crude Desalting 39. Acid Treatmg
noll- 1 Vacuum Crude Distillation 40. Phenol Extraction
~"':,':::::::,- Crackmg and Coking Processes Reformmg and Alk}'latlon Processes

4. Visbreakmg 8 H,so. AIJ..ylahon
~.- -- .-- ··j

~.I
28. . 5. Thermal C~~ 12. Catalytic Refornung
TSS - -·-·--- - --·- 21 &. Flu1d Cata~c CracJ..mg
011 end grease - ·-- --· -- -· •
pH ,_ ..____ -----·- 1~ 7. Movtng Bed Catalytic Cracking (FR Doc. ~18383 F1led 7-11~. 8 45 am)
10. Hydrocracking RUNG CODE 1510-50-11
239

Petro-Refining Guidance June-1985 PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Petro-Refining Guidance June-1985 PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

United States Industrial Technology June 1985

Environmental Protection Division

,.,EPA Guide for the

Petroleum Refining Industry

u.s. Environmental Protection Agency

The purpose of this document is to provide a consolidated

1 NPDES PERMIT WRITERS WORKSHOP MATERIAL 1

In an effort to provide guidance on the application of the recent

• SIC Code 2911

1 220 Operating Refineries in 1984

1 Crude Capacities Range From 400 to 525,000 Barrels Per Day

• Industry Uses About 150 Unique Processes

1 Texas, California and Louisiana Are Highest Producing States

• May 9, 1974 Promulgation

• May 20, 1975

• August 11, 1976 Court Decision

• March 23, 1977 Promulgation

• January 27, 1983 Court Suit by NRDC

1 April 17, 1984 Settlement Agreement

• August 28, 1984 Proposal

Pheno&cs Flow Red., Bio. Trml 1979 Flow Model

Pollutant Technology Basis Permit Calculations

TSS Treat with Proc. W.W. Row x Concentration

• For All BCT Parameters

1 For the BAT Parameters:

1 For The BAT Parameters:

1 tACH PROCESS CATEGORY ALLOCATION IS BASED ON THE TOTAL

Processes Process Feedstock Rate *

THIS SINGLE VALUE TO BE USED FOR BOTH DAILY MAXIMUM AND

SIB' 1: DETERMINE S1ZE FACTOR

ntE SIZE FACTOR IS BASED ON ntE REFINERY FEEDSfOCK RAlE. lliE

FROM THE S1ZE FACTOR TABL£:

1000 BBL OF Ft.t.USIOCK SIZE FACTOR

100.0 to 124.9 0.88

THE VALUE 0.97 IS OBTAINED.

STEP 21 DETERMINE PROCESS FACTOR

THE PROCESS FACTOR IS BASm ON THE PROCESS CONFIGURAllON. THIS VALUE IS

PROCESS PROCESS FEEDSTOCK RATE

TOTAL REFINERY ... 7.26

STEP 2: DETERMINE PROCESS FACTOR (CONTINUED)

FROM THE PROCESS FACTOR TABLE:

Less than 6.49 0.81

THE VALUE 0.88 IS OBTAINED.

STEP 3: CALCULATE EFFLUENT LIMITS

BASED ON THE PRECEDING RESULTS, MAXIMUM DAILY BCT UMITS

STEP 4: ~TE AMENDED BAT Ut.fflS

PROCESS PROCESSES PROCESS FEEDSTOCK

DAILY YAXIUUU BAT UMITS FOR PHe«XJC COMPOUNDS. TOTAL CHROUIUU

Chromium = 0.217 = 0.464 = 0.016 = 0.273 = 0.0 0.97

Nota: For 3D-Day Average Umits, U. Same Praduction Data

SlEP 5: COMPARE AMENDED BAT UMflS FOR PHENOUC COMPOUNDS,

FOR lHE EXAMPLE REFINERY:

DAILY MAXIMUM 30-DAY AVFJOOE

WAX PlANT{'tmH NE\Jl'RAL SEPARATlON}

• Daily Maximum Umits for Ballast Water

FACTOR X R.OW = Ut.trT

• Once Through Cooling Water

- May be Net Basis if Requested by Pennittee

POU.UTANTS BPT BAT BCT

- COMMINGLED wmt PROCESS - EFR.UENT UMITS B.ASED ON SAME

1 DETERMINE REFlNERY CONTAMINATED STORM WATER VOLUME

1 C'LCULATE MASS BASED EFFLUENT UMrT

1 INCORPORATE INTO PERMIT

-- ~----- }l --- ----~~-