Effluent Limitation
Effluent limitations and new source performance standards apply to discharges made directly into receiving bodies of water. The new standards require best available technology (BAT) and are to be used by the states when issuing NPDES permits for all sources 18 months after they are made final by EPA. Pretreatment standards apply to waste streams from industrial sources that are sent to publicly owned treatment works (POTW) for final treatment. These regulations are meant to protect the POTW from any materials that would either harm the treatment facility or pass through untreated. They are to be enforced primarily by the local POTW. These standards are applicable to particular classes of point sources and pertain to discharges into navigable waters without regard to the quality of the receiving water. Standards are specific for numerous subcategories under each point-source category.
Limitations based upon application of the best practicable control technology currently available (BPT) apply to existing point-sources and should have been achieved by July 1, 1977. Limitations based upon application of the BATEA (Best Available Technology Economically Achievable) that will result in reasonable further progress toward elimination of discharges had to be achieved by July 1, 1984.
Clean Water Act of 1977 The 1977 Clean Water Act directed EPA to review all BAT guidelines for conventional pollutants in those industries not already covered. On August 23, 1978 (43 FR 37570), the EPA proposed a new approach to the control of conventional pollutants by effluent guideline limitations. The new guidelines were known as best conventional pollutants control technology (BCT). These guidelines replaced the existing BAT limitations, which were determined to be unreasonable for certain categories of pollutants.
In order to determine if BCT limitations would be necessary, the cost effectiveness of conventional pollutant reduction to BAT levels beyond BPT levels had to be determined and compared to the cost of removal of this same amount of pollutant by a publicly owned treatment works of similar capacity. If it was equally cost-effective for the industry to achieve the reduction required for meeting the BAT limitations as the POTW, then the BCT limit was made equal to the BAT level. When this test was applied, the BAT limitation set for certain categories were found to be unreasonable. In these subcategories EPA proposed to remove the BAT limitations and revert to the BPT limitations until BCT control levels could be formulated.
Control of Toxic Pollutants Since the early 1980s, EPA’s water quality standards guidance placed increasing importance on toxic pollutant control. The Agency urged states to adopt criteria into their standards for the priority toxic pollutants, particularly those for which EPA had published criteria guidance. EPA also provided guidance to help and support state adoption of toxic pollutant standards with the Water Quality Standards Handbook (1983) and the Technical Support Document for Water Quality Toxics Control (1985 and 1991).
Despite EPA’s urging and guidance, state response was disappointing. A few states adopted large numbers of numeric toxic pollutant criteria, primarily for the protection of aquatic life. Most other states adopted few or no water-quality criteria for priority toxic pollutants.
Some relied on “free from toxicity” criteria and so-called “action levels” for toxic pollutants or occasionally calculated site-specific criteria. Few states addressed the protection of human health by adopting numeric human health criteria. State development of case-by-case effluent limits using procedures that did not rely on the statewide adoption of numeric criteria for the priority toxic pollutants frustrated Congress. Congress perceived that states were failing to aggressively address toxics and that EPA was not using its oversight role to push the states to move more quickly and comprehensively. Many in Congress believed that these delays undermined the effectiveness of the Act’s framework.
Limitations based upon application of the best practicable control technology currently available (BPT) apply to existing point-sources and should have been achieved by July 1, 1977. Limitations based upon application of the BATEA (Best Available Technology Economically Achievable) that will result in reasonable further progress toward elimination of discharges had to be achieved by July 1, 1984.
Clean Water Act of 1977 The 1977 Clean Water Act directed EPA to review all BAT guidelines for conventional pollutants in those industries not already covered. On August 23, 1978 (43 FR 37570), the EPA proposed a new approach to the control of conventional pollutants by effluent guideline limitations. The new guidelines were known as best conventional pollutants control technology (BCT). These guidelines replaced the existing BAT limitations, which were determined to be unreasonable for certain categories of pollutants.
In order to determine if BCT limitations would be necessary, the cost effectiveness of conventional pollutant reduction to BAT levels beyond BPT levels had to be determined and compared to the cost of removal of this same amount of pollutant by a publicly owned treatment works of similar capacity. If it was equally cost-effective for the industry to achieve the reduction required for meeting the BAT limitations as the POTW, then the BCT limit was made equal to the BAT level. When this test was applied, the BAT limitation set for certain categories were found to be unreasonable. In these subcategories EPA proposed to remove the BAT limitations and revert to the BPT limitations until BCT control levels could be formulated.
Control of Toxic Pollutants Since the early 1980s, EPA’s water quality standards guidance placed increasing importance on toxic pollutant control. The Agency urged states to adopt criteria into their standards for the priority toxic pollutants, particularly those for which EPA had published criteria guidance. EPA also provided guidance to help and support state adoption of toxic pollutant standards with the Water Quality Standards Handbook (1983) and the Technical Support Document for Water Quality Toxics Control (1985 and 1991).
Despite EPA’s urging and guidance, state response was disappointing. A few states adopted large numbers of numeric toxic pollutant criteria, primarily for the protection of aquatic life. Most other states adopted few or no water-quality criteria for priority toxic pollutants.
Some relied on “free from toxicity” criteria and so-called “action levels” for toxic pollutants or occasionally calculated site-specific criteria. Few states addressed the protection of human health by adopting numeric human health criteria. State development of case-by-case effluent limits using procedures that did not rely on the statewide adoption of numeric criteria for the priority toxic pollutants frustrated Congress. Congress perceived that states were failing to aggressively address toxics and that EPA was not using its oversight role to push the states to move more quickly and comprehensively. Many in Congress believed that these delays undermined the effectiveness of the Act’s framework.
Labels: Water Management
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home