Seafood Processing Effluent Guidelines - Final Rule - December 1, … · 2014-12-01 · the...

RULES AND REGULATIONS

Title 40-Protection of the EnvironmentCHAPTER I-ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCYSUBCHAPTER N-EFFLUENT GUIDEUNES

AND STANDARDS[FRL 460-5] ,

PART 408-CANNED AND PRESERVEDSEAFOOD PROCESS;NG POINT SOURCECATEGORYOn January 30, 1975. notice was pub-

lished in the FEDERAL REGISTER (40 FR4582), that the Environmental Protec-tion Agency (EPA or Agency) set forthinterim final effluent limitations guide-lines for existing sources, proposed pre-treatment standards for existing sourcesamending 40 CFR Part 408, and pro-posed standards of performance and pre-treatment standards for new sourceswithin the fish meal, Alaskan hand-butchered salmon, Alaskan mechanizedsalmon, West Coast hand-butcheredsalmon, West Coast mechanized salmon,Alaskan bottom fish, non-Alaskan con-ventional bottom fish, non-Alaskanmechanized bottom fish, hand-shuckedclam, mechanized clam, Pacific Coasthand-shucked oyster, Atlahtic and GulfCoast hand-shucked oyster, steamed andcanned oyster, sardine, Alaskan scallop,non.:Alaskan scallop, Alaskan herringfillet, non-Alaskan herring fillet, andabalone prodessing subcategories of thecanned and preserved seafood processingcategory of point sources. Concomitantlythe Agency set forth interim final andproposed amendments to the regulationswhich were promulgated in the June 26,1974, FEDERAL REGISTER (39 FR 23134)for the catfish, crab, shrimp, and tunaprocessing segment of the canned ankdpreserved seafood processing category ofpoint sources.

The purpose of this notice is to estab-lish final effluent limitations and guide-lines for existing sources and standardsof performance and pretreatment stand-ards for new sources in the canned andpreserved seafood processing category ofpoint sources by amending 40 CFRChapter I, Subchapter N, Part 408 byrevising" § 408.10 of the farm-raised cat-fish processing subcategory (Subpart A),§ 408.20 of the conventional blue crabprocessing subcategory (Subpart B),§ 408.30 of -the mechanized blue crabprocessing subcategory (Subpart C),§ 408.40 of the non-remote Alaskan crabmeat processing subcategory (SubpartD), § 408.50 of the remote Alaskan crabmeat processing subcategory (SubpartE), § 408.60 of the non-remote Alaskanwhole crab and crab zection processingsubcategory (Subpart F), § 408.70 of theremote Alaskan whole crab and crab sec-tion processing subcategory (Subpart G),§ 408.80 of the dungeness and tannercrab processing in the contiguous Statessubcategory (Subpart H), § 408.90 of thenon-remote Alaskan" shrimp processingsubcategory (Subpart I), § 408.100 of theremote Alaskan shrimp processing sub-category (Subpart J), § 408.110 of thenorthern shrimp processing in the con-tiguous States subcategory (Subpart K),§ 408.120 of the southern non-breadedshrimp processifig in the contiguous

States subcategory (Subpart L), § 408.130of the breaded shrimp processing sub-category (Subpart M), and § 408.140 ofthe tuna processing subcategory (Sub-part N) to expand the applicabilitythereof; by revising § 408.55 of the re-mote Alaskan crab meat processing sub-category (Subpart E), § 408.75 of theremote Alaskan whole crab and crabsection processing sulhcategory (SubpartG), and § 408.105 of the remote Alaskanshrimp processing subcategory (SubpartJ) to change-the standards of perform-ance for new sources based on screeningto standards based on comminutors orgrinders; and by adding thereto the fishmeal processin subcategory (Subpart0), Alaskan hand-butchered salmonprocessing subcategory (Subpart P),Alaskan mechanized salmon processingsubcategory (Subpart Q), West Coasthand-butchered salmon processing sub-category (Subpart R), West Coast mech-anized salmon processing subcategory(Subpart S), Alaskan bottom fishprocessing subcategory (Subpart T),nol-Alaskan conventional bottom fishprocessing subcategory (Subpart U),non-Aaskan mechanized bottom fishprocessing subcategory (Subpart V),hand-shucked clam processing subcate-gory (Subpart W), mechanized clamprocessing subeategory (Subpart X), Pa-cific Coast hand-shucked oyster process-ing subcategory (Subpart Y), Atlanticand Gulf Coast hand-shucked oysterprocessing subcategory (Subpart Zj,steamed and canned oyster processingsubcategory (Subpart AA), sardine proc-essing subcategory (Subpart AB), Alas-kan scallop itrocessing subcategory (Sub-part AC), non-Alaskan scallop processingsubcategory (Subpart AD), Alaskan her-ring fillet processing subcategory (Sub-part AE), non-Alaskan herring filletprocessing subcategory (Subpart AF),and abalone processing subcategory(Subpart AG). This final rulemaking-ispromulgated pursuant to sections 301, 304(b) and (c), 306 (b) and (c) and 307(c)of the Federal Water Pollution ControlAct, as amended, (the Act); 33 U.S.C.1251, 1311,1314 (b) and,(c), 1316 (b) and(c) and 1315(c) ; 86Stat. 816 et seq.; Pub.L. 92-500. A regulation regarding coolingwater intake structures for all categoriesof point sources under section 316(b) ofthe Act will be promulgated in 40 CFRPart 402.

The legal basis, methodology andfactual conclusions which support pro-mulgation of this regulation were setforth in substantial detail in the noticeof public review procedures publishedAugust 6, 1973 (38 FR 21202) and in thenotice of interim final and proposedmlemaking for the fish meal, salmon,bottom fish, sardine, herring, clam,oyster, scallop, and abalone segment ofthe canned and preserved seafood proc-essing point source category. In addi-tion, the regulation as set forth was sup-ported by two other documents: (1) Thedocument entitled "Development Docu-ment for Interim Final Effluent Limita-tions Guidelines and Proposed NewSource Performance Standards for theFish Meal, Salmon, Bottom Fish, Sar-

dine, Herring, qlam, Oyster, Scallop, andAbalone Segment of the Canned andPreserved Seafood Processing PointSource Category" (January 1975) and(2) the document entitled "EcofiomloAnalysis of Interim Final Effluent Guide-lines, Seafood Processing Industry-Fish Meal, Salmon, Bottom Fish, Clams,Oysters, Sardines, Scallops, Herrin,Abalone (February 1975). Both of thes6documents were made available to thepublic and circulated to interested per-sons at approximately the time of pub-lication of the notice of proposed rule-making.

Interested persons were invited toparticipate In the rulemaking by sub-mitting written comments within 30 days'from the date of the notice of avail-ability (40 FR 15096). Prior public par-ticipation in the form of solicited com-ments and responses from the States,Federal agencies, and other Interestedparties were described In the preambleto the Interim final regulation. The EPAhas considered carefully all of the com-ments received and a discussion of thesecomments with the Agency's responsethereto follows.

(a) Summary of comments. The fol-lowing responded to the recluest for writ-ten comments contained In the preambleto the interim final and proposed regu-lation: National Canners Association:New England Fish Company; Petcy PanSeafoodsInc.; East Point Seafood Com-pany; Mfaine Sardine Packers Assocla-tion, Inc.;'Vlrginia Seafoods Inc.; Shell-fish Institute of North America; Ameri-can Shrimp Canners Association: U.S.Department of Commerce, NationalMarine Fisheries Service; Department ofHealth, Education, and Welfare; andU.S. Department of Interior.

Each of the comments received wascarefully reviewed and analyzed. The fol-lowing is a summary of the signiflcantcomments and the Agency's response tothem.

(1) Several commenters cited section102(d) of the Marine Protection, Re-search, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972(Pub. L. 92-532) which exempts fromthe ocean dumping permit requirements"the transportation for dumping or thedumping of fish wastes, except when de-posited In harbors or other protected orenclosed coastal waters, or where the Ad-ministrator finds that such depositscould endanger health, the environment,or ecological systems In a specific loca-tion." The commenters then sugaestthat, contrary to section 306(b) (1) (A)of the Federal Water Pollution ControlAct Amendments of 1972 (Pub. L.92-500), the canned and preserved sea-food processing point source dischargesshould be exempt from effluent limita-tions, except in protected areas wheretidal flushing action or stream flow Isinadequate for assimilation or dispersalof the organic fish wastes.

The majority of the existing seafoodprocessing facilities are located nearbays, inlets, estuaries, rivers, hat*bors,or other areas which provide some ref-uge from the vagaries of adverse weatheror sea conditions. The waste quantitiesfrom these plants can range from 30 to

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 40, NO. 231-MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1975

5577 0


80 percent or more of the weight of rawmaterial which, in many cases, are dis-charged directly to adjacent receivingwaters with little or-no treatment.

The Agency has documented caseswhere water quality degradation resultedfrom the discharge of seafood processingeffluents. For example, the effluents from15 seafood processors in Kodiak, Alaskaresulted in the formation of a sludgedeposit covering nearly 51 acres. About25 percent of the area was- polluted tothe extent that it was devoid of anymacroscopic life. The presence of float-ing solids, floating sludge mats, and theevolution of hydrogen -sulfide gas werenoted during the survey. A subsequentstudy of 32 other Alaskan processorsstates that waste discharges, from manyseafood processors were causing environ-mental damage in receiving waters andviolating Alaskan Water Quality Stand-ards. The environmental damage wasevidenced by: a) accumulations of sea-food wastes resulting in sludge beds and,b) aesthetically degrading conditionssuch as bloody water, accumulations ofseafood wastes on the beaches, and foamand floating seafood wastes on the watersurface.

Canadian Environmental ProtectionService study presented at the April 1974Fish Processing Plant Effluent Treatmentand Guidelines Seminar in St. Johns,Nfld. indicated that fish processingfacilities can affect -the biological eco-system up to a 1listance of one mile. Byevaluating several sediment and diversityindexes, the study found that sea-food processing effluents have a definiteeffect upon the relative abundance ofspecies in the receiving waters. One con-clusion of the report ,suggests thatthe presence of large schools of fish feed-ing in _the effluent from seafoodprocessing facilities is not "indicative ofits non-toxic characteristics, becausethese pelagic or migratory fish do notreproduce, live or carry out normal lifefunctions in thr. effluent stream. The re-port . also states that "the fishprocessing industry may not be classedas an emitter of hlghly toxic waste,although there have been documentedcises of fish kills in the Atlantic Prov-inces. The effluent is more sublethal inaction tending to reduce the diversityand thereby affecting the stability of thecQmmunity structure."

In see. 101 of the Act, Coiigress de-clared its objective "to restore and main-tain the chemical, physical, and bio-logical integrity of the Nation's waters"and declared "the national goal that thedischarge of pollutants into the naviga-blewaters be eliminated by 1985."

To achieve these ends, the Act adoptsa coordinated state-federal program toinitiate clean-up efforts. Water qualitystandards are no longer the primary con-trol mechanism. Instead, Congress hasdirected federal officials to establish ef-fluent limitations foF categories andclasses of individual point s6urces. Eachpolluter within a category or class of In-dustrial sources must, at a minimum,thereafter meet these uniform effluentlimitations (Congressional Research

Service, Library of Congress, A LegalHistory of the Water Pollution ControlAct Amendments of 1972, Vol. 1, p. 162(Comm. Print, 1973) hereinafter re-ferred to as Leg. Hist.). This shift fromwater quality standards to effluent limi-tations as the basic control mechanismwas because of the great difficulty as-sociated with establishing reliable andenforceable precise effluent limitations onthe basis of a given stream quality (seeLeg. Hist., Vol. 2, p. 1426). Water qualitystandards, In addition to their defi-ciencles In relying on the assimilativecapacity of receiving waters, often can-not be translated into effluent limitationsbecause of the imprecision of modelsfor water quality and the effects of ef-fluents in most waters.

Nevertheless, the water quality stand"ards are not totally disregarded. The oldwater quality standards program of theWater Quality Act of 1965 is retained,substantially strengthened, and dove-tailed with the new effluent limitationsprogram of the new Act. Under section303 of the Act water quality standardsfor Interstate waters remain effective,States are to submit new water qualitystandards for intrastate waters to theAdministrator for approval or necessarymodifications, and all water qualitystandards are to be brought up to the re-quirements of the new Act over a periodof time.

Both the States and the Adminis-trator may go beyond the national ef-fluent limitations of section 301 to re-quire a' greater reduction In dischargeinto specific receiving waters where thenational effluent limitations are notstringent enough to meet applicablewater quality standards for those partic-ular waters (sections 303(d) and 302).Therefore, the technology-based section301 national eMuent limitations are aminimum which all plants must meetand local conditions may result in theimposition of more stringent (but notless stringent) effluent limitations.

(2) Several commenters stated thatthe selection of plants for sampling andthe selection of data for subcategoryaverages resulted in inequitable andunattainable limitations. They also re-quested further explanation of theprocedures used to decide whether plantsin a subcategory were either typical ornontypical and the criteria used for in-clusion or exclusion of data.

The time constraints imposed by thestatutory deadlines precluded the Agencyfrom conducting an exhaustive samplingprogram. Nevertheless in the time avail-able, thb contractor (a recognized au-thority on waste management in the sea-food processing industry) carried out thefirst national scale empirical study of theindustry's waste characteristics andtreatment. Project consultants, indus-trial trade associations, individual com-panies, Universities, and State and Fed-eral government contacts assisted inIdentifying representative seafood proc-essing facilities. The following individ-uals were among those that providedinformation and :advice: Mr. RussellNorris, Mr. Prank Riley, and Mr. Robert

Hall of the Northeast Regional Office,National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS) ; Mr. Hugh O'Rourk of the Mas-sachusetts Seafood Council; Mr. RichardReed of the Maine Sardine Council; Mr.Clarence Carlson of the Atlantic FisheryProducts Technology Center; Mr. RoyMartin of the National" Fisheries Insti-tute; Mr. Steele Culbertson of the Na-tional Fish Meal and Oil Association;Mr. James Douglas. Jr. of the VirginiaMarine Resources Commission; Mr. JackWright of the Virginia Seafood Council;Mr. Everett Tolley of the Shellfish Insti-tute of North America; Mr.- JackGehringer of the Southeast Regional Of-flice. NMFS; Mr. Bobby J. Wood and Mr.Melvin Waters of the NMFS PascagoulaLaboratory; Mr. James Bybee of theSouthwest Regional Office, NMFS; r.Richard Moore and Mr. Jerry Sprat ofthe State of California, Department ofFish and Game; Mr. Robert Patta,1NMFS; Mr. Maynard Steinberg, Mr.John Dassow, Mr. Harold Barnett, andMr. Richard Nelson of the NMFS PacificFishery Technology -Laboratory; Mr.Walter Yonker and Mr. Roger DeCampof the National Canners Association; Dr.Dave Crawford of the Oregon State Uni-versity Seafood Laboratory; Mr. JeffreyCollins and Mr. Richard Tenney of theNMFS Kodiak Fishery Products Tech-nology Laboratory; Mr. Charles Perkinsof the New England Fish Company andthe Pacific Fisheries Technologists; andMr. Charles Jensen of the Kodiak Sea-food Processors Association.

After Identifying representative proc-essing facilities, one of the criteria forselecting a plant for detailed study wasphysical ease of collecting unit operationand end-of-pipe full shift flow propor-tioned composite samples. Some facilitieswould have required plumbing changesto facilitate a detailed sampling effort.Other considerations included individualplant cooperation, labor strikes, and sea-sonallty. Because of the need to obtainthe data as rapidly as possible, the sam-pling effort concentrated on plants whichhad indicated a willingness and ability toprovide the requested data promptly.Even though many companies were verycoopeiatiie, labor strikes restricted sam-pling In some locations. Seasonality oravailability of raw material also re-stricted the sampling effort in some partsof the country during the time frame ofthe study.

The available historical data whichwas compatible with the Agency's sam-pling and analytical procedures were in-eluded in the data base. The Agency'ssamples were screened prior to composit-ing to remove the larger solid particleswhich reduced the resultant "scatter" ofthe data points. This method is especi-ally valuable in developing a precisebase-line value for each parameter froma limited number of samples.

Several examples extracted from the"Subcategorization Rationale" portionsof the Development Document illustratethe method of selecting typical plantsfor determining subeategory summarydata. For salmon processing. 18 sets ofsummary data covering several process-

- FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231-MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1975

55771


Ing techniques were obtained from .12processing facilities. Nine sets of sum-mary data represented mechanized sal-mon processing; however, only the 4plants which utilized butchering ma-chines exclusively were Included in thesubdivision average. The other 5 plants,which were excluded, practiced a mixtureof hand and mechanized butcheringwhich resulted In lower raw waste loads.Partial or hybrid processes are not usedIn the subcategory summaries becausethe subcategory effluent 'limitations areintended to serve as "building blocks"for establishing total effluent limitationsfor multi-product plants. In the case ofhand-butchered salmon 6 of the 9 avail-able sets of plant summary data wereused for calculating the subdivision aver-age. The excluded summary data repre-sented facilities with lower raw wasteloads because the salmon were "trolldressed" or eviscerated at sea. For con-ventional bottom fish, 14 sets of datawere available for use, however, one plantwas omitted from the subcategory aver-age because only a zmall number of fishwere being handled in the round, whole,off the day the sample was taken. Thissituation was considered to be atypicaland resulted in relatively low raw wasteloads. In the case of mechanized bottomfish, 2 of the 5 sets of data were excludedfrom the subcategory summary data be-cause the machinery was unique and re-sulted in much lower raw waste loadsthan the other -mechanized processingfacilities. However, the excluded plants,are still considered a part of the mecha-nized bottom fish subcategory.

In general, the plant selection proce-dures resulted in higher, not lower, sub-category waste load summaries. With oneexception, all BOD5, suspended solids,and grease and oil data points of the fa-cilities selected were Included in the cal-culation of subcategory summaries. (Asdiscussed In item 18 below, the only ex-ception involved the grease and oil pa-rameter summary for herring-fillet proc-essing subcategories.) The outliers forthese regulated parameters were not de-leted from the subcategory data base.However, the flow ratios (not a regulatedparameter) were eliminated from thesummary data of 8 of the 60 plants utl-"lized In subcategory summaries for thefollowing reasons: (a) the poor waterconservation practice of letting water runthrough butchering machines in betweeiperiods of operation, (b) allowing hosesto run even when not in use, (c) allowingwater to flow through filleting stationseven when not in use, (d) excessive over-flow rates in oyster blow tanks, and (e)poor control of water flowing throughspray washers.

(3) Several commenters stated thatthe use of an average subcategory raw

waste load is inequitable because effluentlimitations calculated from a mean valueresult in half of the plants having to domore to meet the limitations. They sug-gest that the Agency utilize a case-by-case basis to establish effluent limitationsfor each plant or utilize the highest wasteload observed within -a subcategory asthe basis for the effluent limitations.

It is inherent in developing subcate-gory raw waste loads that some plantspresently will fall above the averagewaste loads. However, by employing"good housekeeping" practices and de-veloping an effective waste managementprogram to optimize plant operation,many of these facilities may reduce theirraw waste loads before 1977. -.

I-In developing effluent limitations, theAgency must be responsive to the re-quirements of the Act. The legal stand-ards for 1977, like thdse for 1983 and fornew sources, are delineated in Sections304 and 306 of the Act as "best, prac-ticable control technology currentlyavailable" (1977), "best available tech-noIogy economically achievable" (1983),and "best available demonstated tech-nology" (new sources). As stated in theSenate Report (Leg. Hist., Vol. 2, p.1468):

'"The Administrator. should establishthe range of best practicable levels basedupon the average of the best existingperformance by plants of various sizes,ages, and unit processes within each in-dustrial category,"

The Agency is mandated to rely uponthe most effective pollution controlachieved in a particular industry sub-category in setting effluent limitations,and must require all point sources In thesubcategory, by 1977, to meet this levelof currently achieved control..

In enacting the Federal Water Pollu-tion Control Act Amendments of 1972,Congress meant to do more than leaveindustry at status quo for another decadeand reward environmentally laggardbusinesses by utilizing worst case wasteloads as the basis for effluent limitatiobs.Therefore, the sampling program cov-ered plants Identified by trade associa-tions and industry experts as representa-tive of the subcategories regulated.

(4) A number of commenters ex-pressed concern' about the use of the lognormal distribution and suggested thatits use was simply a device utilized tomask the variability of the collecteddata.

An analysis of the natural distribu-tion of the major waste* water param-eters indicated that the standard normaldistribution model was inadequate formost cases because the range of datawas large and the data tended to beskewed with some relatively large values.'Also, the normal distribution allowed fornegative values which do not occur inactuality for the pollution parametersbeing examined. The log normal distri-bution was investigated and found toadequately describe the data collectedfrom this industry segment. The lognormal distribution is the distributioncommonly used for only positive valueswhich are skewed right to allow for somelarge values. The set of the logarithm ofvalues in the distribution conforms tothe normal distribution and standardstatistical techniques can be employed.Because the log normal distributionmodel described, the data distributionbetter than the normal distribution, thelog normal distribution was used to es-tablish subcategory summary wasteloads.

If the standard normal distributionhad been used, the extreme oUtliers couldhave been statistically eliminated fromthe calculated averages. Therefore, thesubcategory raw waste load summariesmight have been lower than those cal-culated from the log normal distribution.

(5) Many commenters suggest thatthe true causes of variability in rawwaste loads were not adequately takeninto consideration In the establishmentof effluent guidelines.

As discussed In the Development Docu-ment, the contributing causes of rawwaste variability include factors such asvariety of the species being processed,variability in raw product supply, har-vesting methods, condition of raw prod-uct on delivery to the processing plant,and in plant materials managementpractices. In general, the first four fac-tors are beyond the immediate controlof individual processing facilities.

The variety of species utilized in eachcommodity group is usually limited tothose which are quite similar. In gen-eral, the processes which have the larg-est capacities and produce the mostwaste utilize the fewest species. Thosewhich handle a large variety of species,such as conventional bottom fish proc-esses, are typically smaller and utilizemanual unit operations, which producelower waste loads. The subcategorizationrationale reflects a consideration for thevariety of species when they are proc-essed in a similar manner. I

In the case of salmon processing thepractical aspects of the problem pre-cluded subcategorization by salmon spe-cies. For example, in Alaska productionvolumes for red and pink salmon aremuch greater than those for chum, king,and coho. Since all five.species are manytimes processed during the same shift,sometimes intermingled with one an-other, obtaining full-shift flow propor-tioned composite samples for each speciescould not be practichbly accomplished.

The variability In raw product supplyand production Is strongly correlatedwith the type of product being processedand occasionally with geographic loca-tion and production capacity. The sub-categorization scheme and sampling pro-gram inherently includes the variabilityin raw material supply, because this fac-tor influences all food processing facil-ities dependent on the vagaries of naturefor raw material.

The harvesting methods are generallysimilar within a commodity group. How-ever, It is recognized that different har-vesting methods can affect the conditionof the raw material or the degree of pre-processing. For example, salmon are har-vested primarily by three different moth-ods: trolling, purse seining, and gill net-ting, Larger vessels, called tenders,usually bring the salmon from the fishinggrounds to the processing plants. Fish-ing boats coming into the port because ofbreakdowns and supply shortages alsodeliver fish to the plants. It Is more com-mon for trollers to deliver dhectly toplants than seiners and gill netters.Tenders using chilled brine can store fishup to four days without freezing, whereas

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231-MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1975

55772


dry tenders, which are rapidly becomingobsolete, must return to the processingplants daily. A few tenders ice their fish.A plant may process on the same day, orfrom day to day, fish harvested by anypermutation of the above methods.

The condition of the raw material ondelivery to the processing facility is, per-haps, the major uncontrollable factoraffecting plant raw waste loads. The rawmaterial can be very fresh, only afewhours old, or it can be quite old and onthe verge of spoilage. It is not uncommonfor a processing facility to refuse raw ma-terial which has decomposed beyond thepoint of safe -processing for human con-sumption. The data collected reflects awide range in the condition of the rawmaterial. In several cases the samplingprogram at some plants reflects high rawwaste loads because the raw material was"older and softer than usual." In an-other case, due to a shortage of fish, aplant purchased a load of fish whichwould .ormally be rejected. The fishwere reportably caught just after feedingwhich caused the bellies to bloat andsoften the adjacent meat, thereby in-creasing the raw waste load.

In an attempt to account for the tem-poral variations in raw waste loads dueto some of these factors, whenever possi-ble a given plant was sampled over sev-eral weeks rather than for several con-secutive days. In the case of salmonprocessing in Alaska, the major portionof the season falls from mid-June tomid-September. The Agency's samplingeffort and the historical data covers thecalendar months from mid-July to theearly part of November. In the case ofbottom-fish processing, the -Agency'ssampling program generally covers thecalendar months from July through Oc-tober with historical data at one plantcovering an 8 month period and at twoother plants covering 5 month periods. Ingeneral the oyster processing data coversthe calendar months of October and No-vember.

As stated previously variations in rawmaterial quality are normal and shouldbe expected. Therefor.e, the waste man-agement program should be designedwith sufficient flexibility to handle theproblems inherent in the industry due toexpected raw material quality variations.It is also suggested that a processingplant attempt to work out an emergencyplan tohandle a situation where uncon-trollable, significant deterioration in itsraw material quality causes significantlyhigh waste loads.

The fifth item listed above, plant ma-terials management practices, directlyaffects the variability in raw waste loads.Many plants hose solids, which accumu-late on the floor near the various unitoperations, into drains or troughs. Thesesolids could be removed by shovel andplaced into dry bins for disposal or solidsrecovery. Many plants allow solids to ac-cumulate in sumps which results inleaching of the soluble fractions. In gen-eral, any unnecessary water-solids con-

,tact increases the waste load of the f-Muent stream. Water use practices which

affect raw waste loads are discussedseparately in Items 6,7, and 8 below.

(6) According to many commenters,the Agency should not emphasize wateruse practices because the wide fluctua-tions in water use ratios are beyond thecontrol of individual processors due toFDA and public health mandates.

The waste characterization studies In-dicate that water usage in the seafoodprocessing industry varies widely and isnot always a direct function of the needsof the various unit operations or of sani-tation requirements. The large varia-tions In water usage for the same processconfiguration among different plants andamong different stations of the same unitoperation in a single plant indicates thatthere Is ample opportunity for the reduc-tion of water usage without adversely af-fecting the quality of the product. Manyplants keep the floors flooded at all timesof processing. There is a general lack ofcontrols to adjust water use with thevolume of seafood processed. In manycases several valves control the entireplant water flow and these are adjustedat the start and turned off at the end ofprocessing operations.

The following specific practices wereobserved during the Agency's samplingprogram. (a) In some plants hoses wereused continuously during some shifts towash down an area of waste build up,but were not used on every shift or dayof operation; (b) Water was observed torun through many machines or stationseven though they were not processingfish; (c) In many cases pumps were notflow regulated, therefore requiring largeamounts of water to prevent the loss ofvacuum; (d) Some plants did not shutoff or reduce water flow during restbreaks; and (e) At one plant sampled theflows among 13 filleting stations rangedfrom 0.08 gpm to 2.70 gpm at the samepoint in time, a difference of over 3000percent; and at another plant, the flowsamong 7 butchering stations rangedfrom,0.8 gpm to 3.5 gpm, a difference ofover 300 percent.

The Agency believes It to be evidentthat a significant proportion of the ob-served water use variability does not re-sult from public health mandates but'rather from inefficient housekeeping andwater management practices.

Again, it should be emphasized thatwater use is not a regulated parameter.However, in developing cost estimates ofthe end of pipe technology utilized as thebasis of the 1977 effluent limitations, Itwas assumed that the flow ratios shouldbe based on "good housekeeping" prac-tices which are considered normal prac-tice within the seafood processing indus-try. This includes turning off faucets andhoses when not in use or using spring-loaded hose nozzles.

The extensive discussions of water usein the Development Document is in-tended to illustrate the fact that hy-draulic load Is an important engineeringdesign and cost factor. It would behoovea processor to evaluate the water flow inall unit operations to reduce unneces-sary water-solid contact and indiscrim-inate water use because prolonged water-

55773

solid contact tends to increase raw wasteload and unnecessary water use tends toincrease the cost of end of pipe treat-ment.

(7) S-veral commenters suggest thatthere Is no relationship between wateruse and waste load by referring to sev-eral plants with similar BOD5 ratios and-considerably different flow ratios.

The study revealed two major facets ofwater use within the seafood industry.First, unnecessary flows through hosesand machinery or stations not in use in-crease water consumption without anoticeable effect on waste load ratiosbased on production volume. However,the concentration of the total planteffluent decreases due to the dilutioneffect of unnecessary water consumption.Second, any water-solids contact suchas rinses or spray washes removes unde-sirable material from the surface of theproduct. Public health or product qual-ity criteria determines some optimumwater consumption level for the wash.Beyond this point unnecessary water-solids contact can affect the productsurface which may increase suspendedsolids and induce additional leaching ofsoluble material. In this case, the addi-tional water-solids contact may increasethe waste load per unit of productionwhile the total plant effluent concentra-tion may actually decrease depending onthe amount of excess water.

Some plans sweep or wash solids intodrains while others utilize dry-capturetechniques before cleaning equipment.This has a definite effect on waste loadwhich Is not directly related to wateruse. To be more precise, there is, in fact,a definite relationship between water-solids contact and waste load as Illus-trated by data presented in Section VIIof the Development Document. Whenunnecessary and indiscriminate wateruse Is eliminated, the water use to wasteload relationship will be easier to detectin the processing plant situation.

In general, no comparison can be madeof the water use ancl waste load ratiosbetween different processing plants, un-less the facilities have Identical rawmaterial, unit operations, and end prod-ucts. For example, if one plant has aflume which -is twice as wide as one inanother plant, then with everything elsebeing equal, the.flrst plant will use twicethe water volume to maintain the samevelocity in the flume.

(8) The comment was made that thepremise of water recycling and its part toplay in setting guidelines is at presentunattainable and consequently upsettingto the food proces;ors treatment programplanning.

The effluent limitations are not predi-cated upon water recycling or water re-use. The discussion presented in the De-velopment Document includes water re-cycling or water reuse as one of manyalternatives in a- plant water manage-ment program.

(9) Severalcommenters considered thediscumton of by-product recovery in thepreamble and Development Document tobe overly optimistic by stipulating thatfish waste can be converted into mar-

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231---MONDAY, DECEMBnER 1, 1975


ketable by-products. They state that- crustacean meal dueto competitive mar-"wherever, and more realistically when- kets for the same raw materialever, the economics of such marketing (10) Several commenters state thatare favorable, the industry has and will they prefer to work with some other typescontinue to produce. and market such of treatment systems than those utilizedproducts." as the basis of effluent limitations and re-

It should be noted that neither the quest that. their options be left opentechnical justification for the 1977, 1983, accordingly.and new source effluent limitations nor The technologies which form the basesthe economic impact analysis utilize by- for the effluent limitations are used as aproduct recovery as the basis -for the point of reference for evaluating the eco-regulations. The purpose of the by-prod- nomic impact. T'he industry may selectuct recovery discussion is to outline sev- alternative methods such as those dis-eral of the major developments that ari cussed in the Development Document orcurrently in use, ready for use, or will other sources to meet the pulblished ef-be available-witifin the next few years. fluent limitations.

If the intent and objectives of the Act (11) Several commenters state thatare to be met, the industry has a choice the Development Document indicatesof treating the waste load at the end that the error in the BOD5 analysis canof the pipe or making in-plant modiflca- be as.great as 30 percent. Therefore, theytions which may include recovery of sec- request that COD be substituted for theondary products. Because a company ex- BOD5 parameter.pects to sell a by-product, it may make The discussion of the analytical qual-a profit, break even, or recover only a ity control methods referred to In thefraction of the cost of production. How- Develonment Document states: "Five-ever, it may be less expensive to sell a day BQD was determined according tosecondary product at a loss, than incur "Standard Methods". For samples withthe cost of end-of-pipe disposal or treat- BOD5 of higher than 20 mg/, at leastment for that portion diverted to by- three different dilutions were made forproduct recovery, each sample. The results among the dif-

One example cited in the Development ferent dilutions were generally less thanDocument was the conversion of waste plus or minus 6 percent. The data re-crustacean shells into protein and chitin ported were the average values of theand chitosan fractions. To quote the Oc- different dilutions. For samples withtober 1974 Proceedings of the Sea Grant BOD5 of less than 20 mg/l, one or twoAssociation the following goals and ob- dilutions with two duplicate bottles were'Jectives of the Chitin/Chitosan Shellfish insubated. Most of replicate BOD5 InWaste Utilization Program were met suc- this low range were within-plus or minuscessfully:- "beneficial utilization of a 5 percent; but some had as much as pluswaste product, elimination of a major or minus 30 percent difference. Seed forsource of pollution, demonstration of the dilution water was a specially cul-methodology for technical assessment tivated mixed culure in -the laboratoryand thence utilization of the by-products using various fish wastes as the seed."of a primary objective, attract additional It should be noted that the lowestresearch in chitin and chitosan utfilza- BOD5 concentration assumed for 1983tion, and develop commercial interest in effluent -limitations was 60 mg/l. There-establishment of shellfish waste conver- fore, the relative error of the BOD5 testsion plants." will not fall within the plus or minus 30

In addition to.the Japanese production percent range as suggested by the com-of chitin and chitosan, a U.S. commercial menter.processing facility in Brownsville, Texas' The BOD5 test Is widely used to 'leter-Is presently producing chitin and is mine the pollutional strength of domesticscheduled to commence full-scale pro- and Industrial wastes in -terms of theduction -of chitosan in the near future, oxygen these wastes will require if dis-If a few of the myriad uses of chitin and charged into natural watercourses inchitosafi attain commercial application, which aerobic conditions exist. Further-the demand for crustacean shell win in- more, current engineering practice uti-crease In the foreseeable future. This lizes BOD5 as a principal design param-may result in the construction of other eter, especially for biological waste treat-processing plants and preprocessing or ment-systems.stabilization facilities, which could have The possibility of substituting thea positive economic impact on the exist- COD parameter for the BOD5 parametering crustacean and fish meal plants In was investigated during this study. TheAlaska and other sources of raw or sta- BOD5 and corresponding COD data frombilized shell throughout the country. Not- industrial fish- finfish and shellfishwithstanding the concern of several com- waste waters were analyzed to determinementers who indicated that meal plants if COD Is an adequate predictor of BOD5in Alaska are operating presently at a for any or alf of these groups of seafood.loss, an increase in demand for stabilized The analysis presented in Section VI ofshell could improve the economic condi- the Development Document indicatestion of the entire by-product operation that the COD parameter is not a reliableof these plants. At present, the selling predictor of BOD5.price for crustacean and fish meal Is The relationship between COD anddetermined by the vacillating world wide BOD5 before treatment is not necessarily

supply and demand for protein. An in- the same after treatment. Therefore, thecreasing demand for chitin and chitosan effluent limitations guidelines will includein the chemical markets may tend to the BOD5 parameter, since insufficlentstabilize the fluctuating selling price of information is available on the COD ef-

fluent levels after treatment. However,with adequate data EPA and most Statescould probably allow the substitution ofCOD for BOD5 In the routine monitor-ing program.

(12) One commenter listed the anti-logarithms of the log-normal mean andstandard deviation of the summary datafor conventional bottom fish processingand then suggested that contrary to thestatements in the Development Docu-ment the waste loadings for bottom fishplants were not relatively low and uni-form.

The commenters use of the log-normaldata is mathematically Incorrect. Thelog-normal distribution is a normal dis-tribution of the logarithms of the num-bers In the data set. Any comparisons be-tween the log-normal mean and log-nor-mal standard deviation should be aslogarithms. A comparison of the realnumber antilog'of the log-normal meanand real number antilog of the log-nor-mal standard deviation results in mathe-matically Invalid conclusions. Tile state-ment in the Development Document Iscorrect when comparing te log-normalmean and log-normal standard deviation.

(13) One commenter stated that thedissolved air flotation removal eicienciesfor salmon are too restrictive becausethe only DAF plant operational for sal-mon has shown actual BOD removal to beonly In the range of 11 to 35 percentinstead of the 75 percent that must beachieved for an average salmon canneryto avoid exceeding the guidelines, Fortotal suspended solids the commercialplant was represented as removing only18 to 48 percent instead of the assumed90 percent.

The Fisheries Research Board ofCanada and the Fisheries Association ofBritish Columbia designed and erecteda full-scale demonstration dissolved airflotation waste water treatment plantwhich accommodates salmon canning,herring roe recovery, and ground fishfilleting effluents. The nformatiori avail-able to the Agency Indicates that this Isthe only full-scale DAF system treatingsalmon cannery effluents. The 1972,Canadian operating data using alumand an anionic polyelectrolyte on salmoncanning effluent indicated that sus-pended solids removal averaged 80 per-cent and that COD reduction averaged 84percent. The 1971 operating data 'usingalum on salmon canning effluent indi-cated that suspended solids removal aver-aged 92 percent and that COD removalaveraged 84 percent.

In view of the published operating datafor a full scale salmon processing wastewater treatment system, the Agency be-lieves that dissolved air flotation withoutchemical optimization can achieve theassumed 40 percent reduction of BOD5and 70 percent reduction of total sus-pended solids; and with chemical opti-mization, can achieve by 1983 the as-sumed 75 percent reduction of BOD5 and90 percent reduction of total suspendedsolids.

(14) One commenter indicated thatsardine plants with wet firming systemscould not meet the 1977 limitations with-


55774

out in-plant changes because the sum--mary-data was based on dry conveyingsystehis. Additional sardine processingwaste characterization data was sub-mitted for use in reevaluating the deri-vation of the effluent limitations.

The information indicated that sev-eral of the larger- processing facilitiesemployed dry conveying systems fromthe storage to the processing areas, butthe other plants still relied on wet flum-ing. Therefore, the 1977 emuent limita-tions were revised by including twoadditional plants in the subcategorydata summary for plants with dry con-veying systems and establishing an al-lowance by use of historical data forplants without this in-process modifica-tion. However, the 1983 and new sourceeffluent limitations are based on dry con-veying systems.

(15) One commenter stated that thescallop subcategories have not been ade-quately discussed because there are sig-nificant differences between the twoplants monitored (with one ilant beingsampled only once).

As discussed in the l)evelopment Docu-ment, the bay, sea, and Alaskan scallopsare shucked and eviscerated at sea toavoid deterioration. The unit operationsat and-based processing plants are es-sentially washing and freezing. This re-suits in a yield of nearly 100 percent ofthe rawmaterial entering the plant sincethe only wastes produced are small seal--lop pieces not suitable for freezing, solidwaste removed during inspection, andsmall amounts of dissolved organic mat-.ter-The observed washing methods weredifferent at each plant sampled. Oneplant used a two stage continuous flowwashing system, whereas, the other em--ployed a non-flowing brine tank whichwas dumped approximately every eighthours. With the exception of flow ratios,the other, waste parameters were con-sidered similar. The available informa-tion did not warrant further subate-gorization on the basis of the washing.operation. -

.Although the two Alaskan plants were-lte only ones sampled, other facilitieswere observed in the middle Atlanticregion using essentially the same process;therefore, is was assumed that the wasteloads would be -similar for similar "washand freeze" operations.

It should be noted that, as stated in§ 408.300, the calico scallop process whichemploys land-based machinery forshucking and eviscerating the scallops isnot covered by the regulations set forthherein.

(16) Several commenters expressedconcern about the accuracy of thedevelopment of the steamed and cannedoyster effluent limitations and discussedthe effects of the oyster beds and har-,vesting techniques on the processingwaste loads. One Gulf Coast processorsubmitted -data- to support his state-ments.

A review of the data for steamed andcanned oysters indicated that plant COldata should not have been included inthe , subcategory average. Unlike theother plants, the raw material was pre-


washed before entering the processingfacility, thus reducing the raw waste loaddue to partial processing. The revisedsubcategory average excludes plant COIdata, and Includes the Gulf Coast data.

(17) Several cornmenters objected tothe establishment of two hand-shuckedoyster subcategories with revised eula-ent limitations because the contractor'sdraft report originally recommended onehand-shucked oyster subcategory withhigher effluent limitations.

One result of the review of the con-tractor's draft report and evaluation ofthe public comments, prompted furthersubcategorization of the original Hand-Shucked Oyster Subcategory into thePacific Coast Hand-Shucked Oyster Sub-category and the East and Gulf CoastHand-Shucked Oyster Subcategory withdata based on the specific species proc-essed in the two geographic areas. The_contractor's draft report presents hand-shucked oyster data for ten processingplants-four located on the West Coastand six, on the East Coast. Utilizing TotalSuspended Solids (TSS) as an example,it can be seen that the TSS arithmeticaverage for the West Coast plants proc-essing the Japanese or Pacific oyster Is25.7 kg/kkg of shucked oyster produced;the TSS arithmetic average for the EastCoast plants processing the American,Eastern, or Virginia oyster is 10.8 kg/,kkg.However, as noted in the contractor'sdraft report, the Hand-Shucked OystetsProcess Summary was based on the fourWest Coast plants alone.

Another result of the review, as ex-plained In the preamble to the FEDImrALREGISTER notice (40 Cr 4582) and theInterim Final Development Document,prompted the use of the logarithmetc-normal frequency distribution to deter-mine subcategory summary data. Again

.using TSS as an example, the log-nor-mal transform increases the PacificCoast Hand-Shucked Oyster SubcategoryTSS average from 25.7 to 342 kg/kkg ofproduct, and the East and Gulf CoastHand-Shucked Oyster Subcategory TSSaverage from 10.8 to 13.6 kg/kkg of prod-uct.

The Agency believes that effluentlimitations based on these revisions areequitable because they present a moreaccurate reflection of the characteristics'of the hand-shucked oyster industry.

(18) One commenter suggests that theherring fihletsubeategorles have not beenadequately characterized because no re-mote Alaskan herring fillet plant wassampled and only one day of productionwas monitored at a non-remote Alaskanplant.

As stated in the Development Docu-ment, two herring filleting plants weresampled during August, 1973, one n New

-England and one in Alaska. In addition,historical data were obtained from aplant operating in Canada. The sam-pling interval was during a period of peakproduction for New England, however,due to a poor harvest in 1973, the plantswere operating on an intermittent basis.The sampling interval in Alaska wasduring a slack season, therefore, only oneday of operation was observed.

5517a5

In general, the waste characteristicsfor all three plants were similar. One-difference was the relatively high flmvratio observed at the Alaskan plant. Thishigh ratio is not considered to be typicalbecause only a few fish-were being proc-essed and the flor through the filletingmachines ut the plant monitored tendsto be independent of the production rate.

One relatively hi g grease and oil datapoint at the Alaskan processing facMty,resulted in a distorted log normal projec-tion for the grease and oil daily maxi-mum of 86.6 kg per kkg of raw material,I.e., over 8 percent of the weight of rawmaterial. Since the typical fat composi-tion of herring ranges from 2 up to 11percent of body weight, it would be un-likely for 78 percent or more of this fatto reach the waste water effluent streambecause a major proportion of the fat iscontained in the food product and wastesolids. A comparison of the mechanicallybutchered salmon processing raw wasteload to the mechanized herring filletingraw waste load indicates that TSS aver-ages are virtually Identical, 20.3 kg/kkgfor salmon and 20.9 kg/kkg for herringfilleting; the salmon GOD5 waste lead ishigher, 50.8 kgtkkg for salmon versus32.2 kg/klg for herring filleting; the sal-mon grease and oil average is also vir-tually Identical to the average for theNew England herring filleting plant, 6.49kg/kg for salmon versu 6.11 kg/.kkg forNew England herring filleting. Becausethe one data point at the Alaskan herringfilleting plant appeared to be abnormallyhigh in comparison to the other availableInformation, It was not used to deter-mine a subcategory average. Instead, themechanized salmon process grease andoil data was utilized to derive conclusionsregarding effluent limitations for theherring Miet processing plants.

Since the herring filleting process isessentially the same from plant to plant,geographic location was considered to bethe only factor requiring further atten-tion in the subcategorization process. Asexplained in the Development Documeatand preamble to the interim final effu-ent limitations, subcategorization basedon geographic regions (Alaska versusnon-Alaska, and remote Alaska versusnon-remote Alaska), was developed toaccount for the differences In therelativecosts of business and treatment tech-nologies, not for differences in raw wasteloads, treatability of wastes or othertechnical factors.

(19) Several commenters criticized thefact that the log-normal transform wasused in most cases to determine param-

-eter averages while In some cases anarithmetic average was used.

In reviewing the data base, It was de-cided to use the log-normal distributionexclusively instead of the standard nor-mal distribution for the reasons pre-viously cited in item 4. However, theweighing factors were deleted from thelog-normal transform, even though thisresults generally In higher subcategoryaverages, in order to supplement the database with historical data or availableplant data which does not Include tem-poral variability for the regulated pa-rameters.

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231-M-hIONDAY, DECEMBUER 1, 1975

55776

(20) Questions have been raised con-cerning the availability of standards orguidelines applicable to the disposal ofsolid wastes resulting from the operationof pollution control systems.

The principles set forth in "Land Dis-posal of Solid Wastes Guidelines" (40CFR Part 241) may be used as guidancefor acceptable land disposal techniques.Potentially hazardous wastes may re-quire special considerations to ensuretheir proper disposal. Additionally, stateand local guidelines and regulationsshould be considered wherever appli-cable.

(21) One commenter observed thatEPA did not take into account theeconomic Impact from regulations im-posed by other regulatory agencies.

The Agency realizes that there will bean economic impact from regulations setby other regulatory agencies. In Itseconomic impact analysis, EPA includedcosts incurred as a result of pre-1972regulations.

It is difficult to estimate what othercosts will be incurred in the years aheadas there is no way to determine whatother agencies will propose. However, itis valid to assume that these agencies,when considering the economic impactof their proposed regulations, will con-sider the costs incurred as a result ofpreviously Imposed EPA regulations.

(22) Several comments stated that thenew source and 1983 effluent limitationsbased on extended aeration for the handshucked oyster industry. will have asevere economic impact..

As part of the Agency's overall- re-assessment of the economic impact, theabove comment was carefully evaluated.In this analysis, the impact was investi-gated over a range for several variables(e.g. cost of capital, operating and main-tenance cost). Because the review indi-cated that the comment was generallyvalid, the Agency rejected extended aera-tion as the basis of the 1983 effluentliinitations. The Agency believed that ex-tended aeration still represents a tech-nically feasible alternative for hand-shucked oyster processing. Nevertheless,the 1983 limitations and new source per-formance standards have been revisedso that the best available technologyeconomically achievable and the bestavailable demonstrated control tech-nology consists of "good housekeeping"practices which are considered normalpractice within the seafood processingindustry such as turning off faucets andhoses when not in use Or using spring-loaded hose nozzles, by-product recoveryor ultimate disposal of solids, and treat-mnt of the -waste water effluent byscreening.

The provisions of section 301(d) of theAct require that the effluent limitationsbased on the best available technologyeconomically achievable shall be re-viewed at least every five years and, ifappropriate, revised pursuant to the pro-cedure established under section 301(b)(2). The Agency has initiated a study tcIdentify alternative economically viabletechnology applicable to hand-shuckedoyster processing. Therefore, the 198,


limitations may be revised in the futurepursuant to section 301(d) of the Actto reflect a higher level of technologythan screening.(23) Several commenters were con-cerned that monitoring costs were ex-cluded from the Agency's cost calcula-tions.° The Agency did not-include monitor-ing costs in Its calculations because inmany cases they prove to be an insig-nificant amount of the cost of compli-ance with the effluent limitations.

Laboratory analyses were estimated tocost about $25 per sample. Some permitsare written which require only one sam-ple perseason. For example, using thecost figures for a medium-size East Coasthand shucked oyster plant, that amountsto approximately 0.8 percent of the totalannual costs of $3,000. Even if once permonth sampling was required during theoperating season (7 months), monitor-ing cost would amount to approximately6 percent of the total annual cost.

Most processors are currently requiredto (and do) monitor their discharges;the effluent limitations may not requireany additional monitoring. Therefore, noadditional monitoring costs are incurredas a result of these effluent limitations.

(24) Comments were received whichsaid that .dissolved air flotation (DAF)was not economically fedsible for theWest Coast canned salmon industry.. The Agency reevaluated the cost of

DAF technology, and the potential eco-nomic impact on the West Coast cannedsalmon industry. Based on this evalua-tion, EPA is revising the effluent limita-tions so that (1) DAF is no longer thebasis for the 1977 limitations; however(2) DAF will be retained as the basis forthe 1983 and new source standards.

The Agency considered the cost of thetechnology, the economic history andstatus of the industry, and Its futureprospects. The West Coast canned sal-mon industry has been in a depressedstate during 1973 and 1974. However, theindustry has a cycle of about four years;usually the first two years are profitable,while the last two years are not. Histori-cally, the profits have covered the losses.However, in the last cycle, 1971-1974,losses exceeded profits.

The economic outlook for the-Imme-diate future is uncertain. Landings forJune 1975 were several times gretaterthan landings in June 1974. There areindications that a new cycle is starting,but whether the cycle will be profitable(net positive cash flow) still remains tobe seen. The DAF basis for the 1983 andnew source standards is retained be-cause the industry may, In fact, proveprofitable. However, section 301(c) ofthe Act provides for modification of theeffluent limitations with respect to anypoint source which is based on the besiavailable technology economicallyachievable, upon a showing by the owneior operator of such point source satis-factory to the Administrator that suchmodified requirements, (1) will represenithe maximum use of technology withir

I the economic capability of the owner o3operator; and (2) will result inyreason.

able further progress toward the elimi--nation of the discharge of pollutants.Furthermore, section 301(d) of the Actstates that the effluent limitations basedon the best available technology eco-nomically achievable shall be reviewed atleast every five years and, if appropriate,revised pursuant to the procedure estab-lished under section 301(b) (2). If ad-verse economic conditions are found toexist at a later time, there is ample op-portunity to revise the regulations.

(25) Several commenters stated thatdissolved air flotation was not economi-cally feasible for the Alaskan non-remotefresh and frozen salmon processors andthe Alaskan canned salmon processors.

The Agency reevaluated the cost ofDAF technology, and the potent~t, eco-nomic impact on the Alaskan fresh andfrozen and canned salmon industries.Based on. this evaluation DAF was shownlto be economically feasible and, there-fore, will be retained as the basis forthe 1983 effluent limitations.

EPA considered the cost of tho tech-nology, the economic history and statusof the industry, and its future prospects.The salmon Industry in Alaska hasbeen hampered by a steady and contin-uous decline in landings (due In largepart to foreign fishing offshore) and,concomitantly, rising exvessel prices forthe raw product. The Industry has notbeen profitable in the last few years.

If the future profitability is the same-as-over the most recent cycle, EPA real-izes that there could be a great impacton this industry if DAF is retained as thebasis for the 1983 effluent limitations,However, the outlook for this industry Issubject to great uncertainty. The DAVbasis for 1983 regulations is retained be-cause this Industry may, in fact, proveprofitable. However, section 301(c) ofthe Act provides for modification of theeffluent limitations guidelines with re-spect to any point source which is basedon the best available technology eco-nomically achievable, upon a showing bythe owner or operator of such pointsource satisfactory to the Administratorthat such modified requirements (1) willrepresents the maximum use of technol-ogy within the economic capability of theowner or operator; and (2) will resultin reasonable further progress towardthe elimination of the discharge of pol-lutants. Furthermore, section 301(d) ofthe Act states that the effluent limita-tions guidelines based on the best avail-able technology economically achievableshall be reviewed at least every five yearsand, If appropriate, revised pursuant to

. the procedure established under section301(b) (2). If adverse economic condi-tions are found to exist at a later time,there Is ample opportunity to revise theregulations.

t (b) Revision of the interim final andproposed regulations prior to promulga-tion. As a result of public comments andcontinuing 1review and evaluation of theproposed regulation by the EPA, the fol-lowing changes have been made In theregulation:

(1) The use of the unwelghted log her-mal distribution resulted In the following

- changes:


(i) generally higher effluent limita-tions for the Alaskan bottom fish (Sub-part T), scallop (Subparts AC and AD).and hand-shucked clam (Subpart W)processing subcategories; and

(ii) higher efflent limitations withinthe herring fillet (Subparts AE and AF),sardine (Subpart AB), and abalone(Subpart AG) processing subcategoriesbecause of expansion of the respectivesubcategory data bases to include plantdata without the temporal variabilityweighing factor

(2) The revised technology basis forthe sardine processing 1977 effluent lim-itations (Subpart AB) accounts for sep-aration of those plants with dry cpnvey-ing systems to the processing area fromthose plants with -wet fluming transpor-tation systems. The 1983 and new sourceeffluent limitations are'based on dry con-veying systems alone.

(3) The mechanized clam processingsubcategory effluent limitations increasedbecause one plant which utilized a "par-tial process" was deleted from the sub-category summary.

(4) The stdamed and canned oysterprocessing subcategory effluent limita-tions increased because of the additionof historical data received during thecomment period and the deletion of onelilant which utilized a "partial process."

(5) A reassessment of the economicimpact of the interim final effluent limi-tations for the West Coast MechanizedSalmon Processing Subcategory indicatesthat dissolved air flotation is not an eco-nomically feasible technology basis forthe. 1977 limitations. The promulgatedeffluent limitations have been revised toeliminate this impact. The best practica-ble control technology currently availa-ble involves "good housekeeping" prac-tices which are considered normal prac-

tice within the seafood processing indus-try such as turning off faucets and hoseswhen not in use or using spring-loadedhose nozzles, by-product recovery or ulti-mate disposal of solids, and treatment ofthe waste water effluent by screening.The best available technology economi-cally achievable and the best availabledemonstrated control technology, proc-esses, operating methods or other alter-natives for new sources consist, of, in ad-dition to the aforementioned treatment,

- dissolved air flotation and appropriateprocessed design to provide more ecientin-plant water use which reduces leach-ing of solubles and entrainment of solidsin the contact process water.

(6) A reassessment of the economicimpact of the effluent limitation for thePacific Coast Hand Shucked Oyster andEast and Gulf Coast Hand Shucked Oys-ter Processing Subcategories indicatesthat extended aeration is not an econom-ically feasible technology basis for thenew source and the 1983 limitations. Thepromulgated effluent limitations havebeen revised to eliminate this impact. Thebest available technology economicallyachievable and the best available demon-strated control technology, processes, op-

erating methods or other alternatives fornew sources consist of "good housekeep-ing" practices which are considered nor-


mal practice within the seafood process-ing industry such as turning off faucetsand hoses when not in use or usingspring-loaded hose nozzles, by-productrecovery or ultimate disposal of solids,and treatment of the waste water elluentby screening.

(c) Economic and inflationarij impact.The Agency considered the economic Im-pact of the internal and external costsof the effluent limitations. Internal costsare defined as investment and annualcost (operating costs plus the cost ofcapital and depreciation) for a typicalplant. External cost deals basically withthe assessment of the economic impactof the internal costs in terms of priceincreases, production curtailments orplant closures, resultant unemployment,community and regional Impacts, Inter-national trade, and future industrygrowth.

In its reassessment of the economicimpact, the Agency made a concerted andserious effort to contact new sources andobtain new data. Inquiries were made togovernment agencies, private companies.and trade associations. The Agency re-evaluated previous data and evaluatednew data furnished to the Agency.

There were certain, mostly minor,changes due to this reassessment. Theseinclude the following:

(1) The total internal cost of the 1977effluent limitations Is $6.2 million invest-ment (previous figure: $6.1 million) with$1.3 million annual cost (same as thepreviously published figure).

(2) An additional $5.9 million invest-ment is required for the 1983 standards(previous 1gure: $8'.2 million) plus $1.4million annually (previous figure: $1.7million).

(3) As discussed in the Comments(item (b) 24, above) there was concernthat the economic impact of the 1977effluent limitations would be too severefor the West Coast canned salmon in-dustry. Based on the review of the eco-nomlc history and status of the indus-try, the Agency concluded that a revi-sion of the previously published effluentlimitation was warranted. As such. thebasis for the 1977 limitation was changedfrom air flotation systems to screeningsystems.

(4) The economic impact statementfor the interim final regulation expressedconcern about a potentially severe eco-nomic impact on the Alaskan fresh andfrozen salmon industry. It was alsostated that the severity could have beenoverestimated due to several factors.Based on a review of permit registrations,it was found that a number of the "af-fected" plans were not processors, butpackers and wholesalers that are en-tirely unaffected by the effluent limita-tions. Based on this review, the Agencyconcluded that the previously stated m-pactls overstated and no revisions of theeffluent limitations are necessary.

(5) As discussed in the comments(item (b) 22; above) there was concernthat the economic impact of the 1983and new source performance standardswould be too severe for the hand-shuckedoyster processors. Based on a review ofthe economic history and status of the

55777

industry, the Agency concluded thit arevision of the previously publishedeffluent limitations was warranted. Assuch, the bases for the 1983 and newsource performance standards for thehand-shucked oyster processing sub-categories were changed from extendedaeration systems to screening systems.

The effluent limitations for 1977 willhave a minor effect on prices as priceincreases generally in the range of 0.3to 0.5 percent are projected. Althoughprice increases in this industry will, ofcourse, be affected by foreign competi-tion, the generally small magnitude ofthe projected price increases Is not ex-pected to cause any important interna-tional trade effects. A number of smallplants are projected to be adversely af-fected by the effluent limitations, but thedomestic industry capacity is not ex-pected to be affected by the potentialclosure of these particular small plants.

The 1983 standards are projected toresult in price increases typically in therange 0.5 to 1.5 percent (including the1977 increase). An additional number ofgenerally small plants are projected tobe adversely affected by these 1983 guide-lines, but again, the domestic industrycapacity is not anticipated to be affectedby the potential closure of these smallplants. No significant international tradeeffects of the 1983 guidelines areprojected.

Executive Order 11821 (November 27,1974) requires that major proposals forlegislation and promulgation of regula-tions and rules by Agencies of the ex-ecutive branch be accompanied by astatement certifying that the inflation-ary impact of! the proposal has beenevaluated.

OBM Circular A-107 -(January 28,1975) prescribes guidelines for the iden-tification and evaluation of major pro-posals requiring preparation of inflation-ary impact certifiations. The circularprovides that during the interim periodprior to final approval by OMB of cri-teria developed by each Agency, the Ad-ministrator is responsible for identifyingthdse regulations which require evalu-ation and certification. The Administra-tor has directed that all regulatory ac-tions which are likely to result in capitalinvestment exceeding $100 million orannualized costs in excess of $50 mllionwill require certification. Since the esti-mated total capital investment and an-nualized cost are below the designatedlimits, certification of the inflationaryimpact statement is not necessary.(d) Cost-benefit analysis. The detri-

mental effects -of the constituents ofwaste waters now discharged by pointsources within the fish meal, salmon,bottom fish, sardine, herring, clam,oyster, scallop, and abalone segment ofthe canned and preserved seafood proc-e3sing point source category are dis-cussed in Section VI of the report en-titled "Development Document for Efflu-ent Limitations Guidelines and NewSource Performance Standards for theFish Meal, Salmon, Bottom Fish, Sar-dine, Herring, Clam, Oyster, Scallop, andAbalone Segment of the Canned and Pre-served Seafood Processing Point Source

FEDE AL REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231-4MONDAY, DECEMDER 1, 1975

55778 RI

Category" (August 1975). It Is not feasi- Thisble to quantify in economic terms, par- iiursuaiticularly on a national basis, the costs trict Ccresulting from the discharge of these enteredpollutants to our Nation's waterways. CouncilNevertheless, as indicated in Section VI, That orthe pollutants discharged have substan- tions rtial and damaging impacts on the quality best prof water and therefore on its capacity to rentlysupport healthy populations bf wildlife, fectivefish and other aquatic wildlife and on its gpod casuitability for industrial, recreational tion proand drinking water supply uses. practict

The total cost of implementing the availabeffluent limitations includes the direct on Dececapital and operating costs of the pol- Theflution controltechnology employed to *lichachieve compliance and the indirect eco-nomic and environmental costs identified basedIn Section VIII and in the supplementary economreport entitled ."Economic Analysis of standaiEffluent Guidelines-Seafood Processing demonsIndustry" (August 1975). Implementing new sotthe limitations will substantially reduce mentsthe environmental harm which would eotherwise be attributable to the con- Decembtinued discharge of polluted waste waters Datefrom existing . and newly constructedplants In the canned and preserved sea-food processing industry. The Agency be-lieves tha' the benefits of thus reducing" Subparthe pollutants discharged justify the as- See.sociated costs. 408.150

(e) Publication of information onprocesses, procedures, or operating meth- 408.151ods which result in the elimination or re- 408.152duction of the discharge of pollutants.

In conformance with the relfulrementsof section 304(c) of the Act, a manualentitled, "Development Document forEffluent Limitations Guidelines and New 408.153Source Performance Standards for theFish Meal, Salmon, Bottom Fish, Sar-dine, Herring, Clam, Oyster, Scallop, andAbalone Segment of the Canned andPreserved Seafood Processing Point 408.154Source Category," will be published as 408155-soon as practicable and will be availablefor purchase from the Government 408.156Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402for a nominal fee. Subpa

Copies of the economic analysis docu- ament previously cited will be available 408.160from the National Technical InformationService, Springfield, VA 22151. -

A copy of all public comments is avail-" 408.161able for inspection and copying at the 408.162EPA Public-Information Reference Unit,Room 2404, Waterside Mall, 401 M St.SW., Washington, D.C. 20460. A copy ofthe preliminary draft contractors re-ports, the Development Document (cite 408.163the appropriate reports) and economicstudy referred above, and certain sup-plementary materials supporting the' -

study of the industry concerned, is alsoat this location'for public review andcopying, etc. 408.1"

(f) Final rulemaking. In considera- 408.165tion of the foregoing, 40 CFR Chapter I,Subchapter N, Part 408, Canned and 408.169Preserved Seafood Processing PointSource Category, is hereby amended by Subrevising Subparts A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H,I, J, K, L, M, and N; -nd by adding addi- 408.170tional subparts 0, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V,W, X, Y, Z, AA, AB, AC, AD, AE, AF, andAG to read as set forth below. 408.171

ULES AND REGULATIONS

regulation is being promulgatednt to an order of the Federal Dis-urt for the District of Columbiain Natural Resources DefenseInc. v. Train (Cv. No. 1609-73).

rder requires that effluent limita-equiring the application of theacticable control technology cur-ivailable for this industry be ef-upon publication. Accordingly,

use is found-for the final regula-)mulgated below establishing bestable control technology currentlyle for each subpart to be effectivember 1, 1975.,Inal regulation promulgated belowestablishes effluent limitationsn the best available technologyically achievable; new sourcerds based on, the best availabletrated control technology; andirce and'existing source pretreat-tandards shall become effectiveier 31, 1975.

d: November 13, 1975.

JOHN QUARLES,Acting Administrator.

O-Fsh Meal Processing Subcategory

Applicability: description of the fishmeal processing sub'category.

Specialized definitions.Effluent limitations guidelines re-

presenting the degree of effluentreduction attainablQ by the ap-plication of' the best practicablecontrol technology currentlyavailable.

Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluentreductlon attainable by the appli-cation of the best available tech-nology economically achievable.

Pretreatment standards for existingsources.

Standards of performance for newsources.

Pretreatment standards for newsources.

rt P-Alazkan Hand-Butchered SalmonProcessing Subcategory

Applicability; description of theAlaskan hand-butchered salmonprocessing subcategory.

Specialized definitions.Effluent limitations guidelines rep-

resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the Ap-plication of the best practicablecontrol technology currentlyavailable.

Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best availabletechnology economically achieva-ble.

Pretreatment standards for existingsources.

Standards of performance for newsources. -


part Q-Alaskan Mechanized Salmon-Processing Subcategory

Applicability; description of theAlaskan mechanized salmon proc-essing subategory.

Specialized definitions.

See.408.172 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-

resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best practicablecontrol technology currentlyavailable.

408.173 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best availabletechnology economically achiev-able.

408.174 Pretreatment standards for existingsources.

408.175 Standards of performance for nowsources.

408.176 Pretreatment standards for nowsources.

Subpart R-West Coast Hand-Butchered SalmonProcessing Subcategory

408.180 Applicability; description of theWest Coast hand-butchered sal-mon processing aubcategory.

408.181 Specialized definitions.408.182 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-


408.183 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best availabletechnology economically achliev--able.

408.184 Pretreatment standards for exist-ing sources.

408.185 Standards of performance for nowsources,


Subpart S-West Coast Mechanized SalmonProce:sing Subcategory

408.190 Applicability; description of theWest Coast mechaniled salmon-processing subcategory.


resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the appli-cation of the best practicable con-trol technology currently avail-able.

408.193 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of efftontreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best availabletechnology economically achiev-able.


408.195 Standards of performance for nowsources.


Subpart T-Alaskan Bottom Fish ProcessingSubcategory

408.200 Applicability: description of theAlaskan bottom fish processIngsubcategory.

408.201 Specialized deflnlions.408.202 Effluent limitations guidelines rop-

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the appli-cation .of the best practicablecontrol technology currentlyavallabre.


- FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 40, NO. 231-MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1975


See.408.204 Pretreatment standirds for exist-

ing sources.408205 Standards of performance for new

sources.408206 Pretreatment standards for new

sources.Subpart U-Non Alaskan Conventional Bottom

Fish Processing Subcategory408.210 -Applicability; description of the

non-Alaskan conventional bot-tom fish processing subcategory.

408211 Specialized definitions.408212 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-

- - resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the appli-cation of the'best practicable con-trol technology currently avail-able.

408.213 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-

. plication of the best availabletechnology economically achiev-able.

408214 Pretreatment standards for existingsources.

408.215 Standards of performance for newsources.

408216 Pretreatment standards for newsources.

Subpart V-Non-Alaskan Mechanized BottomFish Processing Subcategory

408.220 Applicability; description of thqnon-Alaskan mechanized bottomfish processing subcategory.


resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the appli-cation of the best practicable con-trol technoloy currently available.

408.223 Effluent limitatlons guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluent re-duction attainable by the applica-tion of the best available technol-ogy economically achievable.


408225 Standards of performance for newsources.

408.226 Pretreatment standards for newsources.

Subpart W-Hand-Shucked Clam ProcessingSubcategory

408-230. Applicability; description of thehand-shucked clam processingsubcategory.

408-231 Specialized definitions.408232 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-

resenting the degree of effluent re-duction attainable by the applica-tion of the best practicable controltechnology currently available.

409233 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluent re-duction attainable by the appli-cation of the best available tech-nology economically achievable.

408-234 Pretreatment standards for existing' sources.



Subpart X-Mechanized Clam ProcessingSubcategory

408.240 Applicability; description of themechanized clam processing sub-category.

4a08241 Speclalize4 definitions.408242 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-


408.243 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainalile by the appli-cation of the best available tech-nology economically achievable.


408.245 Standards of performance for newsources. .

408246 Pretreatment standards for newsources.

Subpart Y-Pacific Coast Hand-Shucked OysterProcessing Subcategory

408250 Applicability; description of thePacific Coast hand-shucked oysterprocessing subtategory.

408251 Specialized definitions.408.252 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-

resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the appli-cation of the best practicable con-trol technology currently available.

40853 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluent re-duction attainable by tho applica-tion of the best available tech-nology economically achievable.


408-255 Standards of performance for newsources.


Subpart Z--AUantic and Gulf Coast Hand-ShuckedOyster Processing Subcate-ory

408.260 Applicability-. description of theAtlantic and Gulf Coast hand-shucked oyster processing sub-category.

408261 Specialized definitions.408262 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-


408263 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the appli-cation of the best available tech-nology economically achievable.

408,264 Pretreatment standards for existingsources.

408-265 Standards of performance for newsources.

408266 Pretreatment standards for nowsources.

Subpart AA-Steamed and Canned OysterProcessing Subcategory

408270 Applicability; description of the• steamed and canned oyster proc-

essing subcategory.408.271 Specialized deflnltions.408272 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-

resenting the degree of effluent re-duction attainable by the appli-cation of the best practicablecontrol technology currentlyavailable.

408273 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best availabletechnology economically achiev-able.



408-278 Pretreatment standards for no:sources.-

Subpart AB-Sardlne Processing Subcategory

408280 Applicability; description of the sar-dine processing subcategory.

408281 Specialized definitions.

Sec.408282 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-

resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best practicablecontrol technology currently

4 available.40-083 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-

resenting the degree of effluent re-duction attainable by the appll-cation of the best available tech-nology economically achievable.



408-280 Pretreatment standards for newsources.

Subpart AC--Alaskan Scallop ProcessingSubcategory

408D90 Applicability; description of theAlaskan scallop processing sub-category.

408-291 Specialized definitions.408292 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-

recenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best practicablecontrol technology currentlyavailable.

408.203 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-recenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the beat availabletechnology economically achiev-able.




Subpart AD--Non-Alaskan Scallop ProcessingSubcategory

408200 Applicability: description of thenon-Alaskan scallop processingsubcategory.



408.303 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best availabletechnolo y economically achiev-able.



408.200 Pretreatient standards for newsources.

Subpart AE-Alaskan Herring Fillet ProcessinZSubcategory

408.310 Applicability; description of theAlaskan herring fillet prcemsingsubcategory.


resenting the degree of eflluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best practicablecontrol technology currentlyavailable.

408.313 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the ap-plication of the best availabletechnology economically achlev-able.

408214 Pretreatment stand rds for existingsources-

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231---MONDAY, DECFJBER 1, 1975

557/79

55780

Sec.408.315

408.316

RULES, AND REGULATIONS

Standards of performance for newsources.


Subpart AF-Non-Alaskan Herring FilletProcessing Subcategory

408.320 Applicability; description of. thenon-Alaskan herring fillet process-Ing subcategory.

408.321 Specialized definitions,408.322 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-






Subpart AG-Abalone Processing Subcategory408.330 Applicability; description of the

abalone processing subcategory.408.331 Specialized definitions. -408.332 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-

resenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the -p-plication of the best practicablecontrol technology currentlyavailable.


408.334 Pretrcatment standards for existingsources.



Amtroarry: Sees. 301, 304 (b) and (c), 308(b) and (c). Federal Water Pollution ControlAct, as amended, (the Act); (33 U.S C. 1251,1311, 1314 (b) and (c), 1316 -(b) and (c),1317(c) ); 86 Stat. 816 et seq.; Pub. L. 92-500.

Subpart A-Farm Raised CatfishProcessing Subcategory

Subpart A-The farm raised catfishprocessing subcategory is amended byrevising § 408.10 to read as follows:

§ 408.10 Applicability; -description ofthe farm raised catfish processingsubcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing of farm-raisefl catfish byexisting facilities which process morethan 1362 kg (3600 lbs) of raw material'per day on any day during a calendaryear and all new sources.

Subpart B-Conventional Blue CrabProcessing Subcategory

Subpart B-The conventional bluecrab processing subcategory is amendedby revising § 408.20 to read as follows:

§408.20 Applicability; description ofthe conventional blue crab processingsubcategory.

The provisions of this-subpart are ap-plicable to discharges'resulting from the

processing of blue crab in which manualpicking or separation of crab meat fromthe shell is utilized: The effluent limita-tions contained in this Subpart B are'applicable to existing facilities process-ing more than 1362 kg (3000 lbs) of rawmaterial per day on any day during a cal-endar year and all new sources.

Subpart C-Mechanized Blue CrabProcessing Subcategory

Subpart C-The mechanized blue crabprocessing subcategory is amended byrevising § 408.30 to read as follows:

§ 408.30 Applicability; description ofthe mechanized blue crab processingsubcategory.

The provisions-of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing of blue crab in which mechan-ical picking or separation of crab meatfrom the shell is utilized.

Subpart D-Non-Remote Alaskan CrabMeat Processing Subcategory

Subpart D-The non-remote Alaskancrab meat processing subcategory isamended by revising § 408.40 to read asfollows:

§408.40 Applicability; description oftie non-remote -Alaskan crab meatprocessing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing, in non-remote Alaska, ofdungeness, tanner, and king crab meat.The efluent limitations contained in thisSubpart D are applicable to facilitieslocated in population or processingcenters including but not limited toAnchorage, Cordova, Juneau, Ketchikan,Kodiak, and Petersburg.

Subpart E-Remote Alaskan Crab MeatProcessing Subcategory

Subpart E-The remote Alaskan crabmeat processing subcategory is amendedby revising §§ 408.50 and 408.55 to readas follows:

§ 408.50 Applicability; description - ofthe remote Alaskan crab meaLproc-essing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart areapplicable to discharges resulting fromthe processing, in remote Alaska, ofdungeness, tanner, and king crab meat.The effluent limitations contained inSubpart E are applicable to facilities notcovered under Subpart D.

§ 408.55 -Standards of performance fornew sources.

The following standards of perform-ance establish the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties, con-trolled by this section, which may be dis-charged by a new source subject to theprovisions of this subpart: No pollutantsmay be discharged which exceed 1.27 cm(0.5 inch) in any dimension.

Subpart F-Non-Remote Alaskan WholeCrab and Crab Section Processing Sub-category

Subpart F-The non-remote Alaskanwhole crab and crab section processingsubcategory is amended by revising§ 408.60 to read as follows:,

§408.60 Applicability; description ofthe non-remote Alaskan whole craband crab section processing subeate.gory.

The provisions of this subpart areapplicable to discharges resulting fromthe processing, in non-remote Alaska, ofdungeness, tanner and king whole craband crab sections. The effluent limitationscontained in this Subpart F are appli-cable to facilities located In populationor processing centers Including but notlimited to Anchorage, Cordova, Juneau,Ketchikan, Kodiak, and Petersburg.

Subpart G-Remote Alaskan Whole Craband Crab Section Processing Subcategory

Subpart G-The remote Alaskan wholecrab and crab section processing sub-category is amended by revising §§ 408.-70 and 408.75 to read as follows:

§ 408.70 Applicability; description ofthe remote Alaskan whole crab andcrab section processing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart areapplicable to discharges resulting fromthe processing,, in remote Alaska, ofdungeness, tanner, and, king whole craband crab sections. The effluent limitationscontained in this Subpart G are applica-ble to facilities not covered under Sub-part F of this part.

§ 408.75 Standards of performance fornew sources.

The following standards of perform-ance establish the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties, con-trolled by this section, which may be dis-charged by a new source subject to theprovisions of this subpart: No pollutantsmay be discharged which exceed 1.27 cm(0.5 inch) in any dimension.

Subpart H-Dungone:s and Tanner CrabProcessing in the Contiguous States Sub.category

Subpart H-The dungeness and tan-ner crab processing In the contiguousStates subcategory is amended by revis-ing section 408.80 to read as follows:

§408.80 Applicability; description ofthe dungeness and tanner crab proc.essing in the contiguous States sub-category.

The provisions of this subpart areapplicable to discharges resulting fromthe processing of dungeness and tannercrab in the contiguous States.

Subpart I-Non-Remote Alaskan ShrimpProcessing Subcategory

Subpart I-The non-remote Alaskanshrimp processing subcategory isamended by revising § 408.90 to read asfollows:

§ 408.90 Applicability; description ofthe non-remote Alaskan shrimpprocessing subcategory.

'The provisions of this subpart areapplicable to discharges resulting fromthe processing of shrimp in non-remoteAlaska. The effluent limitations con-tained in this Subpart I are applicable tofacilities located in population or proc-essing centers including but not limited


RULES. AND REGULATIONS

to Anchorage, Cordova, Juneau, Ketchi- than 908'kg- (200V ibsY of raw- matlrialkan, Kodiak, and.Petersburg. per day on any day during a calendar

SubpartJ-Remote,Jaskan Shrinp year and all new sources.

Processing Subcategory Subpart M-BreadL.Shrmp.ProcesslngUn

Subpart J-The remote Alaskan the ContiguousStates Subcategory

shrimp processing subcategory is SubparklM-The breadedshrmp proc-amended by revising §§- 408.10.0 and 408.- esslng in,the contiguous States, subcate-105to read as follows- gory Is amended by revising § 408.130 to

§ 408.100 Applicability; description of fead as follows:

the remote Alaskan shrimp, process- § 408.130 Applicability;- description ofing subcategory. the breaded'shrimp processing in the

The pravisions' of this subpart are ap- contiguous-States subcategory.

plicable to discharges, resulting from the The provisforis of this subpart are ap-processingof shrimp in remote Alaska. plicable to discharges resulting from theThe effuent- limitations contained in processing of breaded shrimp In the con-this SubpartJ are applicable- to facilities - tiguous- States bv existing facilities proc.not covered under Subpart r of this part. essing- more than 908 kc- (2000 lbs) of

§ 408.105 Standards-of performancefor raw material per day on any day duringa calendar year and all new sources.new SOUres.

The: following standards of perform-ance establish..the quantity, or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties, con-trolled by- this section, which.may be dis-charged by- a new source subject to theprovisions-of this-subpart: No pollutantsmay be. discharged which. exceed 1.27. cm(0.5 inch) in any dimension.

Subpart KL-Northern Shrimp Processing ihthe-Contiguous States Subcategcry

Subpart. K-The. northern shrimpprocessingin the contiguous States sub-category-is amended-by revising 1 408.110to read, as follows:

§ 408-.110- Applicability-,' description ofthe-,Nbrthern shrimpprocessing inthe contiguous States subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable.to discharge.-resulting- from theprocessing of shrimp in the Northerncontiguous States; including-Washington,Oregon; California, Maine, New Hamp-shire, and Massachusetts. The effluentlimitations* contained in this Subpart K

- areapplicable to existing facilities proc-essing-more than 908 kg (2000 lbs) of rawmaterial per day on any day during acalendar year and all new sources.

Subpart L-Souther-i Non-Breaded ShrimpProcessingin the Contiguous States Sub-category

Subpart L--The Southern non-breaded shrimp processing in the con-tiguous States- subcategory is amendedby revising § 108.120 to read as follows:

§ 408.120 Applicability; description ofthe Southern non-breaded shrimpprocessing in. the contiguous Statessubcategory.

The provisions of this subpart. are ap-plicable to discharges resulting-from theprocessing of non-breaded shrimp inthe Southern contiguous States, includ-ing .North and South Carolina, Georgia,Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana,and Texas. The effluent limitations con-tained7 in this Subpart L are applicableto existing facilities processing more

Subpart N-Tuna Processing SubcategorySubpart N-The tuna pr6cessing sub-

- category Is amended by revising § 408.140to read as follows:§ 408.140 Applicability; description of

the tuna. processing subcategory.The provisions of this subpart are ap-

plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing of tuna.

Subpart O-Fish MhealProcessingSubcategory

§ 408.150 Applicability; description ofthe fisli meal processing suYcatcgory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing of menhaden on the Gulf andAtlantic Coasts and the processing ofanchovy on the West Coast into fishmeal, oil and solubles.

§ 408.151 Specialized definition.For the purpose of this subpart:(a) Except as provided below, the gen-

eral definitions, abbreviations and meth-bds of analysis set forth in Part 401 ofthis chapter shall apply to this subpart.

(b) The term "seafood" shall meanthe- raw material, including freshwaterand saltwater fish and shellfish, to beprocessed, in the form in which It isreceived at the processing plant;

§ 408.152 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the npplica.tlion of die best, practicable controltechnology currently available.

(a) In establishing the limitations setforth in this section, EPA took into ac-count all information it was able to col-lect, develop and sollcit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manufacturing processes,products produced, treatment technologyavailable, energy requirements and'costs)which can affect the industry subeate-gorization and effluent levels established.It- is, however, possible that data whichwould affect these limitations have notbeen- available and, as a result, these

limitations shloul'cr be adjusted for cer-tallmplrnt inths industry. An individualdischarger or other interested personmay submit evidence to the RegionalAdminintrator (or to the State, if theState has the authority to issue NPDESpermits)- that, factors- relating- tr theequipment orfacilties involved, the proc-ess applied' or other such factors re-lated to such discharger, are- fundamen-tally different. fromn. the factors consid-ered- in- theestablishment of the- guide-lines. On the basis of such evidence orother available information, the RegionalAdministrator (or the State) will makea written finding. that such factors areor are not fundamentally different forthat facility compared to those specifiedin the Development Document IL suchfundamentally different factors arefound to exist, the Regional Administra-tor or the State shall establish, for thedischarger efluent limitations in theNPDES permit either more or less strin-gent than th limitations establishedheein, to the extent dictated by suchfundamentally different factors. Suchlimitations must; be approved by the Ad-ministrator of the Environmental Pro-tection Agency. The Administrator rayapprove or disapprove such limitations,specify other-limitations, or initiate pr-ceedings to revise these regulations.

(b) The following limitations estab-lish the quantity or quality of pollutantsor pollutant properties, controlled by thissection. which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

(1) Any menhaden or anchovy fishmeal reduction facility which utilizes asolubles plant to process stick water orbail water shall meet the following limi-tations.

FfUlnt Umitatrons

Etfflet Avers of dfflycbra~terhfe4 M.xdmum L- valas~ ra

any I day conxative daysshall termcr-

(Metric nita) kelakig orsa~ml

DODS ....... 3.5TS . ... .. L3Otl =ad re-o, OM....... 0-- -63pIL Z Within tha -

(Ezllih unit) lbC0Cholseafrcd

TS0D$, ,42....__ L5T3 ...... ... 2.3- L3Oil =d Zrr" 0MCI_ ... 03

.withn th3r! ~a c&a to9.0..-

(2) Any menhaden or anchovy fishmeal reduction facilitynotcovered-underT408.152(b) (f) shall meet the followinglimitations:

FEDERAr REGISTER, VOL- 40, NO. 231-MONDAY, DECEMCER 1, 1975

55782

Effluent limitations

Effluent Ave ilycharacteristio Maximum for values for 30

any 1 day consecutive daysshall notexceed-

(Metric units) kglkkg of seafood

BOD ------------ 3.5 ---------. 2.8TSS -------------- 2.6 -------------- 1.7Oil and grease ...... 3.2 -------------- 1.4pH ................. Within the ------------------

range 6.0 to9.0.

(English units) lbI/,000 lb of seafood

BOD ------------ 3.5 ------------- 2.8TSS -------------- 2.0 ------------- 1.7Oil and grease -- 3.2 -------------- 1.4pH .............. Within the ----------------

range 6.0 to9.0.

§ 408.153 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best ivailable technologyeconomically achievable.

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollfitants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of thebest available technology economicallyachievable:


Effluent Average of dailycharacteristic Maximum for values for 30


(Metric units) kg/kkg of seafood

BODS ........... 4.0 ------------ 2.9TSB .............. 2.3 ------------- 1.3Oil and Grease - 0. 0.63pH ................ Within the ------------------

range 6.0 to9.0.

(English units) IbI1,000 lb of seafood

DODS .......... -- 4.0 ------------- 2.9TS . ........... 2.3 -------------- 1.3Oil and grease .... 0.0-- 0.63pH ............... Within t...............-

range 6.0 to9.0.

§ 408.154 Pretreatment standards for

existing sources.

The pretreatment-standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe fish meal -processing subcategorywhich is a user of a publicly owned treat-ment works and a major contributing in-dustry as defined in Part 128 of this chap-ter (and which would be an existing pointsource subject to section 301 of the Act,if it were to discharge pollutants to thenavigable waters), shall be the stand-ard set forth in Part 128 of this chapterexcept that, for the purpose of this sec-tion, §§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132 and128.133 of this chapter shall not apply.The following pretreatment standard

RULES AND REGULATIONS-

etblishes the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties con-trolled by this section which may be dis-charged to a publicly -owned treatmentworks by a point source subject to theprovisions of this subpart.

Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatmentproperty standard

BOD5TSS .....pH ----------------- Z -----Oil and grease ------------

No limitation.Do.Do.DO.


The following standards of perform-ance establish thd quantity or qualityof pollutants or pollutant properties,controlled by this section, which may bedischarged by a new source subject to

- the provisions of this subpart:


Effluent Average of daily'characteristic Maximum for values for 30

any I day consecutive daysshall notexceed-


BeD5 ------------ 4.0 ------ * .... 2.0TSS .............. 2.3 -------------- 1.3Oil and grease .... 0.80 ------------- 0.63pH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Within the ------------------

range 6.0 to9.0.

(English units) lbJ1,000'lb of seafood

BOD5..... ...... 4.0 -------------- 2.9TSS .............. 2.3 ---------------. 1.3Oil and grease . 0.80 ------------- 0.63p ............... Within the ---------- -------

range 6.0 to9.0.

§408;156 Pretreatment standards fornew sources.

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a newsource within the fish meal processingsubcategory which is a user of-a publiclyowned treatment works and a major con-tributing industry as defined In Part 128of this chapter (and which would be anew source subject to section 306 of theAct, if it were to discharge pollutants tothe navigable waters), shall be the samestandard as set forth in Part 128 of thischapter, f6r existing sources, except that,for the purpose of this section, §§ 128.121,128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of thischap-ter shall not apply. The following pre-treatment standard establishes thequantity or quality of .ollutants or pol-lutant properties controlled by this sec-tion which may be discharged to a pub-licly owned treatment worka by a newsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart:


BeD5 ---------------------- No limitation.TSS ----------------------- Do.pH ------------------------ Do.Ol and grease ------------- Do.


Subp3rt P---Aaskan Hand-ButchoredSalmon Processing Subcategory

§ 408.160 Applicability, description ofthe Alaskan hand-butchered sahnolprocessing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from thehand-butchering of salmon In Alaska.§ 408.161 Specialized definitions.

F6r the purpose of this subpart:(a) Except as provided below, the gen-

eral definitions, abbreviations and meth-ods of analysis set forth In Part 401 ofthis chapter shall apply to this subpart.

(b) The term "seafood" shall mean theraw material, including freshwater andsaltwater fish and shell fish, to be proc-essed, In the form In which it Is receivedat the processing plant.§ 408.162 Effluent linhations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best practicable controltechnology currently available.

(a) In establishing the limitations Petforth In this section, EPA took Into ac-count all Information It was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manu-facturing processes,products produced, treatment technologyavailable, energy requirements and costs)which can affect the industry subcate-gorization and effluent levels established.It is, however, possible that data whichwould affect these limitations have notbeen available and, as a result, these lhn-Itations should be adjusted for certain,plants In this industry. An individual dis-charger or other Interested person maysubmit evidence to the Regional Admin-istrator (or to the State, If the State hasthe authority to Issue NPDES permits)that factors relating to the equipment orfacilities Involved, the process applied, orother such factors related to such dis-charger are fundamentally different fromthe factors considered in the establish-ment of the guidelines. On the basis ofsuch evidence or other available Infor-mation, the Regional Administrator (orthe State) will make a written findingthat such factors are or are not funda-maentally different for that facility com-pared to those specified In the Develop-ment Document. If such fundamentallydifferent factors are found to exist, theRegional Administrator or the State shallestablish for the discharger effluent lim-itations In the NPDES permit either moreor less stringent than the limitations es-tablished herein, to the extent dictatedby such fundamentally different factors.Such limitations must be approved by theAdministrator of the Environmental Pro-tection Agency. The Administrator mayapprove or disapprove such limitations,specify other limitations, or initiate pro-ceedings to revise these regulations.

(b) The following limitations establishthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties controlled by thissection, which may be discharged by a

RULES AND- REGULATIONS

point source: subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestpracticable control, technology currentlyavailable:

(1) Any hand&-butcheredsabmon proc-essing facility located" in population, orprocessing centers including.but not lim-ited. to Anchorage,. Cordova,, Juneau,Ketcbikar, Kodiak, and Petersburg shallmeet, the. following limitations:

Effluenvtlimitations

Effluent Average of dailycharacteristic Maximum for values for S0

any--day- consecutive-daysshall notexceed-

(Metric units) kg~kkg of seafood

TSS . .---------. L7 ------------- 1.4Oland-grease_ .... 0--......... 0.17pl ------- Within the -..----------- I.

range 6.0 to

(Eaglish units) lb/l,000 lb of seafood

TSS ---------- L7 -L4Oil-end-greasez- -- 0.20 ---------.. 0.17pW ------. Within the .............

re 6.0 to

(2) Any hanct-butchered salmon proc-essing facility not covered under§ 408.162(b) (1) shall meet the follow-ing limitations: No pollhtants may bedischarged which exceed. 1.27 cm. (0.5inch) in any dimension§408.163 Effluent limitations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction-attainable by the applica-tibn of- the best available technologyeconomically achievable.

TheL following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tibn, whicfrmay be-discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions ofthis, subpart after application of thebest available technology economicallyachievable:

Efluentiinitmitons

Effluent- Average ordallyCharacteristic Maximum for, values for 30

any Lday- consecutive-daysshall notexceed-

(Betic-anits) kglkkg-of seafood

Tss --- 1.5 ------ 2-- L2O1aa&grease_ 0.1 ....

Within therange 6:0 to-9.0.

(English units) lb1.!001b ofseafood

Tss_ _ ........-- -- L2Oil andgreaSe.... 0.18 ....... 015pH . .------------ Within the

range 60-to9.0.

§ 408.164 Pretreatment. standards for- exrstiniasources.-

The pretreatment-standard under sec-tion-302(b) of the Act for a source withinthe. Alaskan hand-butchered salmon

processingsubcategory which is a userof a publicly owned treatment works anda major contributing industry as-definedin Part 128 of this chapter (and whichwould be an existing point source subjectto section 301 of the Act. if It were todischarge- pollutants- tor the- navigablewaters), shall be the standard set forthin- Part 128- ofthis chapter, except that.for the purpose ofthis section. §§ 128:121,128.122, 128.132-and 128.133 of this chap-ter shall not apply. The following pre-treatment standard establishes the quan-tity or quality of pollutahts or pollutantproperties controlled by this sectionwhich may, be discharged to a publiclyowned treatment works by a point sourcesubject to the provisions of this subpart.

Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatmentproverty standard

BODS -----------.-.-- o imltation.TSS -- Do.pH DO.Oil and grease.... Do.

§ 408.165: Standards of performance fornewaourccs.

(a) -The following standards of per-formance establish the quantity or qual-ity of pollutants or pollutant properties,controlled by this section, which may bedischarged by a new source subject to theprovisions of this subpart:

(1) Any hand-butchered salmon proc-essing facility located in population orprocessing centers including but not lim-ited to Anchorage, Cordova, Juneau,Ketchikan, Kodiak, and Petersburg shallmeet the following limitations:

Emuent imitatlons- Effluent Avera.ecfdrily

cbaractcrlsite Maximum for valuri frE]auy I day corarcutlie days

Itall notexceed-

(Metric units) l:fkkgotrrafco

TSS .............. 1.5 .......... 2011nandgreaso.- 0.18.. 0 .5pH ..............- Wlithin the ................-

ranlgo 6.0 to9.0. -

(English units) Il,C0 l b o f r__.cod

'TSS-_....-. 1.5 ........... L2Oilndgese.... 0.18.....-.... . 0.15pH............ -- -Within the----------

range .0 to

(2) Any hand-butchered salmonprocessing facility not covered under§ 408.165 (a) (1) shall meet the followinglimitations: No pollutants may be dis-charged which exceed 1.27 cm (0.5 inch)in any dimension,

§408.166 Pretreatment standards fornew sources.

Thepretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new source-within the Alaskan hand-butcheredsalmon processing subcategory which is auser of a publicly owned treatment worksand, a major contributing industry asdefined In Part 128 of this chapter (andwhich would be a new source subject tosection 306 of the Act, if it were to dis-

557S3

charge pollutantsto the navigable wa-ters), shall be the same standard as setforth In Part 128 of this chapter, forexisting-sources, except that, for the pur-pose of this section, §§ 128.121, 123.122,128.132 and 128.133 of this chapter shallnot apply. The following pretreatmentstandard establishes the quantity or qual-ity of pollutants or pollutant propertiescontrolled by this section which may bedischarged to a publiclyowned treat-ment works by a new, source subject tothe provisions of this subpart:

Pollutant or pollutant Pret retmentpropyrr standard

BOD - o imitatinn.TSS ______ Ds'pH ... l ao.Ol and grease 3 ._

Subpart QL--Alaskan Mechanized SalmonProcessing Subcategory

§ 403.170 Applicability; description ofthe Alasknn mechanized salmon pror-esing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are al.-plicable to discharges resulting from thumechanized butchering of salmon i,Alaska.

§ 408.171 Specializeddefinitions.

For the purpose of this subpart:(a) Ecept as provided below, the gen-

eral definitions, abbreviations and meth-ods of analysis set forth in Part 401 ofthis chapter shall apply to this subpart.

(b) The terra"seafood!" shall mean theraw material. including freshwater andsaltwater fish and shellfish, to, be proc-essed, in the form In which it is receivedat the processing plant.

§ 408.172 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting- the- degree- of effluentreduction attainable by- the applica-tion of thebest practicable- controltechnology currently available.

(a) In establishing the limitations setforth in this section, EPA took into ac-count all information It was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,.raw materials, manufacturing processes,products produced, treatment technologyavailable, energy requirements andcosts) which can affect the industry sub-cate'orization and effluent levels estab-lished. It Is, however, possible that datawhich would affect these limitations-havenot been available and, as a result;, theselimitations should be adjusted for cer-tamn plants In this industry. Ar individ-ual discharger or other interested personmay submit evidence to- the BegionalAdministrator (or to the State, if theState has the authority to issue NPDESpermits) that factors relating to theequipment orfacilftles involved, theproc-e._- applied, or other such factors relatedto such discharger are fundamentallydifferent from the factors considered inthe establishment of the guidelines. Onthe badis of such evidence or other avail-able Information, the Regional Admin-istrator (or the State) will make a writ-ten finding that such factors are or arenot fundamentally different for that fa-city compared to those specified in theDevelopment Document If such funda-

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231-MONDAY,-DECFB1R 1, 1975

55784 RULES AND REGULATIONS

mentally different factors are found tocexist, the Regional Administrator or theState shall establish for the discharger,effluent limitations in the NPDES permiteither more or less stringent than thelimitations established herein, to the ex-tent dictated by such fundamentally dif-ferent factors. Such limitations must beapproved by the Administrator of theEnvironmental Protection Agency. TheAdministrator may approve or disap-prove such limitations, specify other lim-itations, or initiate proceedings to revisethese regulations.

(b) The following limitations establishthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties, controlled by thissection, which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

(1) Any mechanized salmon processingfacility located in population or process-ing centers including but not limited toAnchorage, Cordova, Juneau, Ketehikan,Kodiak, and Petersburg shall meet thefollowing limitations:


Fffluent - -Average of dailycharacteristic Maxlmum for values for 30



TSS .-------------- 27 -------------- 22Oil and grease ---- 27 --------------- 10pH --------------- Within the ----..............

range 6.0 to9.0.

(English u-bits) l15.000 lb of seafood

TSS ------.-------- 27 --------------- 22oil and grease ---- 27 --------------- 10pH --------------- Within the -...............

range 6.0 to9.0.

(2) Any mechanized salmon process-ing facility not covered under § 408.172(b) (1) shall meet the following limita-tions: No pollutants may be dischargedwhich exceed 1.27 cm (0.5 inch) in anydimension.

§ 408.173 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-.tion of the best" available technologyeconomically achievable.

(a) The following limitations establishthe quantity or quality of -pollutants orpollutant properties, controlled by thissection, which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestavailable technology economicallyachievable:

(1) Any mechanized salmon process-ing facility located in population orprocessing centers including but notlim-ited to Anchorage, Cordova, Juneau,Ketehikmn, Kodiak, and Petersburg shallmeet the following limitations:


Emuent Averagb of dailycharacteristie Maximum for values for 30



BOD5 ------ 16 -------------- 13TSS --------- 2.6. 2.2Oil and grease ---- 2.6 ----------- _1.0pH ---------------- Within the ------------------

* range 6.0 to9 9.0.

(English units) lb/1,000 lb of seafood

BODS -------------- 16 --------------- 13TSS -------------- 2.6 -----------.. 2.2Oil and grease 2.6 ---------- --- 1.0pH -------------:..Within the ------------------range 0.0 to

9.0.

(2) Any mechanized salmon processingfacility not covered under § 408.173(a) (1)shall meet the following limitations:


Effluent Average of daily _characterlstic 1axhnum for values for 30

any I day consecutive dayashall notexceed-


TS -------------- 26 ------------- - 21Oil and grease ---- 26 --------------- 10pH --------------- Within the ------------------

range 6.0 to9.0.

(English units) 1b1l,000 lb of seafood

TSS --------------- 26 --------------- 21Oil and grease ---- 26 10pH --------------- Within the ..................

range 6.0 to2.0.

§ 408.174 Pretreatment -standards forexisting sources. -

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe Alaskani mechanized salmon process-ing subcategory which is a user of a pub-licly owned treatment works and a majorcontributing industry as defined in Part128 of this chapter (and which would bean existing point source subject to sec-tion 301 of the Act, if it were to dis-charge pollutants to the navigablewaters), shall be the standard set forthin Part 128 of this chapter, except that,for the purposd of this section, § § 128.121,128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of this chap-ter shall not apply. Thef following pre-treatment standard establishes the quan-tity or quality of pollutants or pollutantproperties controlled by this. sectionwhich may be discharged to a publiclyowned treatment works by a point sourcesubject to the provisions of this subpart.


BOD5 --------------------- No limitation.TSS ----------------------- Do.pH ------------------------- -- Do.On and grease -------------- Do.


(a) The following standards of per-formance- establish the quantity orquality of pollutants or pollutant prop-erties, controlled by this section, whichmay be discharged by a new source sub-ject to the provisions of this subpart:

(1) Any mechanized salmon processingfacility located in population or process-ing centers Including but not limited toAnchorage, Cordova, Juneau, Ketchikan,Kodiak, and Petersburg shall meet thefollowing limitations:


Effluent Average of dailycharacteristie Maximum for values for so

any I day Conrecutive daySshall notexceed-


TSS ................ 26 .............. 21Oil and grease ---- 26 ............... 10pH ............... Within the ..................

range 0.0 to9.0.

(English units) lb/1,000 lb of seafod

TSS -------------- 20 ............... 21Oil and grease ---- 26 ............... 10pH ............... Within the ..................

range 6.0 to9.0.

(2) Any mechanized salmon processingfacility not covered under § 408.175 (a) (1)shall meet the following limitations: Nopollutants may be discharged which ex-ceed 1.27 cm (0.5 inch) in any dimension,§408.176 Pretreatment standards for

iew sources.The pretreatment standard under sec-

tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the Alaskan mechanized salmonprocessing subcategory which Is a userof a publicly owned treatment works anda major contributing industry as definedin Part 128 of this chapter (and whichwould be a new source subject to sec-tion 306 of the Act, if it were to diq-charge pollutants to the navigable wa-ters, shall be the same standards as setforth in Part 128 of this chapter, forexisting sources, except that, for the pur-pose of this section, §§ 128.121, 128.122,128.132 and 128.133 of this chapter shallnot apply. The following pretreatmentstandard establishes the quantity orquality of pollutants or pollutant proper-ties controlled by this section which maybe discharged to a publicly owned treat-ment works by a new source subject tothe provisions of this subpart:

Pollutant or pollutant Ptetrecatmcntproperty standard

BOD5 -------------------- No limitation,TSS ----------------------- Do.pH ---------- ------------- Do.Oil and grease -------------- Do.

Subpart R-West Coast Hand-ButcheredSalmon Processing Subcategory -

§ 408.180 Applicability; description ofthe West Coast hand-butchercd sal-mon processing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart arc ap-plicable to discharges resulting from the



hand-butchering of salmon on the WestCoast.

§ 408.181 Specialized definitions.

For the purpose of this subpirt:(a) Except as provided below, the gen-

eral definitions, abbreviations and meth-ods of analysis set forth in Part 401 ofthischapter shall apply to gi subpart.

(b) The term "seafood" shall meanthe raw material, including freshwaterand saltwater fish and shellfish, to beprocessed, in the form in which it isreceived at the processing plant.

§ 408.182 Effluent limitations gidelinsrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by tie applica-tion of the best jiracticablo controltechnology currently available.

In establishing the limitations set forthin this section, EPA took into accountall information it was able to collect, de-velop and solicit with respect to factors

- (such as age and size of plant, raw mate-rials, manufacturing processes, productsproduced, treatment technology avail-able, energy requirements and costs)which can affect the industry subcatego-rization and effluent levels established. Itis, however, possible that data whichwould affect these limitations.have notbeen available and, as a result, these lim-itations should be adjusted for certainplants in this industry. An individual dis-charger or other interested person maysubmit evidence to the Regional Admin-istratoi- (or to-the State,-if the State hasthe authority to issue NPDES permits)that factors relating to the equipment orfacilities involved, the process applied, orother such factors related to such dis-charger are fundamentally differentfrom the factors considered in the es-tablishment of the guidelines. On thebasis of such evidence or other availableinformation, the Regional Administrator(or the State) will make a written find-

ing that such factors are or are not fun-damentally different for that facilitycompared to those speciefid in the De-velopment Document. If such fundamen-tally different factors are found to exist,the Regional Administrator or the Stateshall establish for the discharger effluentlimitations in the NPDES permit eithermore or less stringenit than the limita-tions established herein, to the extentdictated by such fundamentally differentfactors. Such limitations must be ap-proved by the Administrator of theEn-vironmental Protection Agency. The Ad-ministrator may approve or disapprovesuch limitations, specify, other limita-tions, or initiate procedings to revisethese regulations.

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

Effluent umltauons

Effluent Avero ddai7lycharctedstio laximum for ,lue for 30

any I day canocutve daysriall notezoeed-

(Mctrie units) kgJkkg of seaood

2.4Oil and greseo..... 0-10 ------------- e.17pH ............. Within the ................

rango 0.0 to0.0.

(English units) Ib)1,000 lb of sfood

TSS ....... ...... 1.7 ............ 1.4Oil and greaso --- 0 ............. 0.17pIT ----------------- Within the .............

range 0.0 to9.0.

§ 408.183 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best available technologyeconomically achievable.

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of the bestavailable technology economicallyachievable:

EilluentiUzaltatlans

Effluent AvEfut ot ocluxactcristlo Mxilmur for eu for Z1

any I day conscutive daysshali notexceed-

(Metlo units) kgJkkg ofseood

BOD$. .......... . L2 .............. 1.0TSS ------------ .. 0.1I ............. 0.12Olandgrease...._0 W ........ 0. spiL ------------ i Iv'thin the ..................

range 6.0 to0.0.

(English units) 11Y,OO Ib ofacnfovd

BOD .----------- L2 .............. 1.0TSS -------------- 0.15 ............ 0.12Oil and greae ...... 0 0.018piL ---------------- lWIlthe .................

range 0. 0 to9.0.

§ 408.184 Pretreatment standards forexisting sources.

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe West Coast hand-butchered salmonprocessing subcategory which is a userof a publicly owned treatment works anda major contributing Industry as definedin Part 128 of this chapter (and whichwould be an existing point source sub-ject to section 301 of the Act, if It wereto discharge pollutants to the navigablewaters), shall be the standard set forthin Part 128 of this chapter, except that,for the purpose of this section. §§ 128.121,128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of this chap-ter shall not apply. The following pre-

55785

treatment standard establishes the quan-tity or quality of pollutants or pollutantproperties controlled by this sectionwhich may be discharged to a publiclyowned treatment works by a-point sourcesubject to the provisions of this subpart,


BOD5 No itmitation.TSS Dno.pH Do.Oil and grear --.. ........ Do.


The following standards of perfor-mance establish the quantity or qualityof pollutants or pollutant properties,controlled by this section. which may bedischarged by a new source subject to theprovisions of this subpart:

Efluent lImltatfons

Efluznt Aveofdn11ytcdhr tf Mlmum for values for

any 1 dy can.a'tive dayssolnl.notexceed-

(Sletra units) ki;kkg ofsea d

BOD.... L1.4TSS ..--------- 040....... 0.37Oil and g----.-.... 0.& .....-... -0.WpH --------------- Withatba

rango0.DtoS0. 0.

(Lnsilsh unis) lb l.(O Ib orseartd

nODS ......... ..... L4TSS ............ 0.4G ------. 0.37Oil andgsrc -...... C 0_3pIL ............ hln the

ramog 0.0 to

§408.186 Pietreatment standards fornew sources.

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the West Coast hand-butcheredsalmon processing subcategory which is auser of a publicly owned treatment worksand a major contributing industry as de-fined In Part 128 of this chapter (andwhich would be a new source subject tosection 306 of the Act, if It were to dis-charge pollutants to the navigablewaters), shall be the same standard asset forth In Part 128 of this chapter, forexisting sources, except that, for the pur-pose of this section. §§ 128.121, 128.122,128.132 and 128.133 of this chapter shallnot apply. The following pretreatmentstandard establishes the quantity orquality of pollutants or pollutant prop-erties controlled by this section whichmay be discharged to a publicly ownedtreatment works by a new source subjectto the provisions of this subpart:

Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatnentpr'perty standard

BODS No limltation.TSS Do.pH - -3o.O1 and grea .......... Do.

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231-4MONDAY, DECEBER 1, 1975

RULES'AND REGULATIONS

Subpart S-West Coast MechanizedSalmon Processing Subcategory

9 408.190 Applicability; description ofthe West Coast mechanized salmonprocessing subcategory.

The provisions of this, subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from themechanized butchering of salmon on theWest Coast.§ 408.191 Specialized definitions.

For the purpose of this subpart:(a) Except as provided below, the gen-


(b) The term "seafood" shall mean theraw material, including freshwater andsaltwater fish and shellfish, to be-proc-essed, In the form in which it Is receivedat the processing plant.§ 408.192 Effluent lhinitations guidelines


In'establishing the limitations set forthin this section, EPA took into account allinformation it was able to collect, developand solicit with respect to factors (suchas age and size of plant, raw materials,manufacturing processes, products pro-duced, treatment techn6logy available,energy requirements and costs) whichcan affect the industry subcategorizationand effluent levels established. It is, how-ever, possible that data which would af-fect these limitations have not beenavailable and, as a result, these limita-tions should be adjusted for certainplants in this industry. An individualdischarger or other interested personmay submit evidence to the RegionalAdministrator (or to the State, if theState has the authority to issue NPDESpermits) that factors relating to theequipment or facilities involved, theprocess applied, or other such factorsrelated to such discharger are funda-mentally different from the factors con-sidered in the establishment of the guide-lines. On the basis of such evidence orother available information, the RegionalAdministrator (or the State) will makea written finding that such factors areor are not fundamentally different forthat facility compared to those specifiedin the Development Document. If suchfundamentally different factors arefound to exist, the-Regional Administra-tor or the State shall establish for thedischarger effluent -limitations in theNPDES permit either more or lessstringent than the limitations establishedherein, to the extent dictated by suchfundamentally different factors. Suchlimitations must be approved by the Ad-ministrator of the Environmental Pro-tection Agency. The Administrator mayapprove or disapprove such limitations,specify other limitations, or Initiateproceedings to revise these 'regulations.

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a poiit

source subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

Effluent lintitations

Effluent Average of dailycharacteristic Maximum for values foral



TSS --------------- 27 .. ---------- 22Oil and grease -- 27 ............ 10pH ---------------- Within the -----------------

range 6.0 to9.0.

(English units) 1b/1000 lb of seafood

TSS ------------ 27 22Oil and grease ---- 27 --------------- 10pH -----.--------- Within the ..................

range 6.0 to9.0.

§ 408.193 Effluenit limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best available technologyeconomically achievable. -

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-luant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thiqsubpart after application of the bestavailable technology economicallyachievable:



any/day cons.cuttve daysshall notexceed-


BODS ------------ 16 --------------- 13TSS ------------. 2.G---- - 2.2Oil and grease ---- 2.6 1.0p1------------- Within the .................

range 6.0 to9.0.


BOD5 --------- - - 16 ----------- --- 13TSS -------------- 2.6 ............ 2.2Oil and grease ---- 2.6 -------------- 1.0pH --------------- Within the ------------------

- range 6.0 to,9.0.

§408.194 Pretreatment standards forexisting sources.

The pretreatment standardunder sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe West Coast mechanized salmon pro-cessing subcategory which is a user of apublicly, owned treatment works -and amajor contributing industry as defined inPart 128 of this- Chapter (and- whichwould be an existing point source subjectto section 301 of the Act, if it were todischarge pollutants to the navigablewaters), shall'be the standard set forthin Part 128 of this Chapter, except that,for the purpose of-thissection, §§ 128.121,

128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of thisChapter shall not apply. The followingpretreatment standard establishes thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties controlled by this sec-tion which may be discharged to apublicly owned treatment works by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart.

Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatnteontproperty standard

B0D5 -------------------- No limitation,TSS ---------------------- Do.pH ----------------------- Do.011 and grease ------------- Do.

§ 408.195 Standards of performance fot. new sources.The following standards of perform-

ance establish the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties, con-trolled by.this section, which may be dis-charged by a new source subject to thoprovisions of this subpart:


Effluent Average of dailychargetcristlo Maximun for valutes for 30

any I day con.ecutIve daysny y Mll not

exceed-

(Metric units) kglkk& of seafood

BOD5-------. 39 ............... 02TSS ---- 7.9 .............. 0.Oil and grease ...... 3.8 .............. ,15PH ------...--.--- Within the ..................

range 6.0 to9.0.


DODS ............. 39 ............... 31TSS ................ 7.9 .............. 0,aOil and grease ...... 3. .............. 1.5PH ................ Within the .................

range 6.0 to9.0.

§ 408.196 Pretrcautmcnt standards fornew sources.

The pretreatment standard tnder sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the West Coast mechanized sal-mon processing subcategory which is auser of a publicly owned treatment worksand a major contributing Industry asdefined in Part 128 of this Chapter (andwhich would be a new source subject tosection 306 of the. Act, If It were to dis-charge pollutants to the navigablewaters), shall be the same standard asset forth in Part 128 of this Chapter, forexisting sources, except that, for the pur-pose of this section, §§ 128.121, 128,122,128.132 and 128.133 of this Chapter shallnot apply. The following pretreatmentstandard establishes the quantity orquality of pollutants or pollutant prop-erties controlled by this section whichmay be discharged to a publicly ownedtreatment works by a new source subjectto the provisions of this subpart:

Pollutant or pollutant - Pretreatmentproperty standard

BODS -------------- No limitation.TSS ---------------------- Do.pH ------------------------- - Do.O11 and grease ------------- Do.


55786


Subpart T-Alaskan Bottom FishProcessing Subcategory

§ 408.200 Applicability; description ofthe Alaskan hottans fish processingsubcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing of bottom fish such as halibutin Alaska.

§ 408 .201 Specialized definitions.

For the purpose of this subpart:(a) Except as provided below, the

general -definitions, abbreviations andmethods of analysis set forth in Part 401bf this Chapter shall apply to this sub-part.

(b) The term "seafood" shall meanthe raw material, including freshwaterand saltwater-fish and shellfish, to beprocessed, in the form in which it Isreceived at the processing plant.

§ 408.202 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluent.reduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best practicable controltechnology currendy available.

(a) In establishing the limitations setforth in this section7 EPA took into ac-count all information It was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with- respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manufacturing processes,products produced, treatment tech-nology available, energy requirementsand costs) which can affect the industrysubcategorization and effluent levels es-tablished. It is, however, possible thatdata which would affect these limitationshave not been available and as a result,these limitations should be adjusted forcertain plants in this industry. An in-dividual discharger or other interestedperson may submit evidence to theRegional Administrator (or to the State,if the State has the authority to issueNPDES permits) that factors relating tothe equipment or facilities involved, theprocess applied, or other such factors re-lated to such discharger are funda-mentally different from the factors con-sidered in- the establishment of theguidelines. -On the basis of suchevidence or other available information,the Regional Administrator (or theState) will make a written finding thatsuch factors are or are not funda-mentally different for that facility com-pared to those specified in the Develop-ment Document. If such fundamentallydifferent factors are found to exist, theRegional Administrator or the Stateshall establish for the discharger effluentlimitations in the NPDES permiteither more or less stringent than thelimitations established herein, to the ex-tent dictated by such fundamentallydifferent factors. Such limitations mustbe approved by the Administrator of theEnvironmental Protection Agency. TheAdministrator may approve or disap-prove such limitations, specify otherilimitations, or initiate proceedings to re-vise these regulations.

(b) The following limitations estab-lish the quantity or quality of pollutantsor pollutant properties, controlled by

this section, which may be discharged bya point source subject to the provisionsof this subpart after application of thebest practicable control technology cur-rently available:

(1) AnyAlaskan bottom fish processingfacility located In population or process-ing centers including but not limited toAnchorage, Cordova, Juneau, Ketchikan,Kodiak, and Petersburg shall meet thefollowing limitations:

Eiueat Umltatfors

Effl ent Aveu of d3lyelmracteristio maximum for vrS e3d

any I day consecutive dzysrmil notexceed-

(Uetzia units) kgjkkg oirfood

TSS.... ...... - .. ...- L9Oil and grese.... 4.3 1.....,.1, 0.pL- ... Wtth0 ............

6ag .0 to9.0.. t

(English units) ib/1,000 ib otefood

TSS_.- ..... 1.On and gree --- 4- 9.5pIL ...........- Within the ........ .rango 6.0 to

9.0.

(2) Any Alaskan bottom-flsh process-ing facility not covered under J 408.202(b) (1) shall meet the following limita-tions: No pollutants may be dischargedwhich exceed 1.27 cm (0.5 inch) in anydimension.

§ 408.203 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best available tchmologyeconomically achicvable.

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application ofthe best available technology economi-cally achievable:

Emuentitttons

Effluent Averago ct danychrtcrstio Maximum far vaun for 30

any I day consecut] d

exced-

(Metri units) kglkk otcmfod

T55 ----------. O----9--- LiOil and greaso-2.0 ............. QIp ----------- :::....Withint .................

range 0.0 to

(English units) b11,000 lb otoraood

TSS .............. LO ............. L IOil and greso....-2.0 .............. aspL ............... Within te ..................

;rg 0.0 to9.0 -o


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source with-

in the Alaskan bottom fish processingsubcategory which is a user of a pub-licly owned treatment works and a majorcontributing Industry as defined in Part128 of this chapter (and which wouldbe an existing point source subject tosection 301 of the Act, if It were to dis-charge pollutants to the navigable wa-ters), shall be the standard set forth inPart 128 of this chapter, except that, forthe purpose of this section, §§ 128.121,128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of this chap-ter shall not apply. The following pre-treatment standard establishes thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties controlled by this sec-tion which may be discharged to apublicly owned treatment works by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart.

Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatmentproperty standar&

BOD$ - No limitation.TSS Do.pH Do.Oil and greas- .......... Do.

§ 408.205 Standards of performance fornew source&.

(a) The following standards of per-foriance establish the quantity or qual-Ity of pollutants or pollutant properties,controlled by this section, which may bedischarged by a new source subject tothe provisions of this subpart:

(1) Any Alaskan bottom fish process-ing facility located In population orproc-essing centers Including but not limitedto Anchorage, Cordova, Juneau, Ketchi-kan, Kodiak, and Petersburg shall meetthe following limitations:

Effuent liittins

E flwLnt Average ofcliaraz,.ztarLs Maximum far values for 30

any I day consecutive dysshail notexceed-

(3ltria unit) kzlkkg of seatbed

TS . . ...... 9 L1Oft and 2. -...... 2 -- 0.34pL ............. Withla ths -- ....--

rano .0 to9.0.

(Enalish units) lbblCCOlb of rzeamed

Oil and grLo........ 0.34PH .............. Wi tha -..............

range .0 to

(2) Any Alaskan bottom-fish process-ing facility not covered under § 408.205(a) (1) shall meet the following limita-tions: No pollutants may be dischargedwhich exceed 1.27 cm (0.5 inch) in anydimension.


The pretreatment standard undersection 307(c) of the Act for a newsource within the Alaskan bottom fishprocessing subcategory which is a userof a publicly owned treatment works anda major contributing Industry as definedin Part 128 of this chapter (and which


55787

5ULES AND -REGULATIONS

would be a new source subject to section306 of the Act, if it were to dischargepollutants to the navigable-waters), shallbe the same standard as set forth inPart 128 of this chapter, for existingsources, except that, for the purpose ofthis section, §§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132and 128.133 of this chapter shall not ap-ply. The following pretreatment stand-ard establishes the quantity or qualityof pollutants or pollutant properties con-trolled by this section which may be dis-charged to a publicly owned treatmentworks by a new source subject to thepro-visions of this subpart:

Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatmnentproperty standard

3ODS ...........------- No limitation.,rss --------------------- Do.

pET ......----- Do.Oil and grease Do.

Subpart U-Non-Alaskan ConventionalBottom Fish ProcessingSubcategory

§ 408.210 Applicability; description ofthe non-Alaskan conventional bottomfish processing subeategory.

The provisions of this.subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing of bottom fish outside ofAlaska in which the unit operations arecarried out predominately throughmanual methods. However, the use ofscaling machines and/or' skinning.machines are considered to be normalpractice within this subcategory. Theprovisions of this subpart apply to theprocessing of currently, commerciallyprocessed species of bottom fish such asflounder, ocean perch, haddock, cod, seacatfish, sole, halibut, and rockfish. Theseprovisions apply to existing facilitiesprocessing more than 1316 kg (4000 lbs)of raw material per day on any day dur-ing a calendar year and all new sources.

§ 408.211 Specialized definitions.

For. the purpose of this subpart:(a) Except as provided below, the gen-


(b) The term "seafood" shall mean theraw material, including freshwater andsaltwater fish and shellfish, to be proc-essed, in the form in which. it Is received.at the processing plant.

§ 408.212 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best iracticable contrortechnology currently available.

In establishing the limitations setforth in this section, EPA took into ac-count all information it was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with -respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, maniifacturing processes,

(English units) lb/1,000 lb of sefo

Ts ...------------ 2.1 ............oil and greas_-.___ 0.---... ...... -pH ---------------- Within the range ....6.0reo. 0.

products pr odu'ed,' retrnm6An technol-ogy available, energy requirements andcosts) which can affect the industry sub-categorization and effluent levels estab-lished.- It Is, however, possible that datawhich would affect these limitationshave not been available and, as a re-sult, these limitations should be adjusted*for certain plants in this industry. Anindividual discharger or other interestedperson may submit evidence to the Re-gionaI Administrator (or to the State, Ifthe State has the authority- to issueIPDES permits) that factors relating tothe equipment or facilities involved, theprocess alpplied, or other such factorsrelated to such. discharger are funda-mentally differentkfrom the factors con-sidered in the establishment of the guide-lines. On the basis of such evidence orother available information, the Re-gional Administrator (or the State) willmake a written finding that such fac-tors are or are not fundamentally dif-ferent for that facilitycompared tothose specified in the Development Docu-ment. If such fundamentally differentfactors are found, to exist, the RegionalAdmfnistrator -or the State shall estab-lish for the discharger -effluent limita-tions in the NPDES permit either moreor less stringent than the limitations es-tablished herein, to the extent dictatedby such fundamentally different factors.^Such limitations must be, approved bythe Administrator of the EnvironmentalProtection Agency. The Administrator.may approve or disapprove such limita-tions, specify other limitations, or initi-,ate proceedings to revise these regula-tions. -

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions -of thissubpart after application of the best>practicable control technology currentlyavailable:

.... Effluentlimltations"Effluent Average of daily

characteritic, Iliaxi[nium for values for 30say I day consecutive daysshall notexceed-

(Mefrlcunlts kg/kkg ofseafood.

Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatment0.0 property standard0.40,

............ B.D5 -------------------- No limitation.ThS ------------------------ Do.p1 .----------------------- Do.Oi and grease --------------- Do.

§ 408.215 Standards of performuance for0 new sources.

--------- The following standards of perform-ance establish the quantity or quality of

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231-MONDAY, DECEMBER 7; 1975

55788

§408.213 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the dcgrcc of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best available technologyeconomically achievable,

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of thebest available technology economicallyachievable:

Effluent limItatlon

Efflnent Average of dailycharacteristic Maxlmum for values for 30

any 1 day consecutive daysshall notexced-

(Metric units) kglkkgl of seafood

BOD ------------ 0.73........ 0.05TS -..... .. I.5-.. ...... 0.73Oil and greas ... 0.......... 0.03p ----------------. Within t1io .................

range 0.0 to0.0.

(English units) ib1l,000 lb of seafood

BODS----- ........ 0.73 ............. 0. MTSS --------------- 1.5 .............. 0.73Oil and grease ...... 0.01 ............. 0,03pH - ..... Within the ..............

range 0.0 to

§ 408.214. Pretreatment, standards foredsting sources.

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source with-in the non-Alaskan conventiontil bottomfish processing subcategory which is auser of a publicly owned treatment worksand a major contributing Industry as de-fined in Part 128 of this chapter (andwhich would be an existing point sourcesubject to section 301 of the Act, if itwere to discharge pollutants to thenavigable waters), shall be the standardset forth in Part 128 of this chapter, ex-cept that, for the purpose of this section,§§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132 and 128,133 ofthis chapter shall not apply. The follow-ing pretreatment standard establishesthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties controlled by thissection which may be discharged to apublicly owned treatment works by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart.,

TBS ------------ - 1.. .Oil and grease ---- 0.55 ...........pH ------------- Within the range ....

0.0 to 9.0. "


pollutants or pollutant properties, con- § 408.221 Specialized definitions.trolled by this section, which ZaOy be dis- Fr the purpose of this subpart:charged by a. new source subject to the- (a) Except as provided below, theprovisions of this subpart: general definitions, abbreviations and

methods of analysis set forth in Part 401Eluent limitations of this Chapter shall apply to this sub-

Effluent Average of daily part.characteristic Ilinum O m~nes o (b) The term "seafood" shall mean

any 1 day consecutive daysshall not the raw material, including freshwaterexcwd- and saltwater fish and shellfish, to be

processed, in the form In which it is re-(Metric units) kglkkg of seafood celved at the processing plant.

O .... . .. 0 § 408.222 Effluent liltations guidelinesTSS ..........------- L5........ 0.73 representing the degree of effluentOilandgrse_ 0.0 ...... 0.03 reduction attainable by the applica-pH. ------ Within the...............- tion of the best practicable control9.age 6"0to technology currently available.

In establishing the limitations set forth(English units) lbfl0001b of seafood In this section, EPA took into account all

information It was able to collect, developBeD5... 0.73 --.- as and solicit with respect to factors (suchTSS ------------ _.5 --------- -------- 0.13 a g n ieo lnrwmtrasOi ngese....... ...... _ 0. as age and size of plant, raw mateil,Oil and grease--.... 0.04_......... 0.03p.. .- - ithin the manufacturing processes, products pro-

range &0 to duced, treatment technology available,9.__. energy requirements and costs) which

can affect the Industry subcategorization§408.216 Pretreatment sktandards for and eMuent levels established. I; Is, how-new sources. ever, possible that data which would

The pretreatment standard under sec- affect these limitations have not beention, 307(c) of the Act for a new source available and, as a result, these limita-within the non-Alaskan cohiventional tions should be adjusted for certainbottom fish,. processing subcategory plants in this industry. An individualwhich is a user of a publicly owned discharger or other interested persontreatment works and a major contribut- may submit evidence to the Regionaling industry as defined in Part 128 of Administrator (or to the State, if thethis Chapter (and which would be a new State has the authority to issue XPDESsourc6 subject to section 306 of the Act, permits) that factors relating to theif it were to discharge pollutants to the equipment or facilities involved, thenavigable waters), shall be the same process applied, or other such factorsstandard as set forth in Part 128 of related to such discharger are funda-this Chapter; for existing sources, except mentally different from the factors con-that, for the purpose of this section, sidered In the establishment of the gulde-§§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 lines. On the basis of such evidence orof this chapter shall not apply. The fol- other available information, the Region-lowingpretreatment standard establishes al Administrator (or the State) willthe quantity or quality of pollutants or make a written finding that such factorspollutant properties controlled by this are or are not fundamentally differentsection which may be discharged to a for that f~cility compared to those spec-publicly owned treatment works by a new Ified in the Development Document. Ifsource subject to the provisions of this such fundamentally different factors aresubpart- I found to exist, the Regional Admintra-

Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatment . tor or the State shall establish for thepropefty stanard discharger effluent limitations In the

BOD5---------NO lmitation. NPDES permit either more or less string-T ss Do. ent than .the limitations establishedpH -Do. herein, to the extent dictated by suchOil and grease-. . Do. fundamentally different factors. Such

Subpart V-Non-Alaskan Mechanized limitations must be approved by the Ad-Bottom Fish Processing Subcategory ministrator of the Environmental Pro-

§403.220 Applicability; eescription of tection Agency. The Administrator maythe non-Alaskan mechanized bottom approve or disapprove such limitations,fish processing subcategory. specify other limitations, or initiate pro-

The provisions of this subpart are ap- ceedings to revise these regulations. Theplicable to discharges resulting from the following limitations establish the quan-processing of bottom fish outside of . tity or quality of pollutants or pollutantAlaska in which the unit operations properties, controlled by this section,(particularly the butchering and/or fil- which may be discharged by a pointleting operations) are carried out pre-dominate through mechanized mth- source subjct to the provisions ofods. The provisions of this subpart apply ,subpar after application of the best

* to the-processlng of bottom fish such as practicable control technology currentlywhiting and croaker. available:

fuente dseuatlo

ale crf3)any 1 day ecraectlve i.-,

exceed-

(Meh-tr t3) kgkg of sesibod

TES 1 10Oil ad resse... 5.T7__ 3pl1.. Within tho

(Eglh units) Tbhf,0J)o ofVsaod

T2B&._ _ 14 -. 10i, and grao- ... ..T.....3.3

... Within the2n 0.oto

§ 408.223 Effluentlimitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best available technologyeconomically achievable.

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a poiftsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of the bestavailable technology economicallyachievable: -

Efliunt Average of dlycactezkLz' Mumumfcr aus fr 3O

any I d ccrecntivo day;

exceedi-

(3Setric uaits) kgjkkg cfreaLccd

B0D5 ___ 6Z_._ 5.3T89.._____ 1L--- ___-_082Oil and gren.e__. 0.4s.- 0.2PIL. Withlato -_ ___

rnnge 0.0to 9.0.

1 i.,, 1 Vah units lbJl.(C lb of seah~od

BODS__ 6___ A.3

r.0.4 Oto

S.0. to


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source with-In the non-Alaskan mechanized bottomfish processing subcategory which is auser of a publicly owned treatment worksand a major contributing industry as de-fined in, Part 128 of this chapter (andwhich would be an existing point sourcesubject to section 301 of the Act, if Itwere to discharge pollutants to the navi-gable waters), shall be the standard setforth n Part 128 of this chapter, exceptthat, for the purpose of this section,§§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132 and 128.133of this chapter shall not apply. The fol-


55789


lowing pretreatment standard establish-es the quantity or quality of pollutantsor pollutant properties controlled by thissection which may be discharged to apublicly. owned treatment works by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart.Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatment

property standardLBeD5 --------------- No limitation.TSS -----------------.- Do.PH ................... -. Do,Oil and grease ----.- _.. Do.

§408.225 ,Standards of performnance fornew sources,

-The following standards of perform-ance establish the quantity or qualityof pollutants or pollutant properties,controlled by this section, which may bedischarged by a new source subject tothe provisions of this subpart:





BOD5 ------------ 9.1 -------- 7.4T8 O-------------- 3.3 ---------- 2.5O11 and grease ---- 0.6S ------------- 0.39pH --------------- Within the -----------------

range 6.0 to9.0.

(English units) lbfl,000 lb of seafood

POD ---------- 0- 9.1 -------------- 7.4TO -------------- 3.3 -------------- 2.5Ofi and grease ---- 0.68 ------------- 0.39pit ................. Within the ------------------

range 6.0to9.0.


The pretreatment standard under sec-The pretreatment standard under sec-

tion 307 (c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the non-Alaskan mechanizedbottom fish processing subcategorywhich is a user of a publicly owned treat-ment works and a major contributingindustry as defined in Part 128 of thischapter (and which would be a newsource subject to section 306 of the Act,if it were to discharge pollutants to thenavigable waters), shall be the -samestandard as set forth in Part 128 of thischapter, for existing sources; except that,for the purpose of this section, §§ 128.-121, 128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of thischapter shall not apply. The followingpretreatment standard establishes thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties controlled by this sec-tion which may be discharged to a public-ly owned treatment works by a newsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart:Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatment

prope rty standardBOD3 ------------------ No limitation.TSS------------------. Do.pH .-----------------. Do.Oil and grease ---------- Do.

Subpart W-Hand-Shucked ClamProcessing Subcategory

§ 408.230 Applicability; description ofthe hand-shuciced clam processingsubcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from ex-isting hand-shucked clam processingfacilities which process more than 1816kg (4000 lbs) of raw material per day onany day during a calendar year and allnew sources.§ 408.231 Specialized definitions.



(b) The term "seafood" shall meanthe, raw material, including freshwaterand saltwater fish and shellfish, to beprocessed, in the form in which it is re-ceived at the processing plant.§ 408.232 Effluent limitations guidelines


In establishing the limitations setforth in this section, EPA took into ac-count all information it was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manufacturing processes,products produced, treatment tech-nology available, energy requirementsand costs) which can affect the industrysubcategorization' and effluent levelsestablished. It is, however, possible thatdata which would affect these limitationshave not been available and, as a result,these limitatiois should be adjusted forcertain plants in this industry. An indi-vidual discharger or other interestedperson may submit evidence to the Re-gional Administrator (or to the State, ifthe'State has the authority to issueNPDES permits) that factors relating tothe equipment or facilities involved, theprocess applied, or other such factors re-lated to such discharger are funda-mentally different from thefactors con-sidered, in the establishment of theguidelines. On the basis of such evidenceor other available information, the Re-gional Administrator (or the State) Willmake a written finding that such factorsare or are not fundamentally differentfor that facility compared to those speci-fied in the Development .Document. Ifsuch fundamentally different factors arefound to exist, he Regional Administra-toy or the State shall establish for thedischarger effluent limitations in theNPDES permit either more or less strin-gent than the limitations establishedherein, to the extent dictated by suchfundamentally different factors. Suchlimitations must be approved by the Ad-ministrator of the Environmental Pro-tection Agency. The Administrator mayapprove or disapprove such limitations,specify other limitations, or initiate pro-ceedings to revise these regulations.-

The following limitations establish thequaritity or quality of pollutants or pol-

lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

Effluent. limitations

Effluent - Average of dailycharacteristie Maximum for value, for" .0

any 1 (lay Consecutlve danwshall not


TSS -------------- - -9 ............... 14Oil and grease ...... 0.60 ...... _._. 0.23p --------------- Within the ......

range 0.0 to9.0.

(English units) lb/l,000 lb of ifood '

TSS -------------- 59 ............... lIOil and grease ------ 0.60 ............. 1.23pH ------ _-------- Within tile

range 0.0 to9.0.

§ 408.233 Effluent lihiations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best available technologyeconomically achievable.

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of thebest available technology economicallyachievable:

Efhluent limitations

Effluent Average of dallycharacteristlc Maxtmum for values for 39

any 1 0ay consceutlve dityshall not

(Metri units) 4g/kkg of seafood

Ts ---------------- 55 ............. 17Ol and grease ...... 0.560 ------...... 0.21pIT --------------- Within the .................

range 0.0 to9.0.

(English units) 1b/1,000 lb of seafood

TSS --------------- ............... 1Oil and grease ---- 0.56 ............. 0.21pH ----- _--------- Within the ...

range 0.0 to9.0.

§408.234 Pretreatment standards for

existing sources.

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe hand-shucked clam processing sub-category Which is a user of a publiclyowned treatment works and a majorcontributing industry as defined In Part128 of this chapter (and which would bean existing point source subject to sec-tion 301 of the Act, If it were to dis-charge pollutants to the navigablewaters), shall be the standard set forthin Part 128 of this chapter, except that,for the purpose of this section, §§ 128,121,128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of this


55790

chapter, shall not apply. The followingpretreatment standard establishes thequantity Or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties controlled by this sec-tion which may be discharged to apublicly owned treatment works by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart. -


BOD5 ---------....-.... No limitation.TSS -- Do.pH -- Do.Oi and grease ------------- Do.

§ 408.235 Standihrds of performance fornew sources.

The following standards of perform-ance establish the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties, con-trolled by -this section, which may bedischarged by a new source subject to theprovisions of thissubpart:

EffluentlimitatonsEffluent Average of daly

characteristlc Marinm for values for 30any 1 day eonsecutive days

Shall notexceed-

(Metrc units) kgikkg of seafood

TSS___._ K .... 17011 and grease .... 0.56..- ...... 0.21

• Within therfen6.0 to

(EngUsh units) ThJ],000 b of seafood

Tss .------------ 5----5........ 17Oil and grease -.... 0. ..... 0.21rim ---.-.-------.-.W ithin the

range 6.0 to96.0.


The pretreatment standard undersection 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the hand-shucked clam process-ing subcategory" which is a user of.

a publicly owned treatment works and a.major contributing industry as definedin Part 128.of this chapter (and whichwould be a new source subject to

- section 306 of the Act, if it were todischarge pollutants to the navigablewaters), shall be the game standard asset forth in Part 128 of this chapter, forexist!g sources, except that, for" thepurpose of this iection, §§ 128.121,128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of thischapter shall not apply. The followingpretreatment standard establishes thequantity or -quality of. pollutants orpollutant properties cQntrolled by thissection, whichmay be discharged to apublicly owned treatment works by anew source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart-

PoZlutant or poilutant Pretreatment2property standard

BeOD5 No limitation.TSS Do.pH Do.Oil and grease -------------- Do.


Subpart X--Mechanized Clam ProcessingSubcategory

§ 408.240 Applicability; description ofthe mechanized clam procescing sub-category.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting frommechanized clam processing.§ 408.241 SpecIalized definitions.


eral definitions, abbreviations andmethods of analysis set forth in Part401 of this chapter shall apply to thissubpart.

(b) The term "seafood" shall meanthe raw material, including freshwaterand saltwatwer fish and shellfish, to beprocessed, in the form In which It is re-ceived at the processing plant.§ 408.242 Effluent limitations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable ly the applica-tion of the best practicable controltechnology currently available.

In establishing the limitations setforth in this section, EPA took into ac-count all information It was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manufacturing processes,products produced, treatment technologyavailable, energy requirements and costs)which can affect the industry subcate-gorization and effluent-levels established.It is, however, possible that data whichwould affect these limitations have notbeen available and, as a result, theselimitations should be adjusted for cer-tain plants in this industry. An individualdischarger or other interested personmay submit evidence to the Regional Ad-ministrator (or to the State, If the Statehas the authority to issue NPDES per-mits) that factors relating to the equip-ment or facilities Involved, the processapplied, or other such factors related tosuch discharger are fundamentally dif-ferent from the factors considered in theestablishment of the guidelines. On thebasis of such evidence or other availableinformation, the Regional Administrator(or the State) will make a written find-ing that such factors are or are notfundamentally different for that facilitycompared to those specified In the De-velopment Document. If such funda-mentally different factors are found toexist, the Regional Administrator or theState shall establish for the dischargereffluent limitations in the NPDES permiteither more or less stringent than thelimitations established herein, to the ex-tent dictated by such fundamentally dif-ferent factors. Such limitations must beapproved by the Administrator of theEnvironmental Protection Agency. TheAdministrator may approve or dimp-prove such limitations, specify otherlimitationsi or initiate proceedings to re-vise these regulations.

The following limitations establish thequantity br quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a point

55791

source subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

E111uent ihaitaffeas

Effluent AveragaodaflydrcrLT m Minmu f vues for 30

a7 1 d3y cansecutive daysshall notemoeed-

(Mctri units) kgJkkg of zeafccd

TnaS g 4._ __ 0. r,0il andgr'ea.. 4. .. 0.PH - -- Within~ the -- - ----

r!nge 6.0 to

ZIrhun) IbrCO Ib ofsamfccd

TSS ... CO........ 25Ot1 and Zro- 4.2. 097pIL . .... Within the

raze 6.0 to9.0.



rmfuznt ramitains

rMumt Average of dafyCharaterit1C aimm6 lns for .

any 1 day co-urte days haal noexceed-

(IfeteL- units) kgfxkg of zeafcd

TSS____ __. . 4.4Ol fnd apt,... 0.413- - 0. c.PH .............. Within the

ran 6.0 to9.0.

Mr unts) ThCl CO bof seacd

BODF, 17-31 . 4,4Oil and Vrez.-_.- 0.4.2p11.....-.........M Within the .----

r.Zo 6.0 to9.0


existing sources.

The pretreatment standar'a under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe mechanized clam processing sub-category which Is a user of a publiclyowned treatmentworks and a major con-tributing Industry as defined in Part 123of this chapter (and which would be anexisting point source subject to section301 of the Act, if It were to dischargepollutants to the navigable waters),shall be the standard set forth In Part128 of this chapter, except that, for the



p)urpose of this section, §§ 128.121,128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of this chap-ter shall not apply. The following pre-treatment standard establishes thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties controlled by-this sec-tion which may be discharged tb a pub-licly owned treatment works by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart.

Pollutant or pollutant - Pretreatmentproperty standard

BOD5 ---------------------- No limitation.TSS ------------------------ Do.pH ------------------------- Do.Oil and grease --------------- Do.§ 408.245 Standards of- performance for

new sources.

The following standards of perform-ance establish the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties, con-trolled by this section, which may bedischarged by a new source subject to theprovisions of this subpart:


Effluent Average of dailycharacteristlc Nlaximum for values for S0



BeD6 ----------- 15.-------- 5.7BOS .......... 5..... ............... 54.7TS-----------2-------------------- 4.4Oi and grease ---- 0.40 0------------ .092pi --------------- Within the ------------------

rang 6.0 to0.0.


BOD ........... 15 --------------- 5.7TSS ............. 20 ----------------- 4.4Oil and grease .... 0.40 ------------- 0.002p --- _----------- Within the ------------------range 0.0 to0.0.


new sources.

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the mechanized clam processingsubcategory which is a user of a publiclyowned treatment works and a majorcontributing industry as defined in Part128 of this chapter (and which would bea new source subject to section 306 of theAct, if it were to discharge pollutants tothe navigable waters), shall be the samestandard as set forth in Part 128 of thischapter, for existing sources, except that,for the purpose of this section, §§128.121,128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of this chap-ter shall not apply. The following pre-treatment standard establishes thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties controlled by this sec-tion whidh may be discharged to a pub-licly owned treatment works by a newsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart:


BOD -------------------- No limitation.TSS ------------------------ Do.pH ------------------------- Do.Oil and grease -------------- Do.

Subpart Y-Pacific Coast Hand Shucked- Oyster Processing Subcategory

§ 408.250 Applicability; description ofthe Pacific Coast hand shucked oysterprocessing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from ex-isting Pacific Coast handshucked oysterprocessing facilities which process morethan 454 kg (1000 lbs) of product perday on any day during a calendar yearand all new sources.

§ 408.251 Specialized definitions.For the purpose of this subpart:(a) Except as provided below, the gen-


(b) The term "product" shall meanthe weight of -the oyster meat aftershucking.

§ 408.252 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best practicable controltechnology currently available.

In establishink the limitations setforth in this section, EPA took into ac-count all information it was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manufacturing processes,products produced, treatment technologyavailable, 'energy " requirements andcosts) which can affect the industrysubcategorization and effluent levels es-tablished.. It is, however, possible thatdata which would affect these limitationshave not been available and, as a result,these limitations should be adjusted forcertain plants in this industry. An indi-vidual discharger or other interestedperson may submit evidence to the Re-gional Administrator (or to the State, ifthe State has the authority to issueNPDES permits) that factors relatingto the equipment or facilities involved,the process applied, or other such fac-tors related to such discharger are fun-damentally different from the factorsconsidered in the establishment of theguidelines. On the basis of such evidenceor other available information, the Re-gional Administrator (or the State) willmake a written finding that such factorsare or are not fundamentally differentfor that facility compared to those.specified in the Development Document.If such fundamentally different factorsare found to exist, the Regional Admin-istrator or the State shall establish forthe discharger effluent limitations in theNPDES permit either -more or lesSstringent than the limitations estab-lished herein, to the extent diciated by-such fundamentally different factors.Such limitations must be approved bythe Administrator of the EnvironmentalProtection Agency. The Administratormay approve or disapprove such limita-tions, specify other limitations, orinitiate proceedings to revise these

'regulations.The following limitations establish the

quantity or quality of pollutants or pol-

lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject -to the provisions of thissubpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

Effluentt linlfatlou.q

Effluent Average of dallycharacteristic Maximum for values fof 30.

any I tIdy consceutive draysshall notexceed-

(Metrlo ults) kgfkkg of product

TSS .............. 37 ............... 35Oil and grease ...... 1.7 ............ 0pit ......-.......... Within tnc ......

range 0.0to 9.0.

(English units) lb/1.000 lb of product

TSS ... .......... 37_Oil and grease ...... 1.7 ............pl .......-......... Within the ............

range 0.0to 9.0.

§ 408.253 Effluen. limitations guidelines-representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best available technologyeconomically achievable.

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants, or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of thebest available technology economicallyachievable:

Effluent iultatlong

Effluent Average of dallycharacteristic Malmun for valies foe 39

any 1 day Cosrciltive dayoshall notexceed-

(Metric units) kglkkg of product

TSS ----------- 37.......... MOil and grease ... 1.7 .............. 1pH ................-Within the .....

range 0.0to 9.0.

(English units) lb/l,000 lb of produot

TSs ..........----- 37 ------------ .O1l and grease ...... 1.7 ....... 10pH ................ -Within the ..............

range 0.0to 9.0.


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe Pacific Coast hand-shucked oysterprocessing subcategory which Is a userof a publicly owned treatment works anda major contributing industry as definedin Part 128 of this chapter (and whichwould be an existing point source sub-ject to section 301 of the Act, If It wereto discharge pollutants to the navigablewaters), shall be the standard set forthin Part 128 of this chapter, except that,for the purpose of this section, §§ 128,121,

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 40, NO. 231-MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1'975

55792

I

CICI


.28.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of this SubpartZ-Atlantic and Gulf Coast Hand-chapter shall -not apply. The following Shucked Oyster Processing Subcategory

)retreatment standard establishes the § 408.260 Applicability; description oftuantity or quality of pollutants or pol- the Atlantic and 'Gulf Coast hand-.utant properties controlled by this sec- shucked oyster proccesing subcate-;ion which may be discharged to a public- gory.ly owned treatment works by a pointyowrced subetmnt thworo s of this The provisions of this subpart are ap-source subject to the provisions splicable to discharge resulting from ex-subpart. - isting hand-shucked oyster processing

Pollutant orpollutanlt Pretreatment facilities on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts- property 5tandafd which process more than 454 kg (1000

BD5 --------------------- No llmitation. ibs) of product per day on any day dur-SS -------------------------- Do. ing a calendar year and all new sources.

PH ----------------------- Do.Oil and grease------------ Do. § 408.261 Specialized definitions.

§ 408.255 Standards of performance for For the purpose of this subpart:w s s (a) Except as provided below, the gen-

eral definitions, abbreviations andThe following standards of perform- eldfntos brvain nThce folli tanard of perf methods of analysis set forth in part

pnce establish the quantity or quality of 401 of this chapter shall apply to thispollutants or pollutant properties, con- subpart.trolled by this section,.which may be dis- (b) The term "product" shall meanchargdd by a newsource subject to the the weight of the oyster meat afterprovisions of this subpart: shucking.

Emiluentllmitantons § 408.262 Effluent limitations guidellese -representing the degrce of effluentEffluent- ..~eg of daily reuioatnaul yheppc-

characteristic -3Maximumn for values for so reduction atainable by the applica.any 1 day consecutivO days tion of the best practicable control

shall not technology currently available.exceed-

In establishing the limitations set forth

(Metric units) kgjkkgof product in this section, EPA took into account allinformation It was able to collect, de-

TSS.. . . velop and solicit Vith respect to fac-Oil and greas.--.-: 17--------------- -----. tors (such as age and size of plant, rawpir -----------------Within the ----------- materials, manufacturing processes,

_ - range 6.0 _to 9.0. products produced, treatment technology

available, energy requirements and(English units) lb/i,000 lb of product COSts) which can affect the indiustry sub-

categorization and effluent levels estab-

Tss --------------- -37 --- ......... 35 lished. It is, however, possible that dataOil and grease - ... 1.70 L which would affect these limitations havePH ------------------.*Within the ------------------ not been available and, as a result, these

age.0, limitations should be adjusted for cer-

tain plants in this industry. Anindividualdischarger or other interested person

§ 408.256- Pretreatment standards for may submit evidence to the Regional Ad-new sources, ministrator (or to the State, If the State

The pretreatment standard under sec- has the authority to Issue NPDES per-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new source mits) that factors relating to the equip-within the Pacific Coast hand-shucked ment or facilities Involved, the processoyster processing subcategory which is a applied, or other such factors related touser Of a publicly owned treatment works such discharger are fundamentally dif-and a-major contributing industry as de- ferent from the factors considered In thefined in Part 128 of this chapter (and establishment of the guidelines, On thewhich would be a new -ource subject to basis of such evidence or other availablesection 306 of the Act, if it were to dis- information, the Regional Administratorcharge pollutants to the navigable (or the State) will make a written find-waters), shall be the same standard as ing that such factors are or are notset forth in Part 128 of this chapter, fundamentally different for that facilityfor existing sources, except that, for the compared to those specified in the De-purpose of ths section, §§ 128.121, 128.- velopment .Document. If such funda-122, 128.132 and 128.133 of this1 hapter mentally different factors are found toexist, the Regional Administrator or theshall hot apply. The following pretreat- State shall establish for the dischargerment standard establishes the quantity effluent limitations In the NPDES permitor.. quality of pollutants or pollutant either more or less stringent than theproperties controlled by this section limitations established herein, to the ex-which" may be discharged to a publicly tent dictated by such fundamentally dif-

ferent factors. Such limitations must beowned treatment works by a new source approved by the Administrator of thesubject to the provisions of this subpart: Environmental Protection Agency. The

Polutant or p ollutant Pretreatmnent Administrator may approve or disapproveproperty standarz such limitations, specify other limita-

BOD5 -------------- No limittion. tions, or initiate proceedings to reviseTss ----- - .------ Do. these regulations.pH - ---------- 3Do. The following limitations establish theOil and grease --------------- Do. quantity or quality of pollutants or poi-

55793

lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

Effluen llmtagI yEfflhrent Aver",age ct dally

car,-acterLstl Maximum for values fe 30any I day consecutive days

shall notexceed-

(Metric units) kglkkg of p0duct

TSS . ....... 19 -.. 15Ol ad greo.m. 0.7 .......... 0.70p1 .............. Within the ..................

rgo 6.0to9.0.

(Englth unit) Ib.1,000 lb of prc de

TSS .............. 19 ............ 15Oil and geao.... . 0.;7 ------ 0.70pL ............... Within the ----------------

range 0.0to 9.0.



Effluenilhnlitffans

Efflunt * Average of daiycharacteristle Maximum for values for 30

any I day consecutive daysShall notexceed-

(frtid units) kgkkg of prcduct

O 8ad .......... ............ 0.70pH ........ ..... Within therange .0to 9.0.

(Englsh undts) l bJ1,0lb of product

Oil and greo. 077 ........-- 0.70pu ............. Within the ................-

range 0.0to 9.0.


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) oX the Act for a source withinthe Atlantic and Gulf Coast hand-shucked oyster processing subcategorywhich is a user of a publicly ownedtreatment works and a major contnb-uting industry as defined in" Part 128of this chapter (and which would be anexisting point source subject to section301 of the Act, if it were to dischargepollutants to the navigable waters), shallbe the standard set forth in Part 128 ofthis chapter, except that, for the purpose

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231--MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1975

55794

of this section, §§ 128.121, 128.122,128.132 and 128.133 of this chapter shalnot apply. The following pretreatmentstandard establishes the quantity orquality of pollutants or pollutant prop-erties controlled by this section whichmay be discharged to a publicly ownedtreatment works by a point source sub-Ject to the provisions of this subpart.


BODS -------------------- No limitation.TSS ----------------------- Do.pH ------------------------- Do.Oil and grease -------------- Do.


The following standards of perform-ance establish the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties, con-trolled by this section, which may bedischarged by a new source subject tothe provisions of this subpart:


EMunt Average of dailycharacteristic Maximum for values for 30

'any 1 day consecutive daysshall notexceed-

(Metric units) kg/kkg of product

TS ------------- 19 ----------------- 15Oil and grease ---- 0.77 ------------- 0.70pU --------------- Within the ------------------

range 6.0to 9.0.

(English units) lb/1,000 lb of product

TSS --------------- 19 ---------------- 15Oil and grease ---- 0.77 ------------- 0.70pH --------------- Within the ---------------

range 6.0to 9.0.

§ 408.266 Pretreatment standards fornew sources.

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the Atlantic and Gulf Coast hand-shucked oyster processing subcategorywhich is a user of a publicly ownedtreatment works and a major contrib-uting industry as defined in Part 128of this chapter (and which would be anew source subject to section 306 of theAct, if It were to discharge pollutants tothe navigable waters), shall be the samestandard as set forth in Part128, of thischapter, for existing sources, except that,for the purpose of this section, §§ 128.121,128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of thischapter shall not apply. The followingpretreatment standard establishes thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties controlled by this sec-tion which may be discharged to a pub-licly owned treatment works by a .newsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart:

Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatmentproperty I Standard

BOD5 ------------------TO ..a.................

011 and greaso.......

No limitation.Do.Do.Do.

RULES AND R&GULATIONS

Subpart AA-Steamed and Canned OysterProcessing Subcategory

§408.270 Applicpbillty; description ofthe steamed and canned oyster proc-essing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting fromoysters which are mechanically shucked.§ 408.271 Specialized definitions.

For the purpose of this subpart;(a) Except as provided below, the gen-


(b) The term "product" shall mean theweight of the oyster meat after shucking.§ 408.272 Effluent limitations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-

* tion. of the best practicable controltechnology currently available.

In establishing the limitations set forthin this section; -EPA took into accountall information it was able to collect, de-velop and solicit with respect to factors(such as age and size of plant, raw mate-rials, manufacturing processes, productsproduced, treatment technology avail-able, energy requirements and costs)which can affect the industry subcate-gorization and effluent levels established.It is, however, possible that data whichwould affect these limitations have notbeen available and, as a result, theselimitations should be adjusted for cer-tain plants -in this industry. An in-dividual discharger or other interestedperson may submit evidence to the Re-gional Administrator (or to the State,if the State has the authority to issueNPDES permits) that factors relatingto-the equipment or facilities involved,the process applied, or other such factorsrelated to such discharger are funda-mentally different from the factors con-sidered in the establishment of theguidelines. On the basis of such evidenceor other available information, the Re-gional Administrator (or the State) willmake a written finding that such factorsare or are not fundamentally differentfor that facility compared to thosespecified in the Development Dqcument.If such fundamentally different factorsare found to exist, the Regional Adminis-trator or the State shall establish forthe discharger effluent limitations in theNPDES permit either more or lessstringent than the limitationt 'estab-lished herein, to the extent dictated bysuch fundamentally different factors.Such limitations must be approved bythe Administrator of the EnvironmentalProtection Agency. The Administratormay approve or disapprove such limita-tions, specify other limitations, or ini-tiate proceedings to revise theseregulations.

The following limitations establishthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties, controlled by thissection, which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:


Effluent Average of dailycharactcrstlo Maximum f I valuel for 80



TSB -------------- 270 .............. 10Oil and grease- ---- 2.3 .............. 1,7pH --------------- Within the

range 0.0to 9.0.

(English units) lbf1,000 lb of product

TSS ------------- 270 .............. 100Oil and grease ---- 2.3 ......... 1.7pH --------------- Within the ..............

range 0.0 to9.0.

§ 408.273 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion Li the best available technologyeconoically achievable.

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of the bestavailable , technology economicallyachievable:

Effluont limitatlons

Effluent Average of dailycharactmlstio Maximum for values for 30

any I day coIn.Ecutivo daySshall notexcotd-

(Metric units) kglkkg of product

BeD5 ----------- 7 ................ . 17TS8 ------------ _ 56 ---------------- 9Oil and grease- ----- 0.84 ............. 0. 4pH --------------- Within the ..............

raage 0.0 to9.0.


BOD5 ----- _----- 67 .............. 17T88 --- _--------- 50 ---------------- 3Oil and grease ...... 0.84 ............. 0,42p1 --------------- Within the ------- .....

range 0.0 to9.0.

§408.274 Pretreatment standards forexisting sources. I

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe stemed and canned oyster process-ing subcategory which Is a user of a pub-licly owned treatment works and a majorcontributing industry as defined in Part128 of this chapter (and which would bean existing point source subject to sec-tion 301 of the Act, if It were to dischargepollutants to the navigable waters), shallbe the standard set forth In Part 128 ofthis chapter except that, for the purposeof this section, §§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132and 128.133 of this chapter shall not ap-ply. The following pretreatment stand-ard establishes the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties con-trolled by this section which may be dis-charged to a publicly owned treatment

,FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 40, NO. 231-MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1975


works by a point source subject to theprovisions of this subpart.


BO5 ------ No limitation.TSS ----------------------- Do.p ------------------------ Do.Oil and grease __ - Do.

§ 408.275 Standards of performiance fornew sources.

The following standard of perform-ance establish the-quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties, con-trolled by this section, which may bedischarge by a new source subject tothe provisions of this subpart:


Effluent Average of daily .characteristic Maximum for values for 30

and I day' consecutive daysshall noterXood-


BOIS------ 67 -------------- 17TSS ------------- 56-- 39Oil and grease ---- 0.84 . - .42PH- .. --- Withinthe -----------

range 6.0-. to 9.0.

(English units) IbA,O0 lb of product

BOD5. --------------- ---------- - 17T .------------ 56----------Oil and grease ---- 0.84 ------------- 0. 42pH_ .- ..------------ Within tae ------------------

range 6.0to 9.0.


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the steamed and canned oysterprocessing subcategory which is a userof a publicly owned treatment works anda major contributing industry as definedin Part 128 of thfs chapter (and whichwould be a new source subject to section306 of the Act, if it were to discharge15ollutants to the navigable waters), shallbe the'same standard as set forth inPart 128 of this thapter, for existingsources, except that, for the purpose ofthis- section, §§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132,and 128.133 of this chapter shall not ap-ply. The following pretreatment stand-ard establishes the quantity or qualityof pollutants or pollutant properties con-trolled by this section which may be dis-charged to a publicly owned treatmentworks by a new -source subject to theprovisions of this subpart:


BOD5 -------------------- No limitation.TSS --------------------- Do.pH ------------------- --- Do.Oil and grease ------- ----- -Do.

Subpart AB-Sardine ProcessingSubcategory

§ 408.280 Applicability; description oftite sardine processing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from thecanning of sardines or sea herring forsardines. These provisionis, however, do

not cover the relatively new steaklIngoperation in which cutting machines areused for preparing fish steaks.§ 408.281 Specialized definitions.

For the purpose of this subpart;(a) Except as provided below, the gen-

eral definitions, abbreviations and meth-ods of analyses set forth in Part 401 ofthis chapter shall apply to this subpart.

(b) The term "seafood" shall mean theraw material, including freshwater andsaltwater fish and shellfish, to be proc-essed, in the form in which It Is receivedat the processing plant.§ 408.282 Effluent limitations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best practicable controltednology currently available.

(a) In establishing the limitations setforth in this section, EPA took into ac-count all information It was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manufacturing processes,products produced, treatment technologyavailable, energy requirements and costs)which can affect the industry subcate-gorization and effluent levels established.It is, however, possible that data whichwould affect these limitations have notbeen available and, as a result, these lim-itations should be adjusted for certain

'plants in this industry. An individual dis-charger or other interested person maysubmit evidence to the Regional Admin-istrator (or to the State, if the State hasthe authority to issue NPDES permits)that factors relating to the equipment orfacilities involved, the process applied, orother such factors related to such dis-charger are fundamentally different fromthe factofs considered in the establish-ment of the guidelines. On the basis ofsuch evidence or other available informa-tion, the Regional Administrator (or theState) will make a written finding thatsuch factors are or are not fundamen-tally different for that facility comparedto those specified in the DevelopmentDocument. If such fundamentally differ-ent factors are found to exist; the -Re-gional Administrator or the State shallestablish for the discharger effluent lim-itations in the NPDES permit eithermore or less stringent than the limita-tions established herein, to the extentdictated by such fundamentally differ-ent factors. Such limitations must be-approved by the Administrator of theEnvironmental Protection Agency. TheAdministrator may approve or disapprovesuch limitations, specify other limita-tions, or initiate proceedings to revisethese regulations.

(b) The following limitations establishthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties, controlled by thissection, which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

(1) Any sardine processing facilitywhich utilizes dry transportation systemsfrom the fish storage area to the fish.processing area shall meet the followinglimitations:

55795

Efllun t limitations

Elttn~t Average of dailycbactertsWd Maximum for values for

any I day couMee..tv daysshall not

exceed-

CUetzt units) kglkkg of seafeod

TSS------------3&.......... 10Oil and Z.......... .4pH ................ Within the ...............

ranz,- 0.0to 9.0.

(En glh uaits) Ib.IXO lb of reafecd

TSS ........... . . 1..........-0Oil and groe.... 3.5 ........... L4pU_ ....... Within the

range 60to 9.0.

(2) Any sardine processing facility notcovered under § 408.282 (b) (1) shall meetthe following limitations:

Effluent imitatiom

Emant Average of dallychameterl-tt Maximum for v fu r fo3()


(Meticr units) kgkkg of eood

TBS.-_. 43 ------ - 16Oil and o...... 0.3 -. . 2.8pUi_ -....-------- Within the

tange W.0to 9-.

(Englih utits) Th5l,,CCO lb ofseafcod

• s . ... ..43_. _ 16O11 and grcx o- - 2..9 ..... "Z

pt ------------- Within the ................range 6.0to 9.0.


The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of thebest available technology economicallyachievable:


Eflent Average ofdiychara.cterlsta Maxmum f.r values for 20

any I day eonsecutive daysshalt notexceed-

(Mor uaits) kglkkg of seafood

Tss ....... M. ___10

OR andc grcone. 2.3 .............- 0.52p ---------.. W. ithin the .................

range6.0-to 9.0.

(English units) lb/J1.O lb of seafccd

,I'ss. --- . 10Oil and gre=..._ 13. 0.52p ...... 'Within tho . .............

range 6.0to 9.0.




The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe sardine processing subcategory whichis a user of a publicly owned treatmentworks and a major contributing industryas defined in Part 128 of this chapter(and which would be an existing point,source subject to section 301 of the Act,if it were to discharge pollutants to thenavigable waters), shall be the standardset forth in Part -128 of 'this chapter,except that, for the purpose Of this sec-tion, §§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132 and,128.133 of this chapter shall not apply.The following pretreatment standardestablishes the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties con-trolled by this section which may bedischarged to a publicly owned treat-ment works by a point source subject tothe provisions of this subpart.


BOD5 ------------------ No limitation.TSS ------------------------ Do.pH -------------------- Do.Oil and grease --------------- Do.


The following standards of perform-ance establish the quantity or qualityof pollutants or pollutant properties,controlled by this section, which may bedischarged by a new source subject tothe provisions of this subpart:


Effluent Average of dailycharacteristic Maximum fir values for 30



TS ------------- 36 .---------------- 10O il and grease ---- 14 ------- : ...... 0.57pH ---------------- Withln the ------------------range 6.0 to

9.0.


TS ------------- 0 ---------------- - 10Oil and grease ---- 1.4 -------------- 0.57plI ---------------- Within the

range 6.0 to9.0.


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the sardine processing subcate-gory which is a user of a publicly ownedtreatment works and a major contribut-ing industry as defined in Part 128 ofthis chapter (and which would be a newsource subject to section 306 of the Act,If it were to discharge pollutants to'thenavigable waters), shall be the samestandard as set forth in Part 128 of thischapter, for existing sources, except that,for the purpose of this section, §§ 128.-121, 128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of thischapter shall not apply. The followingpretreatment standard establishes thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-

lutant propertiescontrolled by this sec-tion which may lie discharged to a pub-licly owned treatment works by a newsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart:"Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatment

property standardBOD5 ---------------------- No limitation.TSS ----------------------- Do.pH ------------------------ Do.Ol 'and grease ------------- Do.

Subpart AC-Alaskan Scallop ProcessingSubcategory -

§ 408.290 Applicability; description ofthe Alaskan scallop processing sub-category.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing of scallops in Alaska.

§ 408.291 Specialized definitions.- For the purpose of this subpart:

(a) Except as provided below, the gen-eral definitions, abbreviations andmethods of analysis set forth in Part-401 of this chapter 'shall apply to thissubpart.

(b), The term "product" shall meanthe weight of the scallop meat afterprocessing.

§ 408.292 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best practicable controltechnology currently available.

(a) In establishing the limitations setforth in this section, EPA took into ac-count all information it was able to col-lect, develop and solicit 'with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manufacturing processes,products produced, treatment technol-ogy available, energy requirements andcosts) which can affect the industry sub-categorization and effluent levels estab-lished. It is, however, possible that datawhich would affect these limitations havenot been available and, as a result, theselimitations should be adjusted for cer-tain plants in this industry. An individ-ual discharger or other interested per-son may submit evidence to the RegionalAdministrator (or to the State, if theState has the authority to issue NPDESpermits) that factors relating to theequipment or facilities- involved, theprocess applied, or other such factorsrelated to such discharger are funda-mentally different from the factors con-sidered in the, establishment of the guide-lines. On the basis of such evidence orother available information, the Region-al Administrator (or the State) will makea written finding that such factors areor are not fundamentally different forthat facility compared to those specifiedin the Development Document. If suchfundamentally different factors arefound to exist, the Regional Administra-tor or the State shall establish for thedischa5rger effluent limitations in the-NPDES permit either more or less strin-gent than the limitations establishedherein,-to the extent dictated by suchfundamentally different factors. Suchlimitations-must be approved by the Ad-ministrator of the, Envirofimental Pro-tection Agency. The Administrator may

approve or disapprove such limitations,specify other limitations, or Initiate pro-ceedings to revise these regulations.

(b) The following limitations establishthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties, co~Atrolled by thissection, which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

(1) Any Alaskan scallop processing fa-cility located In population or processingcenters including but not limited to An-chorage, Cordova, Juneau, Ketchilan,Kodiak, and Petersburg shall meet thefollowing limitations:

Effluent linItatonSgilluent Average of daily

characteristic Maximum for values for 30any I day consecutive days

shall notexceed-

S (Netric units) kg/kkg of product

TSS -------------- 6.0 ...... 1.4Oil and grease ...... 7.7 .............. 0.23pH --------------- Within the .................

range 6.0 to9.0.


TSS .------------0 .0 .............. .4Oit and grease .--- 7.7 ............. 0.24pH -------------- Within the ............

range 0.0 to0.0.

(2) any Alaskan scallop processingfacility not covered under § 408.292(b)(1) shall meet the following limitations:No pollutants may be discharged whichexceed 1.27 cm (0E Inch) in oany dimen-sion.

§ 408.293 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentredudtion attainable by the applica.tion of the best available technologyeconomically achievable.


Effluent limitatlons

Eflinent Average of dailycharacteristic Maximum for values for 30

any I day consecutive daysshall notexced-

(Met4 units) kgfkkg of product

Tss ------------- 5.7 .............. 1.4011 and grease ---- 7.3 -------------- 0.23pH------------- Within the .............

range 6.0to 11.0.

(English units) Ib,00 lb of product

TS8 ....----------- 5.7 1............. 4Oil and grease ...... 7.3 ..... 0......... 0.23p 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - --- Within the ..................

range 6.0to 9.0.


55796

§408.294 -Pretreatment standards forexisting sources.

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source with-in the Alaskan scallop processing sub-category which is a user of a publiclyowned treatment works and a majorcontributing industry as defined in Part128 of this chapter (and which would bean existing point source subject to sec-tion 301 of the Act, if it were to dis-charge . pollutants to the. navigablewaters), shall be the standard set forthin part 128 of this chapter, ekcept that,for the purpose of this section,§§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132-and 128.133 ofthis chapter shall not apply. The follow-ing pretreatment standard establishesthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties controlled by thissectioli which may be discharged to apublicly owned treqtnent works by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis-subpart.


BOD5 ----- No llmitation.TSS ----------------------- -Do.pH ' Do.Oil and grease-- ------------- Do.§ 408.295 Standards of performance for

new sources.

(a) The following standards of per-formance establish the quantity orquality of pollutants or pollutant proper-ties, controlled by this section, whichmay be discharged by-a new source sub-ject to the provisions of this subpart:

(1) Any Alaskan scallop processingfacility located in population or proc-essing centers including but not limitedto Anchorage, Cordova, Juneau, Ketch!-kan, Kodiak, and'Petersburg shall meetthe -following limitations:


Effluent Average of dailycharacteristic 3ldxlmum for value for 30


(Metric unlt) kgIklg of product

TSS -- i.............7 -L4Oil andgrease .... 7.3 -------------- 0.23pH. ........... Within the ---------------

rne 6.0

(English units) Ib/i,000 lb ef product

TSS --......... 5.7 ............. . L4Oil and grease .... 7.3 .0.23pHT - .Within the

range 6.0to 9.0.

(2) Any Alaskan' scallop processingfacility not covered under § 408.295(a)(1) shall meet the following limitations:No pollutants may be discharged whichexceed 1.27 cm (0.5 inch) in any dimen-sion.

proessngu U± wcauo scallops, Lae provi-sions of this subpart are applicable todischarges resulting from the processingof scallops outside of Alaska.

§408.301 Specialized definitions.



(b) The term "product" shall meanthe weight of the scallop meat after proc-essing.

§ 408.302 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the npplica-tion of the best practicable controltechnology currently available.

in establishing the limitations setforth In this section, EPA took into ac-count all information It was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manufacturing processes,products produced, treatment technologyavailable, energy requirements andcosts) which can affect the industrysubcategorlzation and effluent levelsestablished. It is, however, possible thatdata which would affect these limitationshave not been available and, as a result,these limitations should be adjusted forcertain plants in this industry. An indi-vidual discharger or other interestedperson may submit evidence to the Re-

Eflluent Ilimitlons

Effluent verge of daly-dbarrlodato I1nylmuns fa valass for 30any I day concecatlve days

shall notexceed-

CMEctric units) kglkkgof product

TSS ..... 6.. ..... L4Oil and gre_o.. _ 7.7 -------------- 0.2tp11.. .. Within the

range 0.0 to

(English units) IbI,O lb of product

'IS . . . 6.0 ..... .L4Oil and .ae.... 7.7 ....... .24plL. ............ Within th

9rno 6.0 to

§ 408.303 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by -the applica-tion of the best available technologyeconomically achicvable-

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of thebest available technology 'economicallyachievable:


RULES AND REGULATIONS 5579 V

§ 408.296 Pretreatment standards for glonal Administrator (or to the State, ifnew sources. the State has the authority to issue

The pretreatment standard under sec- NPDES permits) that factors relating totion 307(c) of the Act for a new source the equipment or facilities involved, thewithin the Alaskan scallop processing process applied, or other such factors re-subcategory which Is a user of a publicly lated to such discharger are fundamen-owned treatment works and a major tally different from the factors consid-contributing industry as defined in Part ered in the establishment of the guide-128 of this chapter (and which would be a lines. On the basis of such evidence ornew source subject to section 306 of the other available Information, the Re-Act, If It were to discharge pollutants to gional Administrator (or the State) willthe navigable waters), shall be the same make a written finding that such factorsstandard as set forth in Part 128 of this are or are not fundamentally differentchapter, for existing sources, except that, for that facility compared to thosefor the purpose of this section, §§ 128.121, specified in the Development Document.128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of this chap- If such fundamentally different factorster shall not apply. The following pre- are found to exist, the Regional Admin-treatment standard establishes the istrator or the State shall establish forquantity or quality of pollutants or pol- the discharger effluent limitations in thelutant properties controlled by this sec- NPDES permit either more or lesstion which may be discharged to a pub- stringent than the limitations estab-liely owned treatment works by a new lished herein, to the extent dictated bysource subject to the provisions of this such fundamentally different factors.subpart: Such limitations must be approved by

the Administrator of the EnvironmentalPollutant or pollutant Pretreattnt Protection Agency. The Administratorproperty standard may approve or disapprove such limita-

BOD5 ------------------- No limitation. tions, specify other limitations, orTSS ------------------. Do. initiate proceedings to -revise thesep'H ---------------------- Do.Oil and grease -------- . Do. regulations.

The following limitations establish theSubpart AD-Non-Alaskan Scallop quantity or quality of pollultants or pol-Processing Subcategory lutant properties, controlled by this sec-

§ 408.300 Applicability; description of tion. which may be discharged by a pointthe non-Alaskan scallop processing source subject to the provisions of thissubcategory. subpart after application of the best

With the exception of land-based practicable control technology currently-,, . . available:



Effluent Averae of dailycharacterlstic Maximum for values for 30

any 1 day consecutiVe daysshall hotexceed-

(Motrio units) kg/kkg of product

TSS. .------------ 5.7 ........... 1.4Oil and grease - 7.3 -------------- 0.23pH ----------------- Within the ------ --.......

rang 0.0-to 0.0.

(English units) lb/l,000 lb of product

TSB ---------- 5.7 -------------- 1.4'O il and grea e ......- 7.3 ------ 0.23pH ------------ Within the --------------

range 0.0to 9.0.


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe non-Alaskan scallop processing sub-category which is a user of a publiclyowned treatment *orks and a major con-tributing industry as defined in Part 128of this chapter (and which would bean existing point source subject t6 sec-tion 301 of the Act, if It were to dischargepollutants to the navigable waters), shallbe the standard set forth in Part 128 ofthis chapter, except that, for the pur-pose of this section, §§,128.121, 128.122,128.132 and 128.133 of this chapter shallnot apply. The following pretreatmentstandard establishes tle quantity orquality of pollutants or pollutant proper-ties controlled by this section which maybe discharged to a publicly owned treat-ment works by a point source subject tothe provisions of this subpart.Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatment

property standardBOD5 -----------------. N No limitation.TSS ----------------------- Do.pH ---------------------- Do.Oi and grease ------------- Do.


The following standards of perfor-mance establish the quantity or qualityof pollutants or pollutant properties, con-trolled by this section, which may be dis-charged by a new source subject to theprovisions of this subpart: ,


Effluent Average of dailyeharacteristlo Maxm for values for 30

any I day consecutive daysshall notexcoed-

(Matric units) kg/kkg of product

T------ ----------- -- L 4Oil and grease -- 7.3 -------------- 0.23pH --------------- Within the ------------------

range 6.0to 0.0.

(English units) Ib/1,000 lb of product

TS... .------------ 5.7 ........... 1 4Oil and grease -. 3 .. -- .....--- 0.23pH --------------- Within the ------------------

,, %V6.6.0

§408.306 Pretreatment standards formew sources.

The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the non-Alaskan scallop process-ing subcategory which Is a user of apublicly owned treatment works and amajor contributing industry as definedin Part 128 of this chapter (and whichwould be a new source subject to section306 of the Act, if it were to discharge pol-lutants to the navigable waters), shall bethe same standard as set forth in Part128 of this chapter, for existing sources,except that, for the purpose of this sec-tion, §§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132 alid128.133 of this chapter shall not apply.The following pretreatment standard es-tablishes the quantity or quality of pol-lutants or pollutant properties controlledby this section which may be dischargedto a publicly owned treatment works bya new source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart:


EOD5 ---------------------- No limitation.TSS ----------------------- Do.pH -------------------- Do.Oil and grease --------------- -Do.

Subpart AE-Alaskan Herring FilletProcessing Subcategory

§ 408.310 Applicability; description ofthe Alaskan herring fillet processingsubcategory.

Theprovisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing of herring fillets in Alaska.§ 408.311 Specialized definitions.

For the purpose of this subpart:(a) Except as provided belqw, the gen-


(b) The term "seafood" shall meanthe raw material, including freshwaterand saltwater fish and shellfish, to beprocessed, in the form in which it is re-ceived at the processing plant.§ 408.312 Effluent limitations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of 'the best practicable controltechnology currently available.

(a) In establishing the limitations setforth in this section, EPA took into ac-count all information it was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manufacturing processes,products produced, treatment technol-ogy available, energy requfrements andcosts) which can affect the industrysubcategorizatlon and effluent levels es-tablished. It is, however, possible thatdata which would affect these limita-tions have not been available and, as aresult, -these limitations should be ad-justed for certain plants in this indus-try. An individual discharger or otherinterested person may submit evidenceto the Regional Administrator (or to theState, if the State has the authority toissue NPDES permits) that factors re-lating to the equipment or facilities in-volved, the process applied, or other such

factors related to such discharger arefundamentally different from the factorsconsidered in the establishment of theguidelines. On the basis of such evidenceor other available information, the Re-gional Administrator (or the State) willmake a written finding that such factorsare or are not fundamentally differentfor that facility compared to those spec-ified in the Development Document. Ifsuch fundamentally different factors arefound to exist, the Regional Adminis-trator or the State shall establish for thedischarger effluent limitations In theNPDES permit either more or less strin-gent than the limitations establishedherein, to the extent dictated by suchfundamentally different factors. Suchlimitations must be approved by the Ad-ministrator of the Environmental Pro-tection Agency. The Administrator mayapprove or disapproye such limitations,specify other limitations, or initiate pro-ceedings to revise these regulations,

(b) The following limitations establishthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties, controlled by this'section, which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

(1) any herring fillet processing facil-ity located in population or processingcenters including but not limited toAnchorage, Cordova, Juneau, Ketchikan,Kodiak and Petersburg shall meet thefollowing limitations:



any 1 day cob.sccutivo daysshall notexceed-

(Metric units) kg/lkg of seafood

TS- ----------- 32 .............. 2401 end grease-27 ............... 10pH ------------ -.-- Within the .................

range 6.0to 9!0.

(English units) lb/l,000 lb of seafood

TS -------------- 32 .............. 24Oil and grease ---- 27 ............... 10pH ................ Within the ..................

range 6.0to 9.0.

(2) any Alaskan herring fillet process-Ing facility not covered under § 408.312(b) (1). shall meet the following limita-tions: No pollutants may be dischargedwhich exceed 1.27 cm (0.5 inch) In anydimension.§ 408.313 Effluent limitations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the applica-tion of the best available'techologyeconomically achievable.

(a) The following limitatlon§ estab-lish the quantity or quality of pollutantsor pollutant properties, controlled by thissection, which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the besta v a ilable technology economicallyachievable:

-FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 40, NO. 231-.MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1975

55798


(1) any herring fillet processing facil-ity located In population or processingcenters Including but not limited toAnchorage, Cordova, Juneau, KetchlkanKodiak and Petersburg shall meet thefollowing limitations:


Ehnluent Average of dailycaracteristic a f alues Ir 30


- (Metric units) ksJq.g of seafood

TSS. -- -:------ 1.8Oil and grease . 2.0-- 0.73p . ---------- within the .................

range 6.0 to9.0.

(English units) Ibl,000 b of seafood

BOD5 . ........ 6.8 --...........-- 6.2TSS_ ---- -- 2.3 --------. . . LSOil and grease..... 2.0 ............ 0.73pH.------------ Within the ------------------

range 6.0 to9.0.

(2) Any Alaskan herring fillet proc-essing facility not covered under Sec.408.313(a) (1) shall meet the followinglimitations:

E ffluent imitations

Effluent Average ofcharacteristic Maximum for values for 30

any 1 day consocutivo daysshall notexceed-


' .SS ------------ 23- --------------- 18Oil and greae----- 2... 7.3p -- ---------- Wi thin the

range 6.0 to9.0.

(English units) IbLOO lb ofseafood

STSS .....---- 23- ....... 8Oil and grease .... 20_: ......... 7.3pH.- ............. Within the

range 6.0 to9.0.


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307 (b) of the Act for a source withinthe Alaskan herring fillet processing sub-category which is a user of a publiclyowned treatment works and a major con-tributing industry as defined In Part 128of this chapter (and which would be anexisting point source subject to section301 of the Act, if it were to dischargepollutants to the navigable waters), shallbe the standard set forth In Part 128 ofthis chapter, except that, for the purposeof this section, §§ 128.121, 128.122,128.132and 128.133 of this chapter shall not ap-ply. Tha following pretreatment stand-ard establishes the quantity-or qualityof pollutants or pollutant properties con-trolled by this section which may be dis-charged to a publicly owned treatment

works by a point source subject to the Pollutant or POlzutantprovisions of this subpart. PPolutant or polutant Prelrcatment

Property, stimfadBODS NTo lmitation.TS Do.pH Do.Oil and grese-......- Do.§ 408.315 Standards of performance for

new sources.(a) The following standards of per-

formance establish the quantity or qual-ity of pollutants or pollutant properties,controlled by this section, which may bedischarged by a new source subject tothe provisions of this subpart:

(1) any herring fillet processing facil-ity located In population or processingcenters including but not limited to An-chorage, Cordova, Juneau, Ketchikan,Kodiak and Petersburg shall meet thefollowing limitations:

Effuent lihittns

Effluent Av rAe of dailyaractestio xmum f valu r0

any 1 day consecutive daszhall nmtemed-

- • (Metilo units) k&xjkM ots e d

Oil ond ; srcs 2. . .0_ 7.3.Within themnc

to9.0.

(Enlish units) Ibfi,030Ib at seaod

TSS ----.-.--..- 23 - -. 23Oil and greasO._ 2 - 7.3PH Withln the .................

(2) Any Alaskan herring fillet process-Ing facility not covered under § 408.315(a) (1) shall meet the following limita-tions: No pollutants may be dischargedwhich exceed 1.27 cm (0.5 Inch) In anydimension.§ 408.316 Pretreatment standards for

new sources.The pretreatment standard under sec-

tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the Alaskan herring fillet process-ing subcategory which Is a user of apublicly owned treatment works and amajor contributing Industry as definedin Part 128 of this chapter (and whichwould be a new source subject to section306 of the Act if It were to dischargepollutants to the navigable waters), shallbe the same standard as set forth in Part128 of this chapter, for existing sources,except that, for the purpose of this sec-tion, §§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132 and128.133 of this chapter shall not apply.The following pretreatment standard es-tablishes the quantity or quality of pol-lutants or pollutant properties controlledby this section which may be dischargedto a publicly owned treatment works by'a new source subject to the provisionsof this subpart:

55799

Pretreatmentatandfard

3BODS -No limitation.Wrss Do.PH Do.O1l and grease.- Do.

Subpart AF-Non-Alaskan Herring FilletProcesslngSubcategory

§408.320 Applicability; description ofthe non-Alaskan herring fillet proc-essing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing of herring fillets outside ofAlaska.§ 408.321 - Specialized definitions.

Por the purpose of this subpart:(a) Except as provided below, the gen-

eral deflnitions., abbreviations and meth-ods of analysis set forth in Part 401 ofthis chapter shall apply to this subpart.

(b) The term "seafood" shall mean theraw material, including freshwater andsaltwater fish and shellfish, to be proc-essed, in the form in which it is receivedat the processing plant.§ 408.322 Effluent limitations guidelines


In establishing the limitations set forthin this section, EPA took into account allInformation It was able to collect, developand solicit with respect to -factors (suchas age and size of plant, raw materials,manufacturing processes, products pro-duced, treatment technology available,energy requirements and costs) whchcan affect the industry subeategorizationand eluent levels established. It is, how-ever, possible that data which wouldaffect these limitations have not beenavailable and, as a result, these limita-tions should be adjusted for certainplants In this industry. An individual dis-charger or other Interested person maysubmit evidence to the Regional Admin-istrator (or to the State, If the State hasthe authority to Issue NPDES permits)that factors relating to the equipment orfacilities Involved, the process applied, orother such factors related to such dis-charger are fundamentally differentfrom the factors considered in the estab-lishment of the guidelines. On the basisof such evidence or other available in-formation, the Regional Administrator(or the State will make a written find-Ing that such factors are or are notfundamentally different for that facilitycompared to those specified In the Devel-opment Document. If such fundamen-tally different factors are found to exist,the Regional Administrator or the Stateshall establish for the discharger effluentlimitations In the NPDES permit eithermore or less stringent than the limita-tions established herein, to the extentdictated by such fundamentally differentfactors. Such limitations must be ap-proved by the Administrator of the En-vironmental Protection Agency. The


55800

Administrator may approve or disap-prove such limitations, specify otherlimitations, or initiate proceedings to re-v ise th ese reg u la tion s .- . ... . "

The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may b6 discharged by apoint source 'subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

Efiluent limitations

EfIluent " Averago of dailycharacteristic Maximum for values for 30

any 1 day conseedtlvo daysshall notexceed-


TSB -------------- 32 ----------------. 24O il a n d g rea se - --- -2 7 -- --- -- ..... ... 10pH ................. Within the ---- ........range 0.0

to 9.0.

(English units) lb/1,00D lb of seafood

T SS ------------.. . . . 32 ---------- - 24Oil and grease ---- 27 ------------ 10pH --------------- Within the ------------------

range 6.0to 9.0.


The following limitations establish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of thebest available technology economicallyachievable:




(Metric units) lkg/kIg of seafood

BOD ------------ 6.8 -------------- 0.2TSS .............. 2.3 ------------- 1.8Oil and grease - 2.0 -------------- 0.73pH - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Within therange 6.0 to9.0.

(English units) lb/I,000 lb of seafood

BOD5 ---------- 0- 6.8 -------------- 6.2TSS -------------- 2.3 -------------- 1.8Oil and grease .. 2.0 ........... 0.73pH ................. Within the ------------------

range 0.0 to9.0.


§408.324 Pretreatment standards forexisting sources

The pretreatment standard tinder sec-tion 307 (b) of the Act for a source-withinthe non-Alaskan herring fillet processingsubcategory whici is a user-of a publiclyowned treatment works and a majorcon-tributing industry as defined in Part 128of this Chapter (and which would be anexisting point source subject to section301 of the Act, if -it were to dischargepollutants to the navigable waters), shallbe the standard set forth in Part 128of this Chapter, except that, for the pur-pose of this section, §§ 128.121, 128.122,128.132 and 128.133 of this Chapter shallnot apply. The following pretreatmentstandard establishes the quantity orquality of pollutants or pollutant proper-ties controlled by this section which maybe discharged to a publicly owned treat-ment works by a point source subject to

-the provisions of this subpart.Pollutant or pollutant Pretreatment

property standardBOD5 --------------- No limitation.TSS ----------------- -. Do.pH ------------------------- Do.Oil and grease ...------------- Do.§ 408.325 Standards of performance for

new sources.The f 9l1owing standards of perform-

ance establish the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties, con-trolled by this section, which may-be dis-charged by a new source subject to theproisions of this subpart:


Effluent Average of dailycharacteristic Maximum for values for 30any I day consecutive days

shall notexceed-

(Metric units) kg/kkg of seafood -

BOD5 ------------ 16 --------------- 15TSS -------------- 7.0 ------------- 5.2Oil and grease ---- 2.9 ------------- 1.1pH --------------- Within the ..................

range 6.0 to9.0.

(English units) lb/l,000 lb of seafood

BODs ------------- 16 --------------- 15TSS ------------- 7.0 . -5.2Oil and grease ---- 2.9 ------------- 1.1pH --------------- Within the ----------------

range 6.0 to9.0.


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the non-Alaskan herring fillet1recessing subcategory which is a user ofa publicly owned treatment work and amajor contributing industry as definedin Part 128 of this chapter (and which

would be a new source subject to section306 of the Act, if It were to dischargepollutants to the navigable waters), shallbe the same standard as set forth InPart 128 of this chapter, for existingsources, except that, for the purpose ofthis section, §§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132and 128.193 of this chapter shall notapply. The following pretreatment stand-ard establishes the quantity or qualityof pollutants or pollutant properties con-trolled by this section which may be dis-charged to a publicly owned treatmentworks by a new source subject to theprovisions of this subpart:

Pollutant or pollutant Pretrcatnitproperty standard

BOD5 -------------------- No limitation.TSS -------- Do.pH ---------------------- Do,Oil and grease ------------ -Do,

Subpart AG-Abalone ProcessingSubcategory

§ 408.330 Applicability; dseriptilons ofthe abalone processing subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart are ap-plicable to discharges resulting from theprocessing of abalone in the contiguousstates.§ 408.331 Specialized definitions.

For the purpose of this subpart:(a) Except as provided below, the

general definitions, abbreviations andmethods of analysis set forth In Part401 of this chapter shall apply to thissubpart.

(b) The term "seafood" shall meanthe raw material, Including freshwaterand saltwater fish and shellfish, to beprocessed, in the form in which It Is-received at the processing plant.§ 408.332 Effluent linltations guidelines

representing the dearee of effiluentreduction attainable by the applica.tion of the best practicable controltechnology currently available.

.In establishing the limitations setforth in this section, EPA "took Into ac-count all information It was able to col-lect, develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of plant,raw materials, manufacturing processesproducts produced, treatment technologyavailable, energy requirements andcosts) which can affect the industry sub-categorization and effluent levels estab-lished. It Is, however, possible that datawhich would affect these limitations havenot been available and, as a result, thetelimitations should be adjusted for cor-tain plants in this industry. An individ-ual discharger or other interested personmay submit evidence to the Regional Ad-ministrator (or to the State, If the Statehas the authority to issue NPDES per-mits) that factors relating to the equip-ment or facilities involved, the processapplied, or othersuch factors related to


such discharger are fundamentally -dif-ferent from the factors considered In theestablishment of the guidelines. On thebasis of such evidence or other availableinformation, the Regional Administra-tor (or the State) will make a writtenfinding thiit such factors are or are notfundamentally different for that facilitycompared to those specified in the De-velopment Document. If such funda-mentally different factors are found toexist, the Regional Administrator or theState shall establish for the dischargereffluent limitations in the INPDES permiteither more or less stringent than thelimitations established herein, to the ex-tent dictated by such fundamentally dif-"ferent factors. Such limitations must beapproved by the Administrator of the-Environmental Protection Agency. TheAdministrator may approve or disap-prove such limitations, specify otherlimitations, or initiate-proceedings to re-vise these regulations.

The following limitations eftablish thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-tion, which may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

Effluent Ulmitati ns

Effluent Aver e of dalyciarcterstic Aaximtumfor values for 3

any I day eonsecutive daysshalt notexceed-

CMetrie units) kg/kkg of seafood

TSS ..... ........ 27 ---------------_-15Oil and grease. -.- 2.2 ............ L4pH .............. Within the ------------------

1ange 6.09.0.

(English units) Ibjl,DM 1b of seatood

T SS ----.-. . -.--.-. 27 -...........---- 15Oil and grease.:. 2.2 -----.. 4...... L4pH_ ............ Within the ------------------

rge 0.0tto 0


The following limitations establish: thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties, controlled by this sec-


tion, which-may be discharged by a pointsource subject to the provisions of thissubpart after application of th6 bestavailable technology economicallyachievable:

Eilutacataltatlon

ebacaeterate Ma1mum L11111111 far = 0any I day coornutlve days

rhall notexceed-

(Mctrte units) kglkc of retsad

TSS __ 3 20 14OR and grease.__ 2.1--. L3pH_ ......-------- Within the

range 0.0to 9.0.

(English units) lb/1,(O2 lb oft a3o d

TSSd.... 26. 14Oil and grcs -. 2.1 ..... L3p1L ............ Within the .....

runge 0.0-to 9.0.


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(b) of the Act for a source withinthe abalone processing subcategorywhich is a user of a publicly ownedtreatment works and a major contribut-ing industry as defined In Part 128 ofthis chapter (and which would bean existing point source subject to sec-tion 301 of the Act, If It were to dischargepollutants to the navigable waters).shall be the standard set forth In Part128 of this chapter, except that, for thepurpose of this section, §§ 128.121,128.122, 128.132 and 128.133 of thischapter shall not apply. The followingpretreatment standard establishes thequantity or quality of pollutants or pol-lutant properties 'controlled by thissection which may be. discharged to apublicly owned treatment works by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart.


BODE -------------------- Ho limitation.TSS ----------------------- Do.pH -------------..... ---- Do.Oil and grease ----------- . Do.


The following standards of perform-ance establish the quantity or quality ofpollutants or pollutant properties, con-

55801

trolled by this section, which may be dis-charged by a new source subject to theprovisions of this subpart:


BODS No limltatlon.TSS --- Do.PH Do.OJI and grease _ _..... Do.

Efflut lnso

Eiflluent Average of dailycrzactetit M1azimum far values far so

any I day - consecutive daysshall netexced-

Metdcmz=t0) kzjkkg of seafrod

TSS_ _____ -----.-_ --- 14Oi an r -. 2.1.. L3pH...... ltln ta

range 0.0to 9.0.

O8 and C__ _ 2L3...... 14pU.............. Within the

range 6.0to 9.0.


The pretreatment standard under sec-tion 307(c) of the Act for a new sourcewithin the abalone processing sub-category which is a user of a publiclyowned treatment works and a major con-trIbuting Industry as defined in Part128 of this chapter (and which would bea new source subject to section 306 of theAct, if It were to discharge pollutants tothe navigable waters), shall be thesame standard as set forth in" Part128 of this chapter, for existing sources,except that, for the purpose ofthis section, §§ 128.121, 128.122, 128.132and 128.133 of this chapter shall notapply. The following pretregatmentstandard establishes the quantity orquality of pollutants or pollutant prop-erties controlled by this section whichmay be discharged to a publicly ownedtreatment works by a new source subjectto the provisions of this subpart.


3ODS ITo limitation.TSS Do.pH .... Do.011 and greac ....... Do.

IR Doc.75-31837 FIled 11-28-75;8:45 am]

FEDEMR. REGISTER, VOL 40, NO. 231-MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1975

Seafood Processing Effluent Guidelines - Final Rule - December 1, … · 2014-12-01 · the...

Documents

Transcript of Seafood Processing Effluent Guidelines - Final Rule - December 1, … · 2014-12-01 · the...