<PRE>
[Federal Register: January 3, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 2)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[<strong>Page</strong> <strong>523</strong>-<strong>558</strong>]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03ja01-31]                         
 
[[pp. <strong>523</strong>-<strong>558</strong>]] Effluent Limitations Guidelines, Pretreatment Standards, and New 
Source Performance Standards for the Metal Products and Machinery Point 
Source Category; Proposed Rule

[[Continued from <strong>page</strong> 522]]

[[<strong>Page</strong> <strong>523</strong>]]

familiar with the facility's processes, products, and analytical 
monitoring reports should be able to make the determination. Some 
facilities may prefer consultation with an analytical chemist.
    EPA is proposing to set numerical limitations on the discharge of 
total sulfide from facilities in several subcategories. In an effort to 
reduce monitoring burden on indirect dischargers, EPA is considering 
(but not proposing) to allow a waiver for the monitoring of total 
sulfide (even when present). EPA would require this demonstration one 
time per permit cycle and if no major changes in processes or raw 
materials change during that period, the demonstration would not have 
to be repeated for the next permit cycle. A wastewater treatment 
operator or other qualified facility personnel who is familiar with the 
facility's processes, products, and analytical monitoring reports can 
make the determination.
    Finally, EPA is considering, but not proposing, whether to allow 
certain facilities in the Metal Finishing Job Shop subcategory to 
demonstrate compliance with specified pollution prevention and water 
conservation practices (in addition to maintaining compliance with the 
existing Metal Finishing and Electroplating effluent guidelines) in 
lieu of meeting the requirements of the MP&M regulation. Facilities 
would submit certification statements one time initially (by the 
compliance deadline) and twice per year thereafter for indirect 
dischargers, or once per year for direct dischargers. The compliance 
paperwork necessary to implement this alternative would likely require 
the attention of the wastewater treatment operator or plant manager.

f. Overlapping Federal Rules

    EPA has established effluent guidelines regulations for thirteen 
industrial categories which may perform operations that are sometimes 
found in MP&M facilities. These effluent guidelines are:
    <bullet> Electroplating (40 CFR part 413);
    <bullet> Iron and Steel Manufacturing (40 CFR part 420);
    <bullet> Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing (40 CFR part 421);
    <bullet> Ferroalloy Manufacturing (40 CFR part 424);
    <bullet> Metal Finishing (40 CFR part 433);
    <bullet> Battery Manufacturing (40 CFR part 461);
    <bullet> Metal Molding and Casting (40 CFR part 464);
    <bullet> Coil Coating (40 CFR part 465);
    <bullet> Porcelain Enameling (40 CFR part 466);
    <bullet> Aluminum Forming (40 CFR part 467);
    <bullet> Copper Forming (40 CFR part 468);
    <bullet> Electrical and Electronic Components (40 CFR part 469); 
and
    <bullet> Nonferrous Metals Forming and Metal Powders (40 CFR part 
471).
    In 1986, the Agency reviewed coverage of these regulations and 
identified a significant number of metals processing facilities 
discharging wastewater that these 13 regulations did not cover. As 
discussed above, EPA's ``Preliminary Data Summary for the Machinery 
Manufacturing and Rebuilding Industry'' (EPA 440/1-89/106) identified 
the MP&M industry as one that is discharging hazardous wastes to 
publicly owned treatment works and directly into the nation's surface 
waters.
    EPA recognizes that in some cases, unit operations performed in 
industries covered by the existing effluent guidelines are the same as 
unit operations performed at MP&M facilities. In general, when unit 
operations and their associated wastewater discharges are already 
covered by an existing effluent guideline, they will remain covered 
under that effluent guideline. However, for the existing Electroplating 
(40 CFR part 413) and Metal Finishing (40 CFR part 433) effluent 
guidelines most facilities will be covered by this proposal. EPA is 
proposing to replace the existing Electroplating (40 CFR part 413) and 
Metal Finishing (40 CFR part 433) effluent guidelines with the MP&M 
regulations for all facilities in the Printed Wiring Board subcategory, 
all facilities in the Metal Finishing Job Shop subcategory, and for 
direct discharging facilities in the Non-Chromium Anodizers 
subcategory. (See Section VI.C for a discussion of subcategory-specific 
applicability).
    When a facility covered by an existing metals effluent guidelines 
(other than Electroplating or Metal Finishing) discharges wastewater 
from unit operations not covered under that existing metals guideline 
but covered under MP&M, the facility will need to comply with both 
regulations. In those cases, the permit writer or control authority 
(e.g., Publicly Owned Treatment Works) will combine the limitations 
using an approach that proportions the limitations based on the 
different in-scope production levels (for production-based standards) 
or wastewater flows. POTWs refer to this approach as the ``combined 
wastestream formula'' (40 CFR 403.6(e)), while NPDES permit writers 
refer to it as the ``building block approach.'' Permit writers and 
local control authorities currently issue permits and control 
mechanisms for many facilities in other effluent guidelines categories 
where overlaps with more than one effluent limitation guidelines 
regulation occur (e.g., Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic 
Fibers; Pesticide Manufacturing; Pesticide Formulating, Packaging and 
Repackaging; and Pharmaceutical Manufacturing). See Section III.D of 
this preamble for additional discussion of applicability.
2. Small Business Advocacy Review Panel
    As required by section 609(b) of the RFA, as amended by SBREFA, EPA 
also conducted outreach to small entities and convened a Small Business 
Advocacy Review Panel to obtain advice and recommendations of 
representatives of the small entities that potentially would be subject 
to the rule's requirements. The Panel consisted of representatives from 
three Federal agencies: EPA, the Small Business Administration, and the 
Office of Management and Budget. The Panel reviewed materials EPA 
prepared in connection with the IRFA, and collected the advice and 
recommendations of small entity representatives. For this proposed 
rule, the small entity representatives included nine small MP&M 
facility owner/operators, one small municipality, and the following six 
trade associations representing different sectors of the industry: 
National Association of Metal Finishers (NAMF)/Association of 
Electroplaters and Surface Finishers (AESF)/MP&M Coalition; the 
Association Connecting Electronics Industries (also known as IPC); 
Porcelain Enamel Institute; American Association of Shortline Railroads 
(ASLRA); Electronics Industry Association (EIA); and the American Wire 
Producers Association (AWPA). Prior to and following the convening of 
the Panel, EPA and the other members of the Panel sought to gather 
advice and recommendations by meeting and consulting with the small 
entity representatives listed above. On September 16, 1999 and October 
5, 1999, EPA held pre-Panel meetings with the potential small entity 
representatives to provide background information on the MP&M 
regulation and EPA's regulatory process and to provide detailed 
information on the elements of the IRFA including possible regulatory 
alternatives. After EPA's Small Business Advocacy Chair convened the 
Panel on December 8, 1999, the Panel provided over 300 pages of 
background information and analysis to the small entity representatives 
and met with the representatives on

[[<strong>Page</strong> 524]]

December 17, 1999 and January 7, 2000. The Panel asked the small entity 
representatives to submit written comment on the MP&M rulemaking in 
relation to the elements of the IRFA. The Panel carefully considered 
these comments when developing its recommendations.
    Consistent with the RFA/SBREFA requirements, the Panel evaluated 
the assembled materials and small-entity comments on issues related to 
the elements of the IRFA and prepared a report. The report summarizes 
the Panel's outreach efforts to small entities and the comments 
submitted by the small entity representatives. The Panel's report also 
presents their findings on issues related to the elements of an IRFA 
and recommendations regarding the rulemaking. EPA included a copy of 
the Panel report in the docket for this proposed rule.
    In the area of potential reporting, record keeping and compliance 
requirements, the Panel recommended that EPA consider reduced 
monitoring schemes for small entities including incorporating several 
concepts of the proposed EPA NPDES Streamlining regulations 
(``Amendments to Streamline the National Pollutant Discharge 
Elimination System Program Regulations: Round 2; Proposed Rule'' 61 FR 
65268; December 11, 1996). For example, the Panel ``encourages EPA to 
explore options for allowing certification in lieu of monitoring where 
an operator can determine, based on knowledge of the facility and its 
processes, that certain pollutants are not likely to be present or are 
adequately controlled.'' Based on the Panel's recommendations, EPA is 
proposing to allow MP&M indirect discharge facilities to apply for a 
waiver that will allow them to reduce their monitoring burden. In order 
for a facility to receive a monitoring waiver, the facility must submit 
a certification statement in writing to the control authority (e.g., 
POTW) stating that the facility does not use nor generate in any way a 
pollutant (or pollutants) at their site or that the pollutant (or 
pollutants) is present only at background levels from intake water and 
without any increase in the pollutant due to activities of the 
discharger. EPA notes that the NPDES streamlining for direct 
dischargers, which includes a similar provision, was finalized on May 
15, 2000 (65 FR 30886).
    The Panel also recommended that EPA give serious consideration to 
allowing the use of best management practices (BMPs) instead of 
numerical limitations, at least for some pollutants and/or 
subcategories of facilities. In response to this recommendation, EPA is 
soliciting comment and data on a ``Pollution Prevention Alternative for 
the Metal Finishing Job Shop Subcategory.'' This alternative would 
allow facilities in the Metal Finishing Job Shop subcategory to 
implement a set of pollution prevention measures in lieu of monitoring 
for a set of regulated parameters. The Agency is also soliciting 
comment on allowing facilities in other subcategories to comply with 
this pollution prevention alternative. EPA fully describes this 
potential alternative in Section XXI.D.
    In relation to proposing an indicator for toxic organic 
constituents to reduce the burden of monitoring for specific organic 
pollutants, the Panel recommended that EPA attempt to identify an 
appropriate organic indicator if it turns out that limitations for 
organic pollutants are appropriate for one or more subcategories. 
However, the Panel also recommended that if organic pollutant removals 
by subcategory are not higher than levels in the preliminary analysis 
provided to the Panel, then EPA should give serious consideration to 
not proposing pretreatment standards for those pollutants in those 
subcategories. In response to this recommendation, the Agency is 
proposing several alternatives for organic pollutant monitoring. EPA is 
proposing to allow the use of Total Organic Carbon (TOC) as an 
indicator parameter for organic pollutants found in the wastewater 
discharges at MP&M facilities. The indicator is an alternative limit. 
If facilities do not wish to use TOC as an indicator, EPA is proposing 
two other alternatives. The second alternative allows facilities to 
monitor for a list of organic pollutants (i.e., total organics 
parameter (TOP) list) and to meet a limit which would equate to the 
summation of all quantifiable values of the listed organic pollutants. 
The third alternative allows facilities to develop and certify the 
implementation of an ``organic chemical management plan.'' The Agency 
further discusses these organic monitoring alternatives in Section 
XXI.C.
    The Panel also recommended that EPA not regulate TSS, pH, iron, or 
aluminum for indirect dischargers. The Agency is not proposing 
pretreatment standards for any of these parameters.
    In the area of overlap with other Federal rules, the Panel 
recommended that EPA attempt to minimize the potential for MP&M 
facilities to be covered by more than one effluent guideline and that 
EPA clarify in the preamble how it plans to regulate facilities that 
have operations covered by more than one effluent guideline. In 
response to this recommendation, EPA has made an effort to clearly 
define the applicability of the proposed MP&M rule. In addition, EPA is 
replacing the Metal Finishing (40 CFR part 433) and Electroplating (40 
CFR part 413) effluent guidelines for a large number of facilities. 
Therefore, these facilities will only be covered by the MP&M rule.
    The Panel recommended that EPA consider regulatory alternatives, 
including a ``no regulation'' option, to reduce any significant 
economic impacts that are not justified by environmental improvements 
and to improve the cost-effectiveness of the regulation. In response to 
these recommendations, the Agency is proposing low flow exclusions for 
two subcategories and is proposing not to establish pretreatment 
standards for three other subcategories based on low levels of 
pollutants discharged. EPA discusses these issues throughout this 
notice (see Sections II.D, VI.C, and XII for detailed discussions of 
the proposed flow cutoff (or no regulation) by subcategory).
    Additionally, as recommended by the Panel, EPA has solicited data 
and comment on the following topics discussed in the Panel report: the 
cost savings to Control Authorities and dischargers of BMPs in lieu of 
numerical limitations; in-process versus end-of-pipe monitoring for 
cyanide; inclusion of the steel wire producers in the proposed rule; 
costs for contract hauling; certain methodological issues, including 
costs and adequacy of operational changes or treatment enhancements for 
BAT facilities to consistently and reliably achieve full compliance 
with proposed limitations; the POTW removals methodology; and the 
revision to the Toxic Weighting Factors. EPA invites comments on all 
aspects of the proposal and its impacts on small entities (see Section 
XXIII for a specific request for comment on each of these issues).

D. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the 
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as 
one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or

[[<strong>Page</strong> 525]]

State, local, or Tribal governments or communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this rule is a ``significant regulatory action.'' As 
such, this action was submitted to OMB for review. Changes made in 
response to OMB suggestions or recommendations will be documented in 
the public record.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will 
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. The rule establishes effluent 
limitations imposing requirements that apply to metal product and 
machinery facilities, as defined by this preamble, when they discharge 
wastewater. The rule applies to States and localities when they own and 
operate an in-scope MP&M facility. EPA estimates 4,300 MP&M facilities 
are owned and operated by State and local governments. Only 730 of 
these 4,300 facilities discharge MP&M process wastewater at levels 
above the flow exclusions for the General Metals and Oily Wastes 
subcategories (1 MGY and 2 MGY, respectively).
    In addition, this proposed rule will affect State and local 
governments when they are administering CWA permitting programs. The 
proposed rule, at most, imposes minimal administrative costs on States 
that have an authorized NPDES program. (These States must incorporate 
the new limitations and standards in new and reissued NPDES permits). 
In an effort to minimize this administrative burden, EPA has 
incorporated a low flow cutoff for indirect dischargers in the two 
largest subcategories (i.e., General Metals and Oily Waste) to reduce 
permitting burden on POTWs related to permitting the smallest MP&M 
facilities (see Sections II.D, VI.C, and XII for discussions on the 
proposed low flow exclusion). The total cost of today's proposal to 
governments (including regulated MP&M government-owned facilities and 
regulators) is less than $15 million. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does 
not apply to this rule. See Section XXII.B for a discussion of the 
administrative costs to State and local governments.
    Although Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule, EPA did 
consult with State and local government representatives in developing 
this proposal. EPA developed and administered a survey questionnaire to 
collect information from POTWs on the burden of implementing permits 
for MP&M facilities (see Section V.B.5 for a information on the POTW 
survey questionnaire). In addition, EPA attended several industry and 
professional meetings such as the National Metal Finishing Strategic 
Goals Summit and the annual meetings of the Association of Municipal 
Sewerage Authorities (AMSA) to talk to States and local governments 
(and other stakeholders) about the MP&M proposed rule including several 
possible alternative options for monitoring. States and local 
government representatives were also present at EPA's public meetings 
on the MP&M proposed rule (see Section V.E of this notice for a 
discussion on public outreach efforts). Section II.D summarizes many of 
the major concerns expressed by MP&M stakeholders (including State and 
local governments) during the development of this proposal.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA 
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local 
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule 
from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

1. E.O. 12898 Requirements
    Executive Order 12898 requires that, to the greatest extent 
practicable and permitted by law, each Federal agency must make 
achieving environmental justice part of its mission. E.O. 12898 
provides that each Federal agency must conduct its programs, policies, 
and activities that substantially affect human health or the 
environment in a manner that ensures that such programs, policies, and 
activities do not have the effect of excluding persons (including 
populations) from participation in, denying persons (including 
populations) the benefits of, or subjecting persons (including 
populations) to discrimination under such programs, policies, and 
activities because of their race, color, or national origin.
2. Environmental Justice Analysis
    EPA examined whether the proposed regulation will promote 
environmental justice in the areas affected by MP&M discharges. This 
analysis first examines whether the proposed rule specifically reduces 
risks to disadvantaged populations. EPA then examined whether MP&M 
discharges have a disproportionally high environmental impact on 
minority populations based on the demographic characteristics of the 
populations residing in the counties affected by MP&M discharges.
a. Changes in Health Risk for Subsistence Anglers
    Subsistence anglers include low-income and minority populations 
that rely heavily on subsistence fishing in their food supply. 
Subsistence anglers are likely to be at disproportionally high risk 
from consumption of contaminated fish because of heavy reliance on fish 
caught in local waters in their diets. EPA's analysis of changes in 
adverse health effects from the proposed rule show that benefits to 
subsistence anglers substantially exceed benefits to recreational 
anglers.
    EPA used the same methodology for estimating cancer and systemic 
health risk used in the national human health benefits analysis to 
estimate changes in health risk to subsistence anglers. EPA's estimates 
show that subsistence anglers face significantly higher cancer risk 
from fish consumption than recreational anglers at the baseline 
discharge levels. The estimated average lifetime cancer risk in the 
baseline for subsistence and recreational anglers is 20.3 in a million 
and 8.08 in a million, respectively. The estimated reduction in average 
lifetime cancer risk for subsistence anglers is more than double the 
reduction in risk for sport anglers (i.e., 7.70 in a million vs. 3.77 
in a million) (see Table XXII.F-1).

[[<strong>Page</strong> 526]]



                           Table XXII.F-1.--Estimated Changes in Lifetime Cancer Risk to Subsistence vs. Recreational Anglers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Average lifetime cancer risk per individual               Estimated changes in individual lifetime cancer
                                ----------------------------------------------------------------------                        risk
  Exposed population category                                                                         --------------------------------------------------
                                     Baseline       Proposed option   Option  2/6/10     Option 4/8    Proposed option   Option  2/6/10     Option 4/8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsistence Anglers............  20.3E-06          12.6E-06          12.4E-06         12.8E-06         7.7E-06          7.9E-06          7.5E-06
Recreational Anglers...........  8.1E-06           4.3E-06           4.3E-06          4.5E-06          3.8E-06          3.8E-06          3.6E-06
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA also analyzed changes in systemic health risk from fish 
consumption to subsistence anglers. This analysis is performed at the 
sample level only. The results from this analysis show that 
approximately 7,000 subsistence anglers (two percent) in reaches near 
sample facilities are estimated to ingest MP&M pollutants at rates 
sufficient to pose a significant risk of health effects at the baseline 
discharge levels. The proposed regulation reduces the number of 
subsistence anglers at risk of developing deleterious health effects by 
4,616 (66 percent) (see Table XXII.F-2.).

             Table XXII.F-2.--Changes in Systemic Health Risk to Subsistence Anglers (Sample Basis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Subsistence anglers exposed to        Subsistence anglers
                                                         hazard ratio >1 <SUP>a</SUP>        benefitting from the MP&M rule
                                   Total exposed ---------------------------------------------------------------
        Regulatory status           subsistence                     Percent of
                                      anglers        Number of     total exposed     Number of      Percent of
                                                    individuals     individuals     individuals      baseline
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline........................         320,366           6,971            2.18  ..............  ..............
Proposed option.................         320,366           2,355            0.74           4,616              66
Option 2/6/10...................         320,366           2,355            0.74           4,616              66
Option 4/8......................         320,366           2,355            0.74           4,616             66
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<SUP>a</SUP> Hazard ratio is a ratio of the estimated ingestion rate of a pollutant to the reference dose (RfD) value for
  the pollutant. The RfD is an estimate of the maximum daily ingestion rate in mg/kg per day that is likely to
  be without an appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime. A hazard ratio greater than one
  indicates that individuals would be expected to ingest MP&M pollutants at rates sufficient to pose a
  significant risk of systemic health effects.

b. Demographic Characteristics of the Populations Residing in the 
Counties Affected by MP&M Discharges
    EPA assessed whether adverse environmental, human health, or 
economic effects associated with MP&M facility discharges are more 
likely to be borne by minorities and low-income populations. This 
analysis is based on information on the race, national origin, and 
income level of populations residing in the counties traversed by 
reaches receiving discharges from 885 sample MP&M facilities. The 
analysis was not done at the national level. The 885 sample facilities 
are located in 643 counties in 46 States (excluding Alaska, Hawaii, 
Nevada, and Wyoming). Two sample facilities that are located in Puerto 
Rico were excluded from this analysis due to insufficient data.
    EPA compared demographic data on the counties traversed by sample 
MP&M reaches with the corresponding state-level indicators. The results 
of this analysis show that counties affected by MP&M discharges tend to 
have a larger proportion of African-American population than the State 
average in 41 States. In five States, the proportion of African-
Americans in MP&M counties corresponds to the State averages (District 
of Columbia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Vermont, and West 
Virginia). Other socioeconomic characteristics of the populations 
residing in the counties abutting reaches affected by MP&M discharges 
reflect the corresponding State averages.
3. Findings
    Findings from the EPA's analysis show that this proposed rule is 
expected to promote environmental justice in the areas affected by MP&M 
discharges. EPA's analysis of changes in adverse health effects from 
the proposed rule indicate that health benefits to 3.8 million 
subsistence anglers substantially exceed benefits to recreational 
anglers. The estimated reduction in annual cancer risk is an order of 
magnitude greater for subsistence than for sport anglers (i.e., 0.5 in 
one hundred million vs 0.5 in one billion). The proportion of 
subsistence anglers that face a hazard ratio of greater than one under 
the baseline conditions (2.2 percent) declines by 1.5 percent due to 
the proposed rule (see Table XXII.F-2). [Note: the hazard ratio is a 
ratio of the estimated ingestion rate of a pollutant to the reference 
dose (RfD) value point. A hazard ratio greater than one indicates that 
individuals would be expected to ingest MP&M pollutants at rates 
sufficient to pose a significant risk of systemic health effects.] A 
much smaller proportion of recreational anglers (0.15 percent) is 
expected to suffer from systemic health risk effects under the baseline 
conditions. The percentage of recreational anglers facing a hazard 
ratio of one drops to 0.05 percent under the post-compliance. Higher 
representation of African-American households in the areas where most 
MP&M sample facilities are located and their effluents are released 
indicates that the disadvantaged populations will receive a relatively 
larger share of the benefits from the MP&M rule, though they may also 
bear a disproportionate share of costs if the MP&M facilities that 
close are in their community (e.g., lost jobs).

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

1. E.O. 13045 Requirements
    The Executive Order ``Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies 
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' 
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may 
have a

[[<strong>Page</strong> 527]]

disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or 
safety effects of the planned rule on children; and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This 
proposed rule is subject to the Executive Order because it is an 
economically significant regulatory action as defined by E.O. 12866. It 
is expected to reduce numerous pollutants, including lead, in fish 
tissue and drinking water that exceed human health criteria for 
consumption of water and organisms and organisms only. Therefore, EPA 
has performed an analysis of children's health impacts reduced by this 
proposed rule.
2. Analysis of Children's Health Impacts
    EPA expects that the proposed regulation will benefit children in 
many ways, including reducing health risk from exposure to MP&M 
pollutants from consumption of contaminated fish tissue and drinking 
water and improving recreational opportunities. The Agency was able to 
quantify only one category of benefits to children, however--avoided 
health damages to pre-school age children from reduced exposure to 
lead. This analysis considered several measures of children's health 
benefits associated with lead exposure for children up to age six. 
Avoided neurological and cognitive damages were expressed as changes in 
three metrics: (1) Overall IQ levels, (2) the incidence of low IQ 
scores (70), and (3) the incidence of blood-lead levels above 20 mg/dL. 
The Agency also assessed changes in incidence of neonatal mortality 
from reduced maternal exposure to lead. EPA's methodology for assessing 
benefits to children and adults is presented in Section XX.B.3.c. This 
analysis showed that the proposed rule is expected to yield $14.4 
million (1999$) in annual benefits to children from reduced 
neurological and cognitive damages and reduced incidence of neonatal 
mortality.
    The Agency also examined whether lead discharges from MP&M 
facilities are likely to have a disproportionate impact on children in 
subsistence anglers' families. Children in subsistence fishing families 
face a greater risk of adverse health effects from exposure to lead-
contaminated fish due to high proportion of fish from local waters in 
their diet. EPA's analysis showed that the beneficial outcome of the 
MP&M rule favor children from subsistence fishing families. The average 
estimated health risk reduction per child for each of the four lead-
related health effects was much larger for children from subsistence 
fishing families. This finding is also supported by the monetary 
estimates of benefits per child in each population category. EPA 
estimated that the monetary value of benefits to a child from a 
subsistence fishing family is $781.2 (1999$) per year, as compared to 
$82.6 (1999$) for a child from a recreational fishing family. These 
benefits comprise a much larger portion of subsistence fishing families 
income compared to the benefits received by a recreational fishing 
because subsistence fishing families (e.g., Native American families) 
have on average a lower household income. EPA estimated that the 
monetary value of benefits from reduced cognitive damages to children 
for a subsistence household is about 2.9 percent of their current 
household income, while benefits for a recreational fishing family is 
0.2 percent of their household income. This analysis uses average 
household income in Native American families and average household 
income of all households in the United States. Table XXII.G-1 
summarizes estimated changes in health risk and the monetary value of 
benefits to children from recreational and subsistence fishing 
families.

            Table XXII.G-1.--Estimated Benefits to Pre-School Children From Reduced Exposure to Lead
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Estimated monetary value of
                                                                   Reduction in      avoided health damages to
                                   Population        Number of     the number of      children (1999$)--mean
       Benefit category             category         children     adverse health             estimates
                                                   (ages 0 to 1)   effect cases  -------------------------------
                                                                                       Total         Per child
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Preferred Option
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neo-Natal Mortality...........  Recreation......  ..............            0.92      $5,536,000             $47
                                Subsistence.....  ..............            0.69      $4,002,000            $609
Avoided IQ Loss...............  Recreation......  ..............          390.43      $3,934,410             $30
                                Subsistence.....  ..............           98.65        $994,104            $151
Reduced IQ 70.................  Recreation......  ..............            0.02        $101,311              $1
                                Subsistence.....  ..............            0.09         $25,079              $4
Reduced PbB >20...............  Recreation......  ..............            0.03            $686           (\1\)
                                Subsistence.....  ..............            0.06             $60           (\1\)
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................  Recreation......         131,511  ..............      $9,372,407             $83
                                Subsistence.....           6,576  ..............      $5,021,243            $764
                                All Children....         138,087  ..............     $14,393,650            $120
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Option 2/6/10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neo-Natal Mortality...........  Recreation......  ..............            0.95      $5,510,000             $49
                                Subsistence.....  ..............            0.71      $4,118,000            $626
Avoided IQ Loss...............  Recreation......  ..............          402.75      $4,058,465             $31
                                Subsistence.....  ..............          101.74      $1,025,276            $156
Reduced IQ 70.................  Recreation......  ..............            0.02        $104,529              $1
                                Subsistence.....  ..............            0.09         $25,866              $4
Reduced PbB >20...............  Recreation......  ..............            0.03            $609           (\1\)
                                Subsistence.....  ..............            0.04             $36           (\1\)
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................  Recreation......         131,511  ..............      $9,546,407             $84
                                Subsistence.....           6,576  ..............      $5,013,243            $781

[[<strong>Page</strong> 528]]


                                All Children....         138,087  ..............     $14,683,650            $122
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Option 4/8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neo-Natal Mortality...........  Recreation......  ..............            0.95      $5,510,000             $49
                                Subsistence.....  ..............            0.71      $4,118,000            $626
Avoided IQ Loss...............  Recreation......  ..............          402.75      $4,058,465             $31
                                Subsistence.....  ..............          101.74      $1,025,276            $156
Reduced IQ 70.................  Recreation......  ..............            0.02        $104,529              $1
                                Subsistence.....  ..............            0.09         $25,866              $4
Reduced PbB >20...............  Recreation......  ..............            0.03            $609           (\1\)
                                Subsistence.....  ..............            0.04             $36           (\1\)
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................  Recreation......         131,511  ..............      $9,673,603             $85
                                Subsistence.....           6,576  ..............      $5,169,178            $786
                                All Children....         138,087  ..............     $14,842,781           $124
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Negligible.

    Children over age six are also likely to benefit from reduced 
neurological and cognitive damages due to reduced exposure to lead. 
Recent research on brain development among 10-to 18-year-old children 
shows unanticipated and substantial growth in brain development, mainly 
in the early teenage years (Giedd et al., 1999). This research suggests 
that older children may be hypersensitive to lead exposure, as are 
children aged 0 to 6.
    Additional benefits to children from reduced exposure to lead not 
quantified in this analysis may include prevention of the following 
adverse health effects: slowed or delayed growth, delinquent and anti-
social behavior, metabolic effects, impaired heme synthesis, anemia, 
impaired hearing, and cancer.

H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian Tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the Tribal governments, or EPA consults with those 
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected Tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of Indian Tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian Tribal governments. Based on the information 
collection efforts for this industry category, EPA does not expect any 
Indian Tribal governments to own or operate in-scope MP&M facilities. 
In addition, given the proposed applicability thresholds (i.e., low 
flow exclusions for the General Metals and Oily Wastes subcategories), 
EPA estimates that few, if any, new facilities subject to the rule will 
be owned by Tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements of 
section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) of 1995, (Pub L. 104-113 Sec. 12(d) 15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standard bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide 
Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), 
explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and 
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    Although today's proposed rule does not establish new analytical 
methods, it does require dischargers to monitor for TSS, O&G (as HEM), 
Total Organic Carbon (TOC), Aluminum, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, 
Cyanide (T), Cyanide (A), Lead, Manganese, Molybdenum, Nickel, Silver, 
Sulfide (as S), Tin, and Zinc. (EPA notes that the pollutants listed 
may not be regulated for all subcategories). All of these analytes can 
be measured by EPA methods and many using consensus standards that are 
specified in the tables at 40 CFR part 136.3. EPA is also proposing a 
limit for Total Organics Parameter (TOP), as part of an organic 
monitoring alternative. (See Section XXI.C.2). EPA developed the TOP 
list of organic pollutants using the list of organic priority 
pollutants and other non-conventional organic pollutants that met EPA's 
``pollutant of concern'' criteria for this rule (see section VII for a 
discussion on the selection of the MP&M pollutants of concern). Of the 
nonconventional organic chemicals on the MP&M pollutant of concern 
list, EPA included only those that were removed in appreciable 
quantities (based on toxic weighted pound-equivalents) in two or more 
subcategories. See appendix B to part 438 in the proposed rule 
accompanying

[[<strong>Page</strong> 529]]

this notice for a list of organic pollutants that comprise the proposed 
Total Organics Parameter (TOP). The following analytes that EPA is 
proposing to comprise the TOP do not have approved EPA methods: Benzoic 
acid, carbon disulfide, 3,6-Dimethylphenanthrene, 2-
Isopropylnaphthalene, 1-Methylfluorene, and 2-Methylnaphthalene. In 
addition, aniline and 1-Methylphenanthrene do not have procedures 
approved in 40 CFR part 136, but have procedures that have been 
validated as attachments to EPA Methods 1625/625. EPA plans to 
promulgate methods or validate the procedures for these analytes prior 
to the promulgation of the MP&M rule. EPA welcomes comments on this 
aspect of the proposed rulemaking and, specifically, invites the public 
to identify potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards and to 
explain why such standards should be used in this regulation.

J. Plain Language Directive

    Executive Order 12866 and the President's memorandum of June 1, 
1998, require each agency to write all rules in plain language. We 
invite your comments on how to make this proposed rule easier to 
understand. For example, have we organized the material to suit your 
needs? Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated? Does the rule 
contain technical language or jargon that isn't clear? Would a 
different format (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, 
paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand? Would more (but 
shorter) sections be better? Could we improve clarity by adding tables, 
lists, or diagrams? What else could we do to make the rule easier to 
understand?

K. Executive Order 13158: Marine Protected Areas

1. E.O. 13158 Requirements
    Executive Order 13158 has been established to ``help protect the 
significant natural and cultural resources within the marine 
environment for the benefit of present and future generations by 
strengthening and expanding the Nation's system of marine protected 
areas (MPAs).'' MPAs include areas of coastal and ocean waters, the 
Great Lakes and their connecting waters that have been reserved by laws 
or regulations to provide lasting protection for part or all of their 
natural resources. The list of MPAs defined for the purposes of this 
Executive Order will be published and maintained by the Secretary of 
Commerce and the Secretary of the Interior.
    This order aims at further enhancing and strengthening protection 
of the existing MPAs and establishing new or expanded MPAs. The order 
provides EPA with the ability to propose new science-based regulations, 
as necessary, to ensure better protection for beaches, coasts, and the 
marine environment from pollution.
2. Impacts on Marine Resources
    The proposed regulation is expected to enhance protection of MPAs 
by improving the quality of marine waters receiving discharges from 
MP&M facilities. Although the list of MPAs affected by this order has 
not yet been published, may include waterbodies currently protected 
under the National Estuaries Program (NEP), wildlife refugees, and 
other significant natural and cultural resources in marine 
environments. EPA compared sample MP&M facility discharge locations 
with the list of the 28 waterbodies under the NEP and the Chesapeake 
Bay to assess potential impacts of the regulation on significant marine 
resources. Sample MP&M facilities included in this analysis discharge 
directly or indirectly to 627 receiving waterways, of which, 544 are 
rivers/streams, 55 are bays or estuaries, and 28 are lakes, including 
the Great Lakes. This analysis showed that several of the NEP 
waterbodies currently receive discharges from the sample facilities, 
including Long Island Sound (NY/CT), Buzzards Bay (MA), Narragansett 
Bay (RI), and Puget Sound (WA). Most of the other protected estuaries 
receive effluents from the sample MP&M facilities via connecting 
waters. For example, discharges to the Connecticut River enter Long 
Island Sound (NY/CT), and discharges to the Hudson River enter the New 
York-New Jersey Harbor.
    The absence of the current MPA list makes it difficult to determine 
the extent of benefits to MPAs from the proposed rule. The breadth of 
this regulation, however, ensures that some MPAs are likely to benefit 
from reduced pollutant discharges from MP&M facilities.

L. Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments (CZARA)

    Congress enacted Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act 
Reauthorization Amendments (CZARA) in 1990 to address the problem of 
nonpoint source pollution in coastal waters. Section 6217 of CZARA 
requires all States/tribes with federally approved coastal zone 
management programs to develop and implement coastal nonpoint pollution 
control programs. The EPA and NOAA administer the Section 6217 program 
and have developed guidance to assist States in implementing the 
coastal nonpoint pollution control programs. States may choose the 
specific practice or combination of practices that will achieve the 
goals of controlling nonpoint source pollution and of protecting 
coastal waters.
    Section 6217 of CZARA differs from the previous Coastal Zone 
Management Act (CZMA) of 1972 in that it is a mandatory program. Under 
CZMA the participation by States in coastal resource management was 
voluntary. CZARA requires coastal States/tribes to submit a coastal 
nonpoint pollution program to the EPA and NOAA within 30 months of the 
technical guidance issuance by EPA and NOAA (by July 1995).
    The technical guidance provided by EPA and NOAA identifies five 
categories of nonpoint sources affecting coastal waters: Agriculture; 
forestry; urban runoff; marinas and recreational boating; and 
hydromodification. For each category, the technical guidance specifies 
management measures and practices to control nonpoint pollution. 
Management measures are defined in CZARA as economically achievable 
measures that reflect the best available technology to control the 
addition of pollutants to coastal waters.
    Although today's proposed rule does not affect nonpoint sources 
directly, it may contribute to nonpoint source pollution control in 
coastal areas by improving the quality of sewage sludge. EPA estimates 
that 1.7 million dry metric tons of sewage sludge would be newly 
qualified for land application as a result of the proposed rule. Sewage 
sludge is a valuable source of fertilizer and can be applied to 
agricultural land, golf courses, sod farms, forests, and residential 
gardens. Compared to nitrogen in most chemical fertilizers, nitrogen in 
sewage sludge is relatively insoluble in water. If sewage sludge is 
used as a substitute for chemical fertilizers on agricultural land 
nonpoint source contamination of surface water can be reduced.

XXIII. Solicitation of Data and Comments

    EPA invites and encourages public participation in this rulemaking. 
The Agency asks that comments address any perceived deficiencies in the 
record of this proposal and that suggested revisions or corrections be 
supported by data where possible. See Section XXIV for guidelines for 
submittal of data.
    EPA particularly requests comments and information on the following 
issues:

[[<strong>Page</strong> 530]]

    1. Steel Forming & Finishing Facilities. EPA solicits comments on 
the choice to include the Steel Forming & Finishing facilities in 
today's proposed MP&M regulation. Facilities in this subcategory 
predominantly process steel wire, rod, bar, pipe, or tube. EPA 
previously regulated these sites under the 1982 Iron & Steel 
Manufacturing effluent guidelines (40 CFR part 420). However, based on 
the information gathered during the data collection effort for the 
Agency's proposed revision to the Iron & Steel Manufacturing 
regulations, EPA has determined that these facilities are more 
appropriately regulated by the MP&M proposed rule. (See Section VI.C.5 
for a discussion of the proposed applicability of the Steel Forming & 
Finishing Subcategory). EPA is also interested in analytical sampling 
data to help better identify the raw wastewater characteristics and 
treatment performance of facilities in the proposed Steel Forming & 
Finishing subcategory. Please note the requirements for submitting 
paired influent and effluent data, as described in section XXIV.A.
    In addition, for facilities that perform operations that fall 
within the proposed scope of both the MP&M Steel Forming & Finishing 
subcategory and the proposed Iron & Steel regulations (i.e., a facility 
that performs manufacturing and batch electroplating of steel), EPA is 
soliciting comment on whether both regulations should cover these 
facilities (using the combined waste stream formula for indirect 
dischargers or building block approach for direct dischargers) or 
whether EPA should allow facilities that would fall under the scope of 
both regulations to be regulated only by the Iron & Steel Manufacturing 
rule. EPA notes that both the proposed regulations discussed here set 
mass-based limits for these facilities. If the Agency were to choose 
the later option, it would need to incorporate a wastewater flow 
allowance for the steel forming and finishing operations into the mass-
based limits of the Iron & Steel regulation, where applicable. EPA is 
particularly interested in comments from permit writers and control 
authorities concerning the burden of permitting an Iron & Steel 
facility under two effluent guidelines (using the building block 
approach or combined waste stream formula) versus the expected 
complexity of interpreting the applicability statements when two 
regulations cover the same operations. In addition, EPA is interested 
in better understanding the potential economic advantage (or 
disadvantage) this might create between stand-alone steel forming & 
finishing facilities and steel manufacturing facilities where steel 
forming & finishing operations occur.
    2. P2 Alternative for Metal Finishing Job Shops subcategory. EPA 
solicits comment on all aspects of the Pollution Prevention Alternative 
for the Metal Finishing Job Shops subcategory including the list of 
practices as well as the possible format for the alternative (see 
Section XXI.D for a discussion of the P2 Alternative). More 
specifically, EPA requests comment on whether there are additional or 
different practices that should be listed, the number of practices that 
should be required in each category, the reasons why any of the 
practices may not be applicable to specific facilities or processes, 
the costs of implementing this compliance alternative, the pollutant 
reduction associated with this alternative, and whether EPA should 
offer this alternative to direct discharging facilities in the Metal 
Finishing Job Shops subcategory, only to facilities discharging below a 
specified wastewater discharge flow, other subcategories such as 
General Metals (even those not currently regulated by the Metal 
Finishing and Electroplating effluent guidelines), or at certain 
facilities in other subcategories (e.g., captive metal finishing and 
electroplating shops).
    EPA also requests comment on whether the Agency should (if the P2 
Alternative is incorporated in the final rule) require all facilities 
that choose the P2 Alternative to also meet the pretreatment standards 
for the Metal Finishing effluent guidelines (40 CFR part 433). That is, 
should facilities that are currently covered by the Electroplating 
effluent guidelines (40 CFR part 413) have to meet the pretreatment 
standards for the Metal Finishing effluent guidelines or for the 
Electroplating effluent guidelines when choosing to comply with the P2 
Alternative in lieu of the MP&M pretreatment standards? EPA is 
interested in receiving information on the additional costs that would 
be incurred by facilities currently covered by the Electroplating 
effluent guidelines in order to meet the pretreatment standards of the 
Metal Finishing effluent guidelines.
    3. Monitoring Flexibility--Monitoring Waiver for Pollutants Not 
Present. In an effort to reduce monitoring burden on facilities, EPA is 
proposing to allow MP&M indirect discharge facilities to apply for a 
waiver that will allow them to reduce their monitoring burden. In order 
for a facility to receive a monitoring waiver, the facility must submit 
a certification statement in writing to the control authority (e.g., 
POTW) stating that the facility does not use, nor generate in any way, 
a pollutant (or pollutants) at their site and that the pollutant (or 
pollutants) is present only at background levels from intake water and 
without any increase in the pollutant due to activities of the 
discharger. The facility must base this certification on sampling data 
or other technical factors and is not a waiver from including the 
numerical limit in the control mechanism (i.e., permit) (see Section 
XXI.C.1 for a discussion on this monitoring waiver). EPA solicits 
comment on the language proposed for the monitoring waiver for MP&M 
indirect dischargers. EPA is also interested in receiving comment on 
the Agency's estimate of burden related to preparing and filing such a 
certification and the reduction in monitoring burden and associated 
cost savings that a facility would expect (see section XXII.A. for a 
discussion on the estimated burden).
    4. Monitoring Flexibility--Organic Pollutant Monitoring. As 
discussed in Section XXI.C, EPA is proposing to allow the use of Total 
Organic Carbon (TOC) as an indicator parameter for organic pollutants 
found in the wastewater discharges at MP&M facilities. The indicator is 
an alternative limit. If facilities do not wish to use TOC as an 
indicator, EPA is proposing two other alternatives. The second 
alternative allows facilities to monitor for a list of organic 
pollutants (i.e., total organics parameter (TOP) list) and to meet a 
limit which would equate to the summation of all quantifiable values of 
the listed organic pollutants. In any case where the data for these 
pollutants indicated a level below the minimum level (i.e., below 
quantitation), EPA used the minimum level for the specific pollutant in 
the summation of the total organics parameter limit. Facilities will 
only have to monitor for those TOP chemicals that are reasonably 
present. The third alternative allows facilities to develop and certify 
the implementation of an ``organic chemical management plan.''
    EPA solicits comment on the three alternatives being proposed for 
reducing the burden associated with monitoring for organic pollutants. 
EPA specifically solicits comment on the use of TOC as an indicator 
pollutant for the broad spectrum of organic pollutants found in MP&M 
process wastewater and whether EPA should require facilities that are 
not using the Agency's selected BAT technology to demonstrate a 
correlation between removal of TOC and removal of organic pollutants in 
their MP&M process wastewater.

[[<strong>Page</strong> 531]]

    EPA also requests comment on whether the Agency should allow 
facilities to choose an indicator pollutant from a given set of choices 
(e.g., COD, Oil & Grease (as HEM), TOC, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 
(as SGT-HEM), etc.) instead of specifying TOC as the only allowable 
indicator parameter. Facilities would be required to demonstrate that 
the reductions in the chosen indicator parameter are equivalent to the 
reduction in the organic constituents required by the limit that EPA is 
proposing for the ``Total Organics Parameter'' (TOP). EPA is also 
interested in receiving comment on the Agency's estimate of burden 
related to preparing an organic chemicals management plan and the 
reduction in monitoring burden and associated cost savings that a 
facility would expect in each of these suggested alternatives as 
compared to monitoring for the TOP list (see section XXII.A. for a 
discussion on the estimated burden).
    5. Monitoring Flexibility--Total Sulfide Waiver. EPA is proposing 
to set numerical limitations on the discharge of Total Sulfide from 
facilities in the General Metals, Metal Finishing Job Shops, Printed 
Wiring Board, Steel Forming & Finishing, and Oily Waste subcategories. 
In an effort to reduce monitoring burden on indirect dischargers, EPA 
is considering to allow a waiver for the monitoring of total sulfide 
(even when present), at the discretion of the POTW, when a facility 
demonstrates that the sulfides will not generate acidic or corrosive 
conditions and will not create conditions that enhance opportunities 
for release of hydrogen sulfide gas in the sewer/interceptor collection 
system or at the receiving POTW or otherwise interfere with the 
operation of the POTW. EPA solicits comment on this alternative and the 
burden associated with demonstrating that it meets the specified 
conditions.
    6. Oily Operations Wastewater. Facilities in the Oily Wastes 
subcategory must only discharge wastewater from one or more of the 
following MP&M unit operations: alkaline cleaning for oil removal, 
aqueous degreasing, corrosion preventive coating, floor cleaning, 
grinding, heat treating, impact deformation, machining, painting, 
pressure deformation, solvent degreasing, testing (e.g., hydrostatic, 
dye penetrant, ultrasonic, magnetic flux), steam cleaning, and 
laundering. If they discharge wastewater from any of the above listed 
operations but also discharge wastewater from other MP&M operations, 
they do not meet the criteria of the Oily Wastes subcategory. 
Facilities in this subcategory are predominantly machine shops or 
maintenance and repair shops. Similarly, EPA is proposing to define the 
applicability of the Railroad Line Maintenance subcategory using the 
same set of ``oily'' unit operations with the addition of ``washing of 
final product'' at facilities that perform routine cleaning and light 
maintenance on railroad engines, cars, and car-wheel trucks and similar 
structures. EPA solicits comment on the list of ``oily'' unit 
operations and whether commenters prefer the use of a list of unit 
operations to define the applicability or a definition (related to low 
metals content of the wastewater). EPA also requests comment on whether 
there are additional MP&M unit operations that should be included in 
this list.
    7. Possible Addition of Other Regulated Parameters. The list of 
parameters which EPA proposes to regulate under today's proposal are 
listed in the proposed codified rule that accompanies this preamble. 
EPA is soliciting comments and data on additional parameters that 
should be considered for regulation. There are two additional chemicals 
that EPA is considering for regulation under the MP&M rule: 
dithiocarbamates and carbon disulfide. Dithiocarbamates is a chemical 
structural group that refers to a set of chemicals, including sodium 
dimethyldithiocarbamate, that are used by facilities in the MP&M 
industry for treatment of chelated metals wastewater (often referred to 
as ``DTC''). It can also be used as a reducing agent. Carbon disulfide 
can be formed during chelation breaking and other treatment steps. 
Although these chemicals are not used in the MP&M processes, they can 
be used/generated by the treatment of MP&M wastewater and may cause 
environmental impacts. EPA is specifically interested in data on the 
treatment of dithiocarbamates and carbon disulfide (including treatment 
effectiveness, treatment costs, costs of contract hauling of these 
wastewater) and on the environmental impacts that these chemicals may 
pose to aquatic life, human health, and POTWs.
    In addition, EPA solicits comment on proper management practices 
for using dithiocarbamates (DTC) at MP&M facilities. EPA also requests 
information on alternative chemicals (e.g., hydrazine, sodium 
borohydride) or technologies for use in chelation breaking as reducing 
or precipitation agents and the associated costs and environmental 
impacts.
    8. Possible Deletion of Regulated Parameters. The list of 
parameters which EPA proposes to regulate in today's proposal are 
listed in the proposed codified rule that accompanies this preamble. 
EPA is soliciting comments and data on parameters that should be 
deleted from consideration for regulation.
    9. Additional Technology Data. The Agency solicits additional data 
on the use of ultrafiltration systems for the removal of oily wastes 
and organic pollutants and on microfiltration systems for the removal 
of metal pollutants and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in relation to 
process wastewater in the MP&M category. The Agency is particularly 
interested in receiving data on: (1) Technology performance, including 
pollutant reduction/elimination; (2) economics, including initial 
capital investment, operation and maintenance costs, payback period, 
waste disposal savings, material input savings, and other savings; (3) 
overall energy use; (4) sludge generation, including metals 
recoverability and the ability of sludge to be recycled on or off-site; 
(5) waste oil generation, including oil recovery and the ability of the 
oil to be recycled on or off-site; (6) air quality impacts and 
emissions. In addition, as some technologies eliminate or reduce 
discharges to water, but not to other media, the Agency solicits 
comments on the environmental impacts and regulatory costs associated 
with each technology's impact on other environmental media. The Agency 
particularly welcomes comments on technology performance and cost from 
MP&M facilities currently using these systems and from technology 
vendors and developers.
    10. Costs of Contract Hauling MP&M Wastewater and Sludge. EPA's 
cost model costs facilities to contract haul small volumes of process 
wastewater when the cost is estimated to be less than installing and 
operating a wastewater treatment system. EPA used data from the 
detailed surveys (see Section V for a discussion of the Detailed 
Surveys) to estimate costs associated with contract hauling MP&M 
process wastewater and wastewater treatment sludge. EPA solicits 
comment on the total cost of contract hauling small volumes of 
untreated MP&M process wastewater and how much those costs differ based 
on the type of wastewater (i.e., oily wastewater, hexavalent chromium-
bearing wastewater, concentrated metal-bearing wastewater, chelated 
wastewater). EPA also solicits comment on the cost to haul hazardous 
wastewater treatment sludge.
    11. Ultrasonic Cleaning. EPA solicits comment on non-chemical 
cleaning methods, such as ultrasonic cleaning.

[[<strong>Page</strong> 532]]

Prior to performing surface finishing operations, facilities must clean 
the metal surface to remove dirt, grit, grease or other surface 
contaminants that may interfere with the finish. Currently, the most 
common method for cleaning metal parts prior to surface finishing 
operations is using an alkaline cleaning bath, which may be followed by 
electrolytic cleaning and rinsing steps, and then an acid bath followed 
by another rinse step. Recently, some facilities have started to use 
ultrasonic cleaning (i.e., the use of sound waves) to clean metal 
surfaces prior to electroplating (or other surface finishing 
operations). Ultrasonic cleaning generates a wastewater that does not 
contain acid or alkaline cleaning agents. EPA solicits data and 
information on ultrasonic cleaning including the capital and operation 
and maintenance costs, feasibility of this method versus more 
traditional methods, characterization of the wastewater generated, size 
of the ultrasonic cleaning unit, and the limitations on its use (e.g., 
is it only available for parts of a certain size or shape?).
    12. Mixed-Use Facility Definition and Determination. As discussed 
in Section III, EPA is proposing to cover MP&M process wastewater at 
mixed-use facilities (i.e., any municipal, private, U.S. military or 
federal facility which contains both industrial and commercial/
administrative buildings at which one or more industrial sites conduct 
operations within the facility's boundaries). However, unlike the 
typical industrial facility, such as an aircraft or electronic 
equipment manufacturing plant with one primary manufacturing activity, 
the majority of military installations are mixed-use facilities and 
more like municipalities with several small industries as well as other 
operations within their boundaries. EPA is proposing to allow 
wastewater generated at different sites within a mixed-use facility to 
be dealt with as separate discharges for the purpose of applying the 
appropriate low flow cutoff (when applicable). EPA is proposing to 
allow the control authority to use its discretion in determining which 
wastewater discharges can be considered separate discharges for the 
purposes of applying the appropriate low flow cutoff (when applicable). 
The determination would likely be based on the degree of proximity 
between industrial operations and a practical application of the 
requirements for applicable MP&M subcategories.
    EPA seeks information from facilities (both military and non-
military) that believe they would fall within this mixed-use facility 
category. In addition, EPA seeks comments on the choice to allow 
control authorities to make this determination and the factors for 
making such a decision as well as alternative ways to divide a mixed-
use facility.
    13. Subcategorization of Metal Finishing Job Shops. EPA is 
proposing to create a subcategory called ``Metal Finishing Job Shops.'' 
This subcategory would only include facilities that are job shops by 
definition (i.e., they own less than 50 percent of the parts that they 
process on-site) and are performing one of the six identifying 
operations in the existing Metal Finishing and Electroplating effluent 
guidelines. As discussed in Section VI.A, EPA chose to subcategorize 
these facilities as separate from facilities in the General Metals 
subcategory (which includes captive metal finishing and electroplating 
shops) based on the variability of their wastewater and on economics. 
Although, the facilities in both subcategories are performing many of 
the same operations and require the same wastewater treatment 
technologies. EPA requests comment on whether to combine the Metal 
Finishing Job Shops subcategory with the General Metals subcategory (or 
a portion of the General Metals subcategory). This would also include 
combining the data sets from which EPA sets the numerical limits for 
the rule.
    In addition, the Agency notes that today's proposal sets a low flow 
exclusion for the indirect dischargers in the General Metals 
subcategory to reduce permitting burden, but does not set a low flow 
exclusion for the Metal Finishing Job Shops subcategory, as those 
facilities already have permits under existing effluent guidelines (see 
sections II.D, VI.C, and XII for discussions on the low flow 
exclusion). However, EPA notes that the proposed limits and standards 
for the Metal Finishing Job Shops subcategory are somewhat less 
stringent than those being proposed for the General Metals subcategory. 
EPA solicits comment on whether the use of the low flow exclusion for 
indirect dischargers in the General Metals subcategory versus no 
exclusion for facilities in the Metal Finishing Job Shops subcategory 
would cause a shift away from the use of job shops or whether the 
difference in numeric limitations would prevent such a shift.
    14. Printed Wiring Board Job Shops. EPA solicits comment on the 
best placement, in terms of subcategorization, for printed wiring board 
``job shops.'' EPA has identified a small number of facilities that 
perform some steps in the printed wiring board manufacturing process. 
For example, a printed wiring board manufacturer may contract out the 
tin/lead soldering operations to a printed wiring board job shop. Such 
a facility never performs all the steps necessary for manufacturing 
printed wiring boards. EPA is proposing to include these facilities in 
the Metal Finishing Job Shops subcategory due to their similarity in 
economics (due to the ``job shop'' nature of their work). However, EPA 
is soliciting comment on whether it is more appropriate to include 
these printed wiring board job shops in the Printed Wiring Board 
subcategory. More specifically, EPA requests data on the 
characterization of the wastewater from printed wiring board job shops, 
the variability of their raw materials, and the variability of the 
wastewater they generate.
    15. BMPs in Lieu of Numerical Limitations. EPA solicits comment on 
allowing MP&M facilities to demonstrate compliance through installation 
of well-operated and maintained treatment systems. For example, instead 
of meeting a cyanide limit, the facility would demonstrate and keep 
records of the installation and ongoing use of a well-operated and 
maintained cyanide destruction unit that monitors oxidation-reduction 
potential (ORP). EPA is particularly interested in comments on how to 
define ``well-operated and maintained'' and estimates of the burden (in 
labor hours and dollars) required to keep records sufficient for 
demonstrating compliance and prepare a related certification statement.
    EPA also solicits comment from control and permitting authorities 
on whether such an approach would increase or decrease their burden 
related to determining compliance and by how much (in labor hours and 
dollars). Comments should account for maintaining certifications and 
conducting inspections. EPA also requests comment on whether such an 
approach would be protective of the environment.
    16. Applicability to Facilities With Ancillary MP&M Operations. EPA 
solicits comment on the language used to define applicability in 
regards to facilities that are not manufacturing, maintaining or 
rebuilding metal parts, products or machines for use in the 18 
industrial sectors and that only perform MP&M operations (e.g., 
maintenance and repair of metal parts and machines) as ancillary 
activities. For example, as discussed in Section III, EPA does not 
intend for the MP&M proposal to include process wastewater discharges 
from an on-site machine or maintenance shop at a facility engaged in 
the

[[<strong>Page</strong> 533]]

manufacture of organic chemicals when the facility operates that shop 
to maintain the equipment related to manufacturing their products 
(i.e., organic chemicals). EPA solicits comment on the clarity of this 
statement and specifically requests comment on alternative language. 
For example, EPA could use the following language instead: ``facilities 
that perform on-site maintenance and repair of equipment used to 
produce a product or perform an operation (e.g., manufacturing of 
organic chemicals) where the wastewater generated is already covered by 
effluent guidelines for another point source category (with the 
exception of the Metal Finishing or Electroplating effluent guidelines) 
are excluded from the applicability of the MP&M regulation.''
    17. Non-Chromium Anodizing. EPA is proposing to exclude wastewater 
from indirect discharging non-chromium anodizing facilities (that also 
do not use dichromate sealants) from the MP&M categorical pretreatment 
standards. Such facilities would still need to comply with the 
pretreatment standards of the Metal Finishing (40 CFR part 433) 
effluent guidelines for their non-chromium anodizing wastewater and the 
general pretreatment standards at 40 CFR part 403. EPA is proposing 
limits for direct dischargers in this subcategory. EPA solicits comment 
on whether the applicable standards for indirect discharging non-
chromium anodizers should be transferred from 40 CFR part 433 to the 
MP&M regulation in order to include all non-chromium anodizers under 
one regulation. Because today's proposal includes a monitoring waiver 
for pollutants that are not present (see section XXI.C.1 for a 
discussion on the monitoring waiver), the Agency believes that 
transferring the pretreatment standards for these facilities to the 
MP&M regulation would allow non-chromium anodizing indirect dischargers 
to reduce the number of parameters for which they have to monitor.
    In addition, EPA solicits comment and data on the chromium content 
of sulfuric acid anodizing baths, anodizing dyes/sealants, and other 
wastewater from sulfuric acid anodizing. EPA is especially interested 
in data that provides measurement of hexavalent chromium separate from 
that of trivalent chromium or total chromium.
    18. Cyanide Monitoring. EPA is proposing to allow facilities, in 
subcategories with limits and standards for cyanide, to also monitor 
for amenable cyanide when they have alkaline chlorination treatment in 
place prior to commingling their wastewater (see detailed discussion in 
section XXI.C.3). The point of compliance is based on monitoring for 
total cyanide (or amenable cyanide) directly after cyanide treatment, 
before combining the cyanide treated effluent with other wastestreams. 
EPA is also proposing an alternative where a facility may take samples 
of final effluent, in order to meet the total cyanide limit, if the 
control authority adjusts the permit limits based on the dilution ratio 
of the cyanide wastestream flow to the effluent flow. EPA is proposing 
to allow end-of-pipe alternative sampling point for amenable cyanide as 
well; however, in addition to adjusting the permit limits based on the 
dilution ratio, facilities must have alkaline chlorination treatment in 
place prior to the commingling of their cyanide-bearing wastewater with 
other process wastewater. The Agency notes this is very similar to the 
language used in the Metal Finishing effluent guidelines (40 CFR part 
433). EPA solicits comment on this approach.
    19. Compliance Cost for BAT Facilities. EPA has based the numeric 
limitations for today's proposed rule on wastewater sampling analytical 
data from facilities that the Agency believes to be operating ``best 
available technology.'' This includes pollution prevention and water 
conservation practices as well as wastewater treatment systems. 
However, because EPA uses more than one facility to determine the 
achievable long-term average concentrations and variability factors 
(see Section VIII.B for a discussion on calculation of limits), not all 
model facilities are achieving the long-term average concentrations for 
all pollutants in their wastewater at all times. Therefore, EPA has 
included compliance costs to enhance these model BAT facilities to meet 
the proposed long-term average concentrations for all regulated 
pollutants. For example, model BAT facilities may incur costs for 
additional operational controls or for additional equipment or chemical 
additives that will allow them to target more than one metal type in 
their wastewater treatment system. EPA solicits comment on this 
approach and the adequacy of operational changes and treatment 
enhancements for BAT facilities to consistently and reliably achieve 
full compliance with proposed limitations. EPA also solicits comment 
and data on additional costs that model BAT facilities may incur that 
EPA has not included in the cost model for this proposal.
    20. Space Limitations. EPA solicits comment on the extent to which 
a MP&M facility can install or upgrade its current treatment system to 
meet the proposed limits within the space they currently occupy. More 
specifically, when facilities are located in urban areas with little 
space for expansion, can facilities still install the treatment 
necessary (consider the inclusion of pollution prevention and water 
conservation practices) to meet the proposed limits. If not, can such 
facilities use pollution prevention and water conservation practices 
and install microfiltration systems instead of installing or enlarging 
their existing clarifiers within the space they currently occupy?
    21. Segregation of Waste Streams. EPA solicits comment and 
information on the problems/ issues with segregation of waste streams 
for performing preliminary treatment steps as described in section 
VIII. EPA is especially interested in data on the costs associated with 
retrofitting equipment to segregate waste streams.
    22. Revision to POTW Removals. EPA uses the pollutant by pollutant 
percent removals achieved by POTWs (national average of well-operated 
POTWs with secondary treatment) to give credit to the pretreatment 
system and to conduct the ``Pass Through'' analysis for selecting 
regulated parameters for pretreatment standards.
    In calculating the pollutant removals achieved by the selected 
technology option for today's proposed rule (for wastewater generated 
by indirect dischargers), EPA does not take ``credit'' for removing the 
portion of pollutant loadings that are currently removed by the POTWs. 
In addition, EPA performs a comparison of the percentage of a pollutant 
removed by POTWs with the percentage of the pollutant removed by 
discharging facilities applying EPA's selected technology option (BAT). 
In most cases, (particularly for metals and non-volatile organics) EPA 
has concluded that a pollutant passes through the POTW when the median 
percentage removed nationwide by representative POTWs (those meeting 
secondary treatment requirements) is less than the median percentage 
removed by facilities complying with BAT effluent limitations 
guidelines for that pollutant. EPA notes that the Pass Through Analysis 
uses a different standard for ``pass through'' than that used by POTWs 
to determine compliance with the General Pretreatment Standards (40 CFR 
part 403).
    Recently, EPA has revisited the databases used (see Section XII.A 
for a discussion of the databases and the editing criteria used) to 
determine the

[[<strong>Page</strong> 534]]

percent removal of pollutants achieved by the national average of well-
operated POTWs. Previously, EPA edited data at or near the minimum 
level for POTW performance based on the editing criteria used to 
calculate BAT limitations. EPA is considering revising the POTW data 
editing criteria. Given the range of analytical minimum levels and 
their influence on calculated percent removals, EPA is considering 
several editing alternatives, detailed in section XIV. The Agency 
solicits comments on potential revisions to the pass-through 
methodology.
    23. Toxic Weighting Factors. EPA has developed Toxic Weighting 
Factors (TWFs) using a combination of toxicity data on human health and 
aquatic life. EPA develops TWFs relative to the toxicity of copper. 
(See section XVII or the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Document for this 
proposed rule for a more detailed discussion of toxic weighting 
factors). TWFs are multipliers that are applied to the mass of 
pollutants discharged (or removed) to generate toxic-weighted pound-
equivalents. EPA uses toxic pound-equivalents to indicate the amount of 
toxicity that a pollutant may exert on human health and aquatic life 
relative to other pollutants. Conventional pollutants such as BOD, TSS, 
Oil & Grease (as HEM) and other bulk parameters do not have toxic 
weighting factors. As scientists and researchers develop and publish 
new human health and aquatic toxicity data for various pollutants, EPA 
must revise the TWFs. EPA has documented the changes to TWFs in the 
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis document for this proposed rule. EPA 
solicits comment on these changes.
    24. Phosphoric Acid Cleaning. In regards to the applicability of 
the Oily Wastes subcategory, EPA is soliciting comment on the 
differences in metals content of wastewater generated from ``light'' 
phosphoric acid operations (such as some phosphoric acid etching 
operations and cleaning operations using phosphoric acid solutions) and 
from phosphate conversion coating. EPA is considering including 
phosphoric acid etching and cleaning using phosphoric acid solutions in 
the definition of ``oily operations'' discussed in section VI.C.6. 
However, the Agency is not considering the inclusion of phosphate 
conversion coating as one of the ``oily operations.'' Based on EPA's 
database for this proposal, EPA believes that wastewater generated from 
phosphate conversion coating operations contains high levels of zinc 
and manganese. EPA is especially interested in analytical data from 
sampling wastewater that is representative of either of these 
operations.
    25. Organics Management Plan for Oily Wastes Subcategory. EPA 
solicits comment on whether sites with significant amounts of oil-
bearing wastewater (for example, a facility in the Oily Wastes 
subcategory) should be eligible for the use of an organic pollutant 
management plan as described Section XXI.C.2. Based on the current data 
base, EPA believes that wastewater generated by facilities in the Oily 
Wastes subcategory require end-of-pipe treatment to reduce the 
concentrations of organic pollutants and that an organic management 
plan alone may not adequately control organic-bearing wastewater at 
facilities containing significant quantities of oil-bearing wastewater.
    26. NSPS and PSNS Technology Option. EPA is proposing NSPS and PSNS 
for the General Metals, Metal Finishing Job Shops, Printed Wiring 
Board, and Steel Forming and Finishing subcategories based on BAT 
Option 4. This proposed option includes in-process flow control and 
pollution prevention, segregation of wastewater streams, preliminary 
treatment steps as necessary (including oils removal by 
ultrafiltration), chemical precipitation using lime or sodium 
hydroxide, and solids separation using a microfilter. The Agency also 
strongly considered proposing NSPS and PSNS for these subcategories 
based on ultrafiltration for oil and grease removal and chemical 
precipitation followed by sedimentation for TSS and metals removal. 
This option is equivalent to BAT Option 2 with the oil/water separator 
replaced by an ultrafilter. The Agency is soliciting comment and data 
on this option for NSPS and PSNS for the final rule.
    27. Total Sulfide. EPA is soliciting comment on the appropriate 
analytical method for analyzing total sulfide in wastewater from MP&M 
facilities, specifically in regard to interferences from reducing 
agents or organic chemicals present in the wastewater. The Agency used 
EPA Method 376.1 for seven wastewater sampling episodes, EPA Method 
376.2 at one episode, and Standard Method 4500-S2 for three sampling 
episodes that were performed for EPA by a local POTW. Stakeholders have 
suggested that presence of reducing agents and organic chemicals can 
interfere with EPA Method 376.1, leading to over estimates of total 
sulfide.
    EPA performed matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate recoveries as 
part of its QA/QC procedures on these samples. If the matrix spike is 
recovered quantitatively (e.g., 75-125%), it is unlikely that an 
interference is present. The data narratives for these samples did not 
cite any QA/QC outliers. However, some interferences could still be 
present. (The data narratives can be found in section 5.2 of the public 
record.) EPA intends to perform additional sampling for total sulfide 
following this proposal using both EPA Method 376.1 and 376.2. EPA 
notes that it collected the data used for estimating total sulfide 
pollutant loadings in raw wastewater (i.e., in wastewater from MP&M 
unit operations) at sampling points located prior to treatment 
technologies which introduce reducing agents (i.e., chelation 
breaking). In addition, the data that EPA used to develop the numerical 
limitation for total sulfide was from a site that did not add reducing 
agents to treat its wastewater.
    EPA solicits comment on the various sulfide methods and whether 
these methods are appropriate for analytical wastewater sampling at 
MP&M facilities. EPA also solicits raw wastewater and treatment 
performance data for total sulfide.
    28. Limits for the Non-Chromium Anodizing Subcategory. EPA is 
soliciting comment on two issues relating to the proposed limitations 
for the Non-Chromium Anodizing subcategory. These two issues are 
discussed below.
    EPA is proposing an effluent limitation for aluminum applicable to 
existing and new direct dischargers in the Non-Chromium Anodizing 
subcategory. Because EPA does not have data from any direct discharging 
non-chromium anodizers, it based the proposed aluminum limitation on 
two indirect discharging non-chromium anodizers. However, the Agency 
does not believe that these indirect discharging facilities were 
achieving effluent levels of aluminum that reflect BAT. Because 
aluminum assists in the flocculation of wastewater at POTWs prior to 
sedimentation, many POTWs do not set stringent pretreatment standards 
for aluminum from non-chromium anodizers. EPA is not proposing 
pretreatment standards for aluminum in today's proposal for that 
reason. In addition, neither the Electroplating (40 CFR part 413) nor 
the Metal Finishing (40 CFR part 433) effluent guidelines contain 
pretreatment standards for aluminum. Therefore, the Agency does not 
believe that these two facilities targeted aluminum in their wastewater 
treatment operations. EPA believes that a non-chromium anodizer 
employing Option 2 technologies can achieve effluent concentrations of 
aluminum much lower than those proposed today. Therefore, EPA is 
soliciting data and

[[<strong>Page</strong> 535]]

comment on effective removal of aluminum from non-chromium anodizing 
wastestreams. See section XXIV for guidelines for submitting analytical 
data.
    EPA is proposing effluent limitations for new and existing direct 
dischargers for manganese, nickel and zinc for facilities in the Non-
Chromium Anodizing subcategory. The Agency based these effluent 
limitations on facilities in the General Metals subcategory employing 
the Option 2 treatment technology because it did not have adequate 
wastewater treatment information on these metals from non-chromium 
anodizing facilities. EPA solicits data and comment on the treatment of 
manganese, nickel, and zinc from non-chromium anodizing facilities 
employing Option 2 treatment. See section XXIV for guidelines for 
submitting analytical data.
    29. Limits for the Printed Wiring Subcategory. EPA is proposing 
effluent limitations for chromium, copper, lead, and zinc for existing 
facilities in the Printed Wiring Boards subcategory. The Agency based 
these effluent limitations on facilities in the General Metals 
subcategory employing the Option 2 treatment technology because it did 
not have adequate wastewater treatment information on these metals from 
printed wiring board facilities employing Option 2 treatment. EPA 
solicits data and comment on the treatment of chromium, copper, lead, 
and zinc at printed wiring board facilities employing Option 2 
treatment. See section XXIV for guidelines for submitting analytical 
data.
    30. Cyanide Loadings and Removals. EPA solicits comment and data 
(at the point directly following cyanide destruction treatment) on 
achievable effluent concentrations of cyanide (or amenable cyanide) 
from MP&M facilities that are currently regulated under the Metal 
Finishing effluent guidelines (40 CFR part 433). EPA's Design & Cost 
Model for the MP&M rule estimates pollutant loadings for the industry 
before and after compliance with the proposed regulation. For the 
purposes of estimating baseline loadings (i.e., current discharges) for 
model facilities (i.e., survey sites) currently covered by the Metal 
Finishing or Electroplating effluent guidelines that indicated in their 
survey questionnaire that they both generate wastewater from cyanide-
bearing operations and have cyanide treatment in place, EPA assumed 
that these sites were achieving the LTA concentrations achieved by 
EPA's sampled MP&M BAT facilities (sampled at the point directly 
following cyanide destruction treatment).
    For model sites currently covered by the Metal Finishing or 
Electroplating effluent guidelines that indicated in their survey 
questionnaire that they generate wastewater from cyanide-bearing 
operations but did not indicate that they have cyanide treatment in 
place, EPA used information from EPA sampling of cyanide bearing units 
operations (i.e., raw wastewater loads) to estimate baseline loads 
prior to implementing the technology option under consideration (note 
that cyanide loadings were not analyzed separately by subcategory). On 
a national basis, EPA estimates that 65% (2,315) of MP&M facilities 
discharging cyanide-bearing wastewater do not have treatment in place 
for cyanide destruction. EPA based this national estimate on responses 
to survey questionnaires. This methodology implicitly assumes that many 
of these facilities may not be achieving the cyanide removals that were 
projected for the Metal Finishing and Electroplating effluent 
guidelines. In addition to the request for data above, EPA also 
requests comment on its method for determining baseline cyanide 
loadings. (See Section 6.5 of the public record for a memorandum that 
includes a table of the comparison of cyanide using sites versus 
cyanide treating sites.)
    31. Subcategorization. EPA explains its rationale for its proposed 
subcategorization scheme in section VI. EPA is proposing to subdivide 
the MP&M industrial category into the following 8 subcategories: 
General Metals, Metal Finishing Job Shops, Non-Chromium Anodizing, 
Printed Wiring Boards, Steel Forming and Finishing, Oily Wastes, 
Railroad Line Maintenance, and Shipbuilding Dry Dock. The Agency 
believes its proposed subcategories make sense, but requests comment on 
other possible subcategories. Commenters should include data to support 
their suggestions where possible.
    32. Cost Savings Associated with Pollution Prevention and Water 
Conservation. As discussed in section VIII, EPA's proposed technology 
options include the incorporation of water conservation techniques and 
pollution prevention technologies. In all cases, EPA's options that 
incorporated these technologies and practices costed less and removed 
more pollutants than those options that did not. EPA requests comment 
on its determination that pollution prevention, recycle, and water 
conservation result in net cost savings to facilities, and examples of 
any specific situations where this may not be true.
    33. Assessment of Treatment System Performance. As discussed in 
section VIII, EPA excluded data from chemical precipitation and 
clarification systems at which the concentration of most of the metals 
present in the influent stream did not decrease, indicating poor 
treatment. Although EPA believes this is an appropriate practice, in 
order to focus on facilities with well-run treatment systems, it also 
introduces a risk of biasing estimates of treatment effectiveness 
upwards with respect to identifying pollutant removals on a national 
basis. If a particular metal is not able to be effectively removed by a 
particular treatment train, but its concentration fluctuates randomly 
over time in both the influent and the effluent, then retaining only 
data showing positive ``removals'' may give a misleading impression of 
effectiveness of that treatment technology nationally. Some commenters 
have raised this issue in the past particularly with respect to boron, 
which those commenters believe is not effectively removed by certain 
treatment trains where EPA's data (edited to include only decreases) 
appears to show removals. EPA is continuing to assess this concern both 
with regards to metals in general and with regards to boron in 
particular. EPA requests comment on this issue and suggestions for 
addressing it.
    34. Flow Cutoff Level for the General Metals Subcategory. As 
explained in sections XII and XIII, EPA is proposing a 1 MGY flow 
cutoff for existing and new indirect discharging facilities in the 
General Metals subcategory. EPA requests comment on the 1 MGY flow 
cutoff and whether a higher or lower cutoff would be appropriate. EPA 
also requests comment on whether the flow cutoff should be different 
for facilities currently covered under 40 CFR Part 413 or 433 and 
whether or not that would create an unfair economic advantage for those 
facilities (e.g., captive electroplating shops in General Metals 
remaining regulated under 40 CFR Part 433 but Metal Finishing Job Shops 
being regulated under the proposed MP&M rule).
    35. Flow Cutoff Level for the Metal Finishing Job Shops 
Subcategory. As explained in sections XII and XIII, EPA is not 
proposing a flow cutoff for existing or new indirect discharging 
facilities in the Metal Finishing Job Shops subcategory. The Agency 
concluded that the pollutant reductions associated with the proposed 
option (Option 2) were feasible and achievable and the economic impacts 
were not substantially mitigated under the 1 MGY flow cutoff. EPA 
requests

[[<strong>Page</strong> 536]]

comment on the use of a flow cutoff for this subcategory.
    36. Flow Cutoff Level for the Printed Wiring Board Subcategory. As 
explained in sections XII and XIII, EPA is not proposing a flow cutoff 
for existing or new indirect discharging facilities in the Printed 
Wiring Board subcategory. The Agency concluded that the pollutant 
reductions associated with the proposed option (Option 2) were feasible 
and achievable and the economic impacts were not mitigated at a 1 MGY 
flow cutoff for this subcategory. The Agency solicits comments on a 1 
MGY flow cutoff. Under this scenario, existing regulation would 
continue to apply. EPA solicits comment on the implementation and 
market consequences of this option.
    37. Flow Cutoff Level for the Steel Forming and Finishing 
Subcategory. As explained in sections XII and XIII, EPA is not 
proposing a flow cutoff for existing or new indirect discharging 
facilities in the Steel Forming and Finishing subcategory. However, EPA 
solicits comment on flow cutoffs at the 1, 2, and 3 MGY levels. Under 
these flow cutoff scenarios, existing regulations would continue to 
apply. EPA solicits comment on implementation and market consequences 
of these options.
    38. Flow Cutoff Level for the Oily Wastes Subcategory. As explained 
in sections XII and XIII, EPA is proposing a 2 MGY flow cutoff for 
existing and new indirect discharging facilities in the Oily Wastes 
subcategory. It is proposing the 2 MGY flow cutoff primarily to reduce 
the burden on POTWs, and solicits comment on a 3 MGY cutoff.
    39. For the General Metals, Metal Finishing Job Shops, Printed 
Wiring Boards, and Steel Forming and Finishing subcategories, EPA is 
proposing new source performance standards and pretreatment standards 
for new sources based on Option 4. EPA noted in section IX in the 
discussion of its consideration of this technology for BPT/BAT for each 
of these subcategories that it is not being proposed for BPT because 
the additional removals, while large when considered across the entire 
population of existing facilities, were not significant on a per 
facility basis, and because of concerns with potential increased 
loadings (relative to Option 2) of COD and organic pollutants. EPA 
requests comment on basing NSPS on Option 2 for the above subcategories 
for the same reasons it is proposing to base BPT/BAT on Option 2.
    40. Monitoring Costs. In estimating annual monitoring costs for 
model facilities in EPA's MP&M Design and Cost Model, the Agency 
assumed that facilities meeting local limitations or national effluent 
limitation guidelines and pretreatment standards will already incur 
monitoring costs. EPA solicits comment on whether the facilities will 
incur additional monitoring costs to comply with today's proposal (and 
how much that monitoring would cost). EPA has incorporated several 
options for adding additional flexibility in regards to monitoring (See 
Section XXI.C for a discussion on monitoring flexibility). EPA expects 
that these proposed flexibilities will decrease the overall burden and 
costs of analytical wastewater monitoring for facilities within the 
scope of this rule.
    41. Cash Flow Assumption. As discussed in Section XVI, baseline 
cash flow is defined as the sum of reported net income and 
depreciation. The measure is widely used within industry in evaluating 
capital investment decisions because both net income and depreciation 
(which is an accounting offset against income, but not an actual cash 
expenditure) are potentially available to finance future investment. 
However, assuming that total baseline cash flow is available over an 
extended time horizon (for example, 15 years) to finance investments 
related to environmental compliance could overstate a site's ability to 
comply. In particular, the cost of existing capital equipment (not 
associated with regulatory compliance) is not netted out of cash flow, 
as it is of income through the subtraction of depreciation. Thus, any 
costs associated with either replacing existing capital equipment, or 
repaying money that was previously borrowed to pay for it, are omitted 
from the facility analysis. EPA requests comment on its use of cash 
flow as a measure of resources available to finance environmental 
compliance and suggestions for alternative methodologies. (See Section 
XXII of today's notice.)
    42. Alternatives for Establishing Permit Effluent Limitations and 
Standards for the Steel Forming and Finishing subcategory. As discussed 
in Section XXI.B, EPA is soliciting comment on several alternative 
approaches for the development of mass-based limitations for the Steel 
Forming and Finishing subcategory. These approaches may result in more 
stringent mass-based permits/control mechanisms for some facilities 
with better protection of the environment for the entire life of a 
permit/control mechanism and may result in higher costs. Each 
alternative requires that production from unit operations that do not 
generate or discharge process wastewater shall not be included in the 
calculation of operating rates. EPA solicits comments on these 
alternatives to the proposed production basis for calculating effluent 
limitations and pretreatment standards used in NPDES permits or control 
mechanisms. In particular, the Agency solicits comments on related 
costs and any technical difficulties that steel forming and finishing 
facilities might have in meeting limits during short periods of high 
production. EPA also solicits other options for consideration including 
whether to allow concentration-based limits for this subcategory and 
any rationale for doing so.
    43. Benefit Analysis. As explained in Section XX, benefits analyses 
for past effluent guidelines have been limited in the range of benefits 
addressed which has hindered EPA's ability to compare the benefits and 
costs of rules comprehensively. The Agency is working to improve its 
benefits analyses, including applying methodologies that have now 
become well established in the natural resources valuation field, but 
have not been used previously in the effluent guidelines program. EPA 
was particularly interested in expanding its benefits analysis for this 
rule to include water-based recreational activities other than fishing. 
EPA has therefore expanded upon its traditional methodologies in the 
benefits analysis for the proposed MP&M rule. Past effluent guidelines 
analyses have included human health benefits, economic productivity 
benefits such as reduced costs for POTW sludge disposal, recreational 
benefits for fishing, and nonuse values. The additional analysis 
contained in this rule expands on the traditional analysis by adding 
benefits to participants in boating, swimming, and viewing (i.e., near-
water recreation). Because EPA has not yet resolved some anomalies in 
the extrapolation of the analysis to the national level, the monetized 
benefits for these new categories are not included in the summary 
statements of benefits for the proposed rule. However, EPA is including 
these analyses in the EEBA to present the new methodologies and their 
results as applied to the MP&M rule for public comment.
    Although EPA is confident in the sample-based results, EPA believes 
that the large number of viewers and boaters projected to benefit from 
the rule at the national level may indicate a need to revise its 
procedures for scaling up from sampled facilities to the national 
level. This simple extrapolation technique used in both the cost and 
benefit analyses may bias both estimates and may have the unintended 
effect of overcounting the number of benefitting

[[<strong>Page</strong> 537]]

boaters and wildlife viewers. EPA recognizes that extrapolating from 
sample facility to national results introduces uncertainty in the 
analysis and is continuing to explore ways to reduce this uncertainty. 
The Agency is requesting comment on the methods used to extrapolate 
sample results to national benefit estimates. EPA is also specifically 
soliciting comment on several of the other methodological approaches 
used in the new analysis including the benefits transfer of values from 
studies that did not specifically address boating and wildlife viewing 
to these activities, and the extent to which activities such as 
recreational boating and wildlife viewing are applicable to children. 
EPA may include additional categories of monetized benefits estimates 
based on these new methodologies, as revised based on comment and peer 
review, in its economic analysis for the final rule.

XXIV. Guidelines for Submission of Analytical Data

    EPA requests that commenters to today's proposed rule submit 
analytical, flow, and production data to supplement data collected by 
the Agency during the regulatory development process. To ensure that 
commenter data may be effectively evaluated by the Agency, EPA has 
developed the following guidelines for submission of data.

A. Types of Data Requested

    1. EPA requests paired influent and effluent treatment data for 
each of the technologies identified in the technology options 
(especially in cases where paired data will be helpful in assessing 
variability), as well as any additional technologies applicable to the 
treatment of MP&M wastewater. This includes end-of-pipe treatment 
technologies and in-process treatment, recycling, water reuse, or metal 
recovery technologies. Submission of effluent data only is not 
sufficient for full analysis; the corresponding influent data must be 
provided.
    For submissions of paired influent and effluent treatment data, a 
minimum of four days of data are required for EPA to assess 
variability. Submissions of paired influent and effluent treatment data 
should include: a process diagram of the treatment system; treatment 
chemical addition rates; sampling point locations; sample collection 
dates; influent and effluent flow rates for each treatment unit during 
the sampling period; sludge or waste oil generation rates; a brief 
discussion of the treatment technology sampled; and a list of unit 
operations contributing to the sampled wastestream. EPA requests data 
for systems that are treating only process wastewater. Systems treating 
non-process wastewater (e.g., sanitary wastewater or non-contact 
cooling water) will not be evaluated by EPA. In addition to data for 
the analytes discussed below, data for total suspended solids (TSS) and 
pH must be included with submissions of treatment data. If available, 
information on capital cost, annual (operation and maintenance) cost, 
and treatment capacity should be included for each treatment unit 
within the system.
    2. EPA also requests flow, production, and analytical data from 
MP&M unit operations, rinses, and wet air pollution control devices. 
Submissions of analytical data for MP&M unit operations and rinses 
should include a process diagram of the unit operation; a description 
of the purpose and performance of the operation; production data 
associated with the sampling period; flow rates associated with the 
sampling period (i.e., continuous discharge flow rates, intermittent 
discharge rates and frequencies, or volume of bath and time of last 
discharge for stagnant baths); sample type (grab or composite); 
temperature and pH of each sample; sample collection dates; known 
process bath constituents; sampling point locations; and, the volume, 
discharge frequency, and destination of all process wastewater, waste 
oil, or sludge generated by the unit operation.
    Associated production data should be provided in the following 
units: mass of metal removed (for abrasive jet machining, electrical 
discharge machining, grinding, machining, and plasma arc machining 
operations), in standard cubic feet of air flow (for wet air pollution 
control operations), or surface area of parts processed (for all other 
unit operations). Flow, production, and analytical data should all 
correspond to the same period of time. When applicable, a description 
of any pollution prevention technologies used at the site for the unit 
operations, including cost savings and pollution reduction estimates 
should be provided.

B. Analytes Requested

    EPA considered metal, organic, conventional, and other 
nonconventional pollutant parameters for regulation under the MP&M 
Category. Based on analytical data collected, the Agency initially 
identified 132 pollutant parameters as MP&M ``pollutants of concern.'' 
Complete lists of pollutant parameters considered for regulation and 
pollutants of concern (as well as the criteria used to identify each of 
these pollutant parameters) are briefly discussed in Section VII and 
fully discussed the Technical Development Document for this proposal. 
The Agency requests analytical data for any of the 132 pollutants of 
concern and for any other pollutant parameters which commentors believe 
are of concern in the MP&M industry. TSS and pH data are requested for 
all samples. Table XXIV-1 presents the EPA analytical methods for these 
pollutants. Commentors should use these methods or equivalent methods 
for analyses, and should document the method used for all data 
submissions.

C. Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Requirements

    EPA based today's proposed regulations on analytical data collected 
by EPA using rigorous QA/QC checks. These QA/QC checks include 
procedures specified in each of the analytical methods, as well as 
procedures used for the MP&M sampling program in accordance with EPA 
sampling and analysis protocols. The Agency requests that submissions 
of analytical data include documentation of QA/QC procedures.
    EPA followed the QA/QC procedures specified in the analytical 
methods listed in Table XXIV-1. These QA/QC procedures include sample 
preservation and the use of method blanks, matrix spikes, matrix spike 
duplicates, laboratory duplicate samples, and Q standard checks (e.g., 
continuing calibration blanks). EPA requests that sites provide 
detection limits for all non-detected pollutants. EPA also requests 
that composite samples be collected for all flowing wastewater streams 
(except for analyses requiring grab samples, such as oil and grease), 
sites collect and analyze 10 percent field duplicate samples to assess 
sampling variability, and sites provide data for equipment blanks for 
volatile organic pollutants when automatic compositors are used to 
collect samples.

         Table XXIV-1.--EPA Analytical Methods for Use With MP&M
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  EPA
                          Parameter                              method
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acidity......................................................      305.1
Alkalinity...................................................      310.1
Ammonia as Nitrogen..........................................      350.1
BOD 5-Day (Carbonaceous).....................................      405.1
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD).................................      410.1
                                                                   410.2
Chloride.....................................................      325.3
Cyanide, Total...............................................      335.2
Cyanide, Amenable............................................      335.1
Fluoride.....................................................      340.2
Metals.......................................................       1620

[[<strong>Page</strong> 538]]


Volatile Organics............................................       1624
Semivolatile Organics........................................       1625
Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl.....................................      351.2
Oil and Grease...............................................      413.2
Oil and Grease (as HEM)......................................       1664
pH...........................................................      150.1
Phenolics, Total Recoverable.................................      420.2
Phosphorus, Total............................................      365.4
Sulfate......................................................      375.4
Sulfide, Total...............................................      376.2
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS).................................      160.1
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)...................................      415.1
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (as SGT-HEM)....................       1664
Total Suspended Solids (TSS).................................      160.2
Weak-Acid Dissociable Cyanide................................       1677
Ziram........................................................      630.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendix A to the Preamble--Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Other 
Terms Used in This Document

Act--The Clean Water Act
Agency--U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
AWQC--Ambient Water Quality Criteria
BAT--Best available technology economically achievable, as defined 
by section 304(b)(2)(B) of the Act.
BCT--Best conventional pollutant control technology, as defined by 
section 304(b)(4) of the Act.
BMP--Best management practices, as defined by section 304(e) of the 
Act.
BPT--Best practicable control technology currently available, as 
defined by section 304(b)(1) of the Act.
CAA--Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq., as amended)
CBI--Confidential Business Information
Clean Water Act--(33 U.S.C 1251 et. seq., as amended)
Conventional Pollutants--Constituents of wastewater as determined by 
section 304(a)(4) of the Act and the regulations thereunder 40 CFR 
401.16, including pollutants classified as biochemical oxygen 
demand, suspended solids, oil and grease, fecal coliform, and pH.
CE--Cost Effectiveness
DAF--Dissolved Air Flotation
Direct Discharger--An industrial discharger that introduces 
wastewater to a water of the United States with or without treatment 
by the discharger.
EEA--Economic and Environmental Impact Assessment of the Proposed 
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Metal Products 
& Machinery Industry. This document presents the methodology 
employed to assess economic and environmental impacts of the 
proposed rule and the results of the analysis.
Effluent Limitation--A maximum amount, per unit of time, production, 
volume or other unit, of each specific constituent of the effluent 
from an existing point source that is subject to limitation. 
Effluent limitations may be expressed as a mass loading or as a 
concentration in milligrams of pollutant per liter discharged.
End-of-Pipe Treatment--Refers to those processes that treat a plant 
waste stream for pollutant removal prior to discharge.
FTE--Full Time Equivalents (related to the number of employees)
HAP--Hazardous Air Pollutant
HEM--Hexane Extractable Material refers to an analytical method (EPA 
Method 1664) for determining the level of oil and grease that does 
not use Freon extraction.
Indirect Discharger--An industrial discharger that introduces 
wastewater into a publicly owned treatment works.
MP&M--Metal Products and Machinery point source category
NCEPI--EPA's National Center for Environmental Publications
NESHAP--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NRMRL--EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory (formerly 
RREL--EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory).
MACT--Maximum Achievable Control Technology (applicable to NESHAPs) 
Nonconventional Pollutants--Pollutants that have not been designated 
as either conventional pollutants or priority pollutants.
NPDES--National Pollutant Discharge Elimination system, a Federal 
Program requiring industry dischargers, including municipalities, to 
obtain permits to discharge pollutants to the nation's water, under 
section 402 of the Act.
OCPSF--Organic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic fibers 
manufacturing point source category (40 CFR part 414).
ORP--Oxidation-Reduction Potential
POTW--Publicly owned treatment works.
Priority Pollutants--The 126 pollutants listed in 40 CFR part 423, 
appendix A.
PPA--Pollutant Prevention Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq., Pub. 
L. 101-508, November 5, 1990)
PSES--Pretreatment Standards for existing sources of indirect 
discharges, under section 307(b) of the Act.
PSNS--Pretreatment standards for new sources of indirect discharges, 
under sections 307 (b) and (c) of the Act.
SIC--Standards Industrial Classification, a numerical categorization 
scheme used by the U.S. Department of Commerce to denote segments of 
industry.
SGP--EPA's National Metal Finishing Strategic Goals Program.
SGT-HEM--Silica Gel Treated--Hexane Extractable Material refers to 
the freon-free oil and grease method (EPA Method 1664) used to 
measure the portion of oil and grease that is similar to total 
petroleum hydrocarbons.
SIU--Significant Industrial User as defined in the General 
Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR part 403)
Technical Development Document (TDD)--Development Document for 
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Metal Products 
and Machinery Point Source Category.
TOC--Total Organic Carbon (EPA method 415.1)
TOP--Total Organics Parameter
TRI--Toxic Release Inventory
TTO--Total Toxic Organics as defined in the Metal Finishing effluent 
guidelines (40 CFR part 433).
TWF--Toxic Weighting Factor
VOC--Volatile Organic Compound

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 413

    Environmental protection, Electroplating, Metals, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment and disposal, Water 
pollution control.

40 CFR Part 433

    Environmental protection, Metals, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Waste treatment and disposal, Water pollution control.

40 CFR Part 438

    Environmental protection, Metals, Waste treatment and disposal, 
Water pollution control.

40 CFR Part 463

    Environmental protection, Plastics materials and synthetics, Waste 
treatment and disposal, Water pollution control.

40 CFR Part 464

    Environmental protection, Metals, Waste treatment and disposal, 
Water pollution control.

40 CFR Part 467

    Environmental protection, Aluminum, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Waste treatment and disposal, Water pollution control.

40 CFR Part 471

    Environmental protection, Metals, Waste treatment and disposal, 
Water pollution control.

    Dated: October 31, 2000.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 413--ELECTROPLATING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY

    1. The authority citation for Part 413 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342, and 
1361.

    2. Section 413.01 is amended by revising the first and last 
sentence of paragraph (a) to read as follows:

[[<strong>Page</strong> 539]]

Sec. 413.01  Applicability and compliance dates.

    (a) As defined more specifically in each subpart, this part applies 
to discharges resulting from electroplating operations in which a metal 
is electroplated on any basis material and to related metal finishing 
operations as set forth in the various subparts, whether such 
operations are conducted in conjunction with electroplating, 
independently, or as part of some other operation. * * * This part does 
not apply to any facility that must achieve the standards or 
limitations in 40 CFR 433.15 (Metal Finishing PSES) or 40 CFR part 438 
(Metal Products & Machinery).
* * * * *

PART 433--METAL FINISHING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY

    3. The authority citation for Part 433 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342, and 
1361.

    4. Section 433.10 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 433.10  Applicability; description of the metal finishing point 
source category.

* * * * *
    (b) In some cases, effluent limitations and standards for other 
industrial categories may be applicable to wastewater discharges from 
the metal finishing operations listed in paragraph (a) of this section. 
In such cases, the effluent limitations and standards for this part do 
not apply and the metal finishing operations are subject to the 
provisions of one of the following categories:

 Iron and Steel (40 CFR part 420);
 Nonferrous Metals Smelting and Refining (40 CFR part 421);
 Metal Products and Machinery (40 CFR part 438);
Battery Manufacturing (40 CFR part 461);
Plastic Molding and Forming (40 CFR part 463);
Metal Casting Foundries (40 CFR part 464);
Coil Coating (40 CFR part 465);
Porcelain Enameling (40 CFR part 466);
Aluminum Forming (40 CFR part 467);
Copper Forming (40 CFR part 468);
Electrical and Electronic Components (40 CFR part 469); and
Nonferrous Metals Forming (40 CFR part 471).
* * * * *
    5. A new part 438 is proposed to be added to read as follows:

PART 438--METAL PRODUCTS AND MACHINERY POINT SOURCE CATEGORY

Sec.
438.1   General applicability.
438.2   General definitions.
438.3   General pretreatment standards.
438.4   Monitoring requirements.
438.5   Compliance date for pretreatment standards for existing 
sources.
Subpart A--General Metals
438.10   Applicability.
438.12   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).
438.13   Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).
438.14   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).
438.15   Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).
438.16   New source performance standards (NSPS).
438.17   Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).
Subpart B--Metal Finishing Job Shops
438.20   Applicability.
438.21   Special definitions.
438.22   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).
438.23   Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).
438.24   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).
438.25   Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).
438.26   New source performance standards (NSPS).
438.27   Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).
Subpart C--Non-Chromium Anodizing
438.30   Applicability.
438.31   Special definitions.
438.32   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).
438.33   Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).
438.34   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).
438.36   New source performance standards (NSPS).
Subpart D--Printed Wiring Boards
438.40   Applicability.
438.42   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).
438.43   Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).
438.44   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).
438.45   Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).
438.46   New source performance standards (NSPS).
438.47   Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).
Subpart E--Steel Forming and Finishing
438.50   Applicability.
438.51   Special definitions.
438.52   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).
438.53   Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).
438.54   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).
438.55   Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).
438.56   New source performance standards (NSPS).
438.57   Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).
438.58   Calculation of NPDES and pretreatment permit effluent 
limitations.
Subpart F--Oily Wastes
438.60   Applicability.
438.61   Special definitions.
438.62   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).
438.63   Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).
438.64   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).
438.65   Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).
438.66   New source performance standards (NSPS).
438.67   Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).
Subpart G--Railroad Line Maintenance
438.70   Applicability.
438.72   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).
438.73   Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).
438.76   New source performance standards (NSPS).
Subpart H--Shipbuilding Dry Docks
438.80   Applicability.
438.81   Special definitions.
438.82   Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable

[[<strong>Page</strong> 540]]

control technology currently available (BPT).
438.83   Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).
438.86   New source performance standards (NSPS).

Appendix A to Part 438--Typical Products In Metal Products & Machinery 
Sectors

Appendix B to Part 438--TOP Pollutants List

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342 and 
1361.


Sec. 438.1  General applicability.

    (a)(1) As defined more specifically in each subpart, except as 
provided in paragraphs (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) of this 
section, this part applies to process wastewater discharges from 
existing or new industrial sites (including facilities owned and 
operated by federal, state, or local governments) engaged in 
manufacturing, rebuilding, or maintenance of metal parts, products or 
machines for use in the Metal Product & Machinery (MP&M) industrial 
sectors listed in this section. A list of typical products found in 
each of the 18 industrial sectors is provided in Appendix A to this 
part. The MP&M Industrial Sectors consist of the following:

Aerospace;
Aircraft;
Bus and Truck;
Electronic Equipment;
Hardware;
Household Equipment;
Instruments;
Job Shops;
Mobile Industrial Equipment;
Motor Vehicle;
Office Machine;
Ordnance;
Precious Metals and Jewelry;
Printed Wiring Boards;
Railroad;
Ships and Boats;
Stationary Industrial Equipment; or
Miscellaneous Metal Products.

    (2) This part also applies to mixed-use facilities, as described in 
paragraph (h) of this section.
    (b) The regulations in this part do not apply to wastewater 
discharges which are subject to the limitations and standards of one or 
more of the following categories:

(1) Iron and steel manufacturing (40 CFR part 420).
(2) Nonferrous metals manufacturing (40 CFR part 421).
(3) Ferroalloy manufacturing (40 CFR part 424).
(4) Battery manufacturing (40 CFR part 461).
(5) Plastic molding and forming (40 CFR part 463).
(6) Metal molding and casting (40 CFR part 464).
(7) Coil coating (40 CFR part 465).
(8) Porcelain enameling (40 CFR part 466).
(9) Aluminum forming (40 CFR part 467).
(10) Copper forming (40 CFR part 468).
(11) Electrical and electronic components (40 CFR part 469).
(12) Nonferrous metals forming and metal powders (40 CFR part 271).

    (c) When a facility discharges process wastewater that is subject 
to the general applicability of this part and the facility discharges 
other wastewater that is subject to the limitations and standards of 
one or more of the categories listed in paragraph (b) of this section, 
the facility must comply with both the provisions of this part and 
other parts, as applicable.
    (d) Facilities other than those reasonably included in the 18 MP&M 
industrial sectors specified in paragraph (a) of this section are not 
subject to this part when discharges from the maintenance or repair of 
metal parts or machines at the facility are performed only as ancillary 
activities.
    (e) Wastewater discharges generated from electroplating during 
semi-conductor wafer manufacturing in a ``clean room'' environment are 
not subject to this part. Wastewater discharges from electroplating 
during semiconductor final wafer assembly are subject to this part.
    (f) Wastewater discharges resulting from the washing of cars, 
aircraft or other vehicles, when performed as a preparatory step prior 
to one or more successive manufacturing, rebuilding, or maintenance 
operations, are subject to this part.
    (g) Process wastewater generated by maintenance and repair 
activities at gasoline service stations, passenger car rental 
facilities, or utility trailer and recreational vehicle rental 
facilities are not subject to this part.
    (h) When this part is applied to wastewater discharges generated at 
different industrial sites (industrial buildings as well as outdoor 
locations where manufacturing, rebuilding, or maintenance occur as 
specified in Sec. 438.1) within a mixed-use facility (as defined in 
Sec. 438.2(c)), the control authority may consider these discharges to 
be separate for the purpose of applying the applicable low flow 
exemption to a pretreatment standard. The control authority must 
determine which wastewater discharges can be considered separate for 
this purpose.


Sec. 438.2  General definitions.

    As used in this part:
    (a) The general definitions and abbreviations in 40 CFR part 401 
shall apply.
    (b) The regulated parameters are listed with approved methods of 
analysis in Table 1B at 40 CFR 136.3, and are defined as follows:
    (1) BOD<INF>5</INF> means 5-day biochemical oxygen demand.
    (2) Cadmium means total cadmium.
    (3) Chromium means total chromium.
    (4) Copper means total copper.
    (5) Cyanide (T) means total cyanide.
    (6) Cyanide (A) means those cyanides which are amenable to alkaline 
chlorination.
    (7) Lead means total lead.
    (8) Manganese means total manganese.
    (9) Molybdenum means total molybdenum.
    (10) Nickel means total nickel.
    (11) O&G (as HEM) means total recoverable oil and grease as hexane 
extractable material.
    (12) Silver means total silver.
    (13) Sulfide (as S) means total sulfide.
    (14) Tin means total tin.
    (15) TSS means total suspended solids.
    (16) Zinc means total zinc.
    (c) Mixed-Use Facility means any privately-owned or state, local, 
or federal government-owned facility which contains both industrial and 
commercial/administrative buildings (such as military bases and 
airports) at which one or more industrial sites conduct operations 
(including at least one that discharges wastewater subject to this 
part) within the facility's boundaries.
    (d) Non-process wastewater means sanitary wastewater, non-contact 
cooling water, and storm water. In relation to a mixed-use facility, as 
defined in this part, non-process wastewater for this part also 
includes wastewater discharges from non-industrial sources such as 
residential housing, schools, churches, recreational parks, shopping 
centers as well as wastewater discharges from gas stations, utility 
plants, hospitals, and similar sources.
    (e) Process wastewater means wastewater as defined in 40 CFR parts 
122 and 401, and includes wastewater from non-contact, nondestructive 
testing (e.g., photographic wastewater from nondestructive X-ray 
examination of parts) performed at facilities subject to this part and 
includes wastewater from air pollution control devices.
    (f) TOP (total organics parameter) means a parameter which is 
calculated as the sum of all quantifiable concentration values greater 
than the nominal quantitation value of the organic pollutants listed in 
the Appendix B to this part. These organic chemicals are defined as 
parameters at 40 CFR 136.3 in Table 1C, which also cites the approved 
methods of analysis

[[<strong>Page</strong> 541]]

or have procedures that have been validated as attachments to EPA 
Methods 1624/624 or 1625/625.
    (g) TOC (as indicator) means total organic carbon used as an 
indicator for the organic pollutants listed in the Appendix B to this 
part.


Sec. 438.3  General pretreatment standards.

    Any source subject to this part that introduces process wastewater 
pollutants into a publicly owned treatment works (POTW) must comply 
with 40 CFR part 403.


Sec. 438.4  Monitoring requirements.

    (a) Monitoring options. All subcategories with limitations or 
standards for the TOP or TOC (as indicator) parameters must choose one 
of three monitoring options:
    (1) Achieve the limitation or standard specified for the TOP 
parameter;
    (2) Achieve a limitation or standard specified for the TOC (as 
indicator) parameter; or
    (3) Develop and certify the implementation of a management plan for 
organic chemicals.
    (b) Management plan for organic chemicals. (1) The management plan 
for organic chemicals must specify to the satisfaction of the 
permitting authority (or the control authority for discharges to a 
POTW) all organic chemicals that are in use at the facility; the 
method(s) used for disposal of these chemicals; the procedures in place 
for ensuring that organic chemicals do not routinely spill or leak into 
the wastewater, or that reduce to a minimum the amount of organic 
chemicals that are used in the process; the procedures in place to 
manage the oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) of process wastewater 
during cyanide destruction to control the formation of chlorinated 
organic by-products; and the procedures employed to prevent an 
excessive dosage of dithiocarbamates when treating wastewater 
containing chelated metals. Facilities choosing to develop a management 
plan for organic chemicals must certify that the procedures described 
in the plan are being implemented at the facility. A mixed-use 
facility, as defined in Sec. 438.2(c), may develop, certify, and 
implement one or more management plans for organic chemicals when 
multiple industrial sites are subject to this part within their 
facility boundaries.
    (2) In lieu of monitoring for individual organic chemicals 
specified collectively as TOP in Appendix B of this part or in lieu of 
monitoring for TOC (as an indicator), the permitting authority (or the 
control authority for dischargers to a POTW) may allow dischargers to 
make the following certification: ``Based on my inquiry of the person 
or persons directly responsible for managing compliance with the 
provisions of the Metal Products and Machinery regulation, I certify 
that, to the best of my knowledge, this facility is implementing the 
management plan for organic chemicals which was submitted to the 
permitting (or control) authority.'' For dischargers to surface waters, 
this statement is to be included as a comment on the Discharge 
Monitoring Report (DMR) required by 40 CFR 122.44(i). For indirect 
dischargers, the statement is to be included as a comment to the 
periodic reports required by 40 CFR 403.12(e).
    (c) TOP monitoring. In monitoring to measure compliance with the 
TOP standard, the industrial discharger need analyze only for those TOP 
organic chemicals which would reasonably be expected to be present. 
Facilities may apply for a monitoring waiver for any individual TOP 
organic chemical(s) as described in paragraph (e) of this section for 
indirect dischargers and 40 CFR 122.44 for direct dischargers. See 
Sec. 438.2(f) for definition of TOP.
    (d) Cyanide monitoring. Self-monitoring for cyanide must be 
conducted after cyanide treatment and before dilution with other 
wastewater streams. Alternatively, samples of the final effluent may be 
taken, if the plant limitations are adjusted based on the following 
dilution ratio: Cyanide-bearing wastewater flow divided by the final 
effluent flow.
    (e) Monitoring waivers for certain pollutants. (1) The control 
authority may authorize a discharger subject to pretreatment standards 
in this part to forego sampling of a pollutant if the discharger has 
demonstrated through sampling and other technical factors, as described 
in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, that the pollutant is not used or 
generated on-site or is present only at background levels from intake 
water and without any increase in the pollutant due to activities of 
the discharger.
    (2) Sampling or other technical information, including, but not 
limited to, information generated during the monitoring for the 
baseline monitoring report (40 CFR 403.12(b)) or the 90-day compliance 
report (40 CFR 403.12(d)), must be used to demonstrate that the 
pollutant is not used or generated on-site or is present only at 
background levels from intake water and without any increase in the 
pollutant due to activities of the discharger.
    (3) Any grant of the monitoring waiver must be included in the 
control mechanism as an express condition and the reasons supporting 
the grant must be documented in the fact sheet or similar supporting 
documentation.


Sec. 438.5  Compliance date for pretreatment standards for existing 
sources.

    Any existing source subject to pretreatment standards in this part 
must be in compliance no later than [DATE 3 years after date of 
PUBLICATION of FINAL RULE].

Subpart A--General Metals


Sec. 438.10  Applicability.

    (a) This subpart applies to process wastewater discharges from 
facilities (as specified in Sec. 438.1(a)) other than those subject to 
subparts B, C, D, E, F, G, or H of this part.
    (b) Facilities introducing process wastewater into a POTW at a rate 
that does not exceed 1 million gallons per year are not subject to 
Sec. 438.15 or Sec. 438.17.


Sec. 438.12  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any 
existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following effluent limitations representing the application of BPT. 
Discharges must remain within the pH range 6 to 9 and must not exceed 
the following:

                          Effluent Limitations
                                  [BPT]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
              Regulated  parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TSS.........................................       34          18
 2. O&G (as HEM)................................       15          12
 3. TOC (as indicator)..........................       87          50
 4. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 5. Cadmium.....................................        0.14        0.09
 6. Chromium....................................        0.25        0.14
 7. Copper......................................        0.55        0.28
 8. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 9. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
10. Lead........................................        0.04        0.03
11. Manganese...................................        0.13        0.09
12. Molybdenum..................................        0.79        0.49
13 Nickel.......................................        0.50        0.31
14. Silver......................................        0.22        0.09
15. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
16. Tin.........................................        1.4         0.67
17. Zinc........................................        0.38        0.22 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\mg/L (ppm).

    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving

[[<strong>Page</strong> 542]]

the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.13  Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitation representing the application of BCT: Limitations 
for TSS, O&G (as HEM) and pH are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.12.


Sec. 438.14  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any 
existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following effluent limitation representing the application of BAT: 
Limitations for TOC (as indicator), TOP, cadmium, chromium, copper, 
cyanide (T), cyanide (A), lead, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, silver, 
sulfide (as S), tin, and zinc are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.12.
    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.15  Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7 and 403.13, and except at 
facilities where the process wastewater introduced into a POTW does not 
exceed 1 million gallons per year, any existing source subject to this 
subpart must achieve the following:

                         Pretreatment Standards
                                 [PSES]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
              Regulated  parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TOC (as indicator)..........................       87          50
 2. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 3. Cadmium.....................................        0.14        0.09
 4. Chromium....................................        0.25        0.14
 5. Copper......................................        0.55        0.28
 6. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 7. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
 8. Lead........................................        0.04        0.03
 9. Manganese...................................        0.13        0.09
10. Molybdenum..................................        0.79        0.49
11. Nickel......................................        0.50        0.31
12. Silver......................................        0.22        0.09
13. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
14. Tin.........................................        1.4         0.67
15. Zinc........................................        0.38        0.22 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (b) Upon agreement with the control authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the control authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (d) A POTW has the option of imposing mass-based standards in place 
of the concentration-based standards. To convert to mass-based 
standards, multiply each parameter's concentration-based standard times 
the average daily flow of process wastewater discharged by the source 
into the POTW.


Sec. 438.16  New source performance standards (NSPS).

    New point sources subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following new source performance standards (NSPS), as applicable.
    (a) Any new point source subject to the provisions of this section 
and currently subject to the provisions of 433.16 that commenced 
discharging after [date 10 years prior to the date that is 60 days 
after the publication date of the final rule] and before [date that is 
60 days after the publication date of the final rule] must continue to 
achieve the applicable standards specified in 40 CFR 433.16. Those 
standards shall not apply after the expiration of the applicable time 
period specified in 40 CFR 122.29(d)(1); thereafter, the source must 
achieve the applicable standards specified in Sec. 438.12 and 
Sec. 438.14.
    (b) The following performance standards apply with respect to each 
new point source that commences discharge after [date that is 60 days 
after the publication date of the final rule]. Discharges must remain 
within the pH range of 6 to 9 and must not exceed the following:

                          Performance Standards
                                 [NSPS]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
              Regulated  parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TSS.........................................       28          18
 2. O&G (as HEM)................................       15          12
 3. TOC (as indicator)..........................       87          50
 4. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 5. Cadmium.....................................        0.02        0.01
 6. Chromium....................................        0.17        0.07
 7. Copper......................................        0.44        0.16
 8. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 9. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
10. Lead........................................        0.04        0.03
11. Manganese...................................        0.29        0.18
12. Molybdenum..................................        0.79        0.49
13. Nickel......................................        1.9         0.75
14. Silver......................................        0.05        0.03
15. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
16. Tin.........................................        0.03        0.03
17. Zinc........................................        0.08        0.06 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (d) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.17  Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).

    New sources subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS), as applicable.
    (a) Any new source subject to the provisions of this section and 
currently subject to the provisions of 40 CFR 433.17 that commenced 
discharging after [date 10 years prior to the date that is 60 days 
after the publication date of the final rule] and before [date that is 
60 days after the publication date of the final rule] must continue to 
achieve the standards specified in 40 CFR 433.17 for ten years 
beginning on the date the source commenced discharge or during the 
period of depreciation or amortization of the facility, whichever comes 
first, after which the source must achieve the standards specified in 
Sec. 438.15.
    (b) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7, and except at facilities 
where the process wastewater introduced into a POTW does not exceed 1 
million gallons per year, the following standards apply with respect to 
each new source that commences discharge after [date

[[<strong>Page</strong> 543]]

that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule]:

                         Pretreatment Standards
                                 [PSNS]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
               Regulated parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TOC (as indicator)..........................       87          50
 2. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 3. Cadmium.....................................        0.02        0.01
 4. Chromium....................................        0.17        0.07
 5. Copper......................................        0.44        0.16
 6. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 7. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
 8. Lead........................................        0.04        0.03
 9. Manganese...................................        0.29        0.18
10. Molybdenum..................................        0.79        0.49
11. Nickel......................................        1.9         0.75
12. Silver......................................        0.05        0.03
13. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
14. Tin 0.03 0.03...............................        0.03        0.03
15. Zinc........................................        0.08        0.06 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (c) Upon agreement with the control authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (d) Upon agreement with the control authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (e) The control authority has the option of imposing mass-based 
standards in place of the concentration-based standards. To convert to 
mass-based standards, multiply each parameter's concentration-based 
standard times the average daily flow of process wastewater discharged 
by the source into the POTW.

Subpart B--Metal Finishing Job Shops


Sec. 438.20  Applicability.

    (a) This subpart applies to process wastewater discharges from 
facilities, as specified in Sec. 438.1(a), that operate as a metal 
finishing job shop (as defined in Sec. 438.21) and perform one or more 
of the following six operations: electroplating; electroless plating; 
anodizing; coating (chromating, phosphating, passivating, and 
coloring); chemical etching and milling; or the manufacture of printed 
circuit boards (printed wiring boards).
    (b) Metal finishing job shops that only perform anodizing without 
the use of chromic acid or dichromate sealants are not subject to this 
subpart, but may be subject to subpart C of this part.
    (c) Facilities that manufacture, rebuild, or maintain printed 
wiring boards and do not operate as a job shop (as defined in 
Sec. 438.21) are not subject to this subpart, but are subject to 
subpart D of this part.


Sec. 438.21  Special definitions.

    As used in this subpart, metal finishing job shop means a facility 
that owns 50 percent or less (based on metal surface area processed per 
year) of the materials undergoing metal finishing within the boundaries 
of a facility.


Sec. 438.22  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any 
existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following effluent limitations representing the application of BPT. 
Discharges must remain within the pH range 6 to 9 and must not exceed 
the following:

                          Effluent Limitations
                                  [BPT]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
               Regulated parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TSS.........................................       60          31
 2. O&G (as HEM)................................       52          26
 3. TOC (as indicator)..........................       78          59
 4. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 5. Cadmium.....................................        0.21        0.09
 6. Chromium....................................        1.3         0.55
 7. Copper......................................        1.3         0.57
 8. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 9. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
10. Lead........................................        0.12        0.09
11. Manganese...................................        0.25        0.10
12. Molybdenum..................................        0.79        0.49
13. Nickel......................................        1.5         0.64
14. Silver......................................        0.15        0.06
15. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
16. Tin.........................................        1.8         1.4
17. Zinc........................................        0.35        0.17 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.23  Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitation representing the application of BCT: Limitations 
for TSS, O&G (as HEM) and pH are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.22.


Sec. 438.24  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any 
existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following effluent limitation representing the application of BAT: 
Limitations for TOC (as indicator), TOP, cadmium, chromium, copper, 
cyanide (T), cyanide (A), lead, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, silver, 
sulfide (as S), tin and zinc are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.22.
    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.25  Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7 and 403.13, any existing 
source subject to this subpart must achieve the following:

                         Pretreatment Standards
                                 [PSES]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
              Regulated  Parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TOC (as indicator)..........................       78          59
 2. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 3. Cadmium.....................................        0.21        0.09
 4. Chromium....................................        1.3         0.55
 5. Copper......................................        1.3         0.57
 6. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 7. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
 8. Lead........................................        0.12        0.09
 9. Manganese...................................        0.25        0.10
10. Molybdenum..................................        0.79        0.49
11. Nickel......................................        1.5         0.64
12. Silver......................................        0.15        0.06
13. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
14. Tin.........................................        1.8         1.4
15. Zinc........................................        0.35        0.17 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (b) Upon agreement with the control authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the control authority, facilities must 
choose to

[[<strong>Page</strong> 544]]

monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for organic 
chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (d) The control authority has the option of imposing mass-based 
standards in place of the concentration-based standards. To convert to 
mass-based standards, multiply each parameter's concentration-based 
standard times the average daily flow of process wastewater discharged 
by the source into the POTW.


Sec. 438.26  New source performance standards (NSPS).

    New point sources subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following new source performance standards (NSPS), as applicable.
    (a) Any new point source subject to the provisions of this section 
that commenced discharging after [date 10 years prior to the date that 
is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] and before 
[date that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] 
must continue to achieve the applicable standards specified in 40 CFR 
433.16. Those standards shall not apply after the expiration of the 
applicable time period specified in 40 CFR 122.29(d)(1); thereafter, 
the source must achieve the applicable standards specified in 
Sec. 438.22 and Sec. 438.24.
    (b) The following performance standards apply with respect to each 
new point source that commences discharge after [date that is 60 days 
after the publication date of the final rule]. Discharges must remain 
within the pH range of 6 to 9 and must not exceed the following:

                          Performance Standards
                                 [NSPS]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
               Regulated Parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TSS.........................................       28          18
 2. O&G (as HEM)................................       15          12
 3. TOC (as indicator...........................       78          59
 4. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 5. Cadmium.....................................        0.02        0.01
 6. Chromium....................................        0.17        0.07
 7. Copper......................................        0.44        0.16
 8. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 9. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
10. Lead........................................        0.04        0.03
11. Manganese...................................        0.29        0.18
12. Molybdenum..................................        0.79        0.49
13. Nickel......................................        1.9         0.75
14. Silver......................................        0.05        0.03
15. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
16. Tin.........................................        0.03        0.03
17. Zinc........................................        0.08        0.06 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (d) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.27  Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).

    New sources subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS), as applicable.
    (a) Any new source subject to the provisions of this section that 
commenced discharging after [date 10 years prior to the date that is 60 
days after the publication date of the final rule] and before [date 
that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] must 
continue to achieve the standards specified in 40 CFR 433.17 for ten 
years beginning on the date the source commenced discharge or during 
the period of depreciation or amortization of the facility, whichever 
comes first, after which the source must achieve the standards 
specified in Sec. 438.25.
    (b) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7, the following standards 
apply with respect to each new source that commences discharge after 
[date that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule]:

                         Pretreatment Standards
                                 [PSNS]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
              Regulated  parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TOC (as indicator)..........................       78          59
 2. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 3. Cadmium.....................................        0.02        0.01
 4. Chromium....................................        0.17        0.07
 5. Copper......................................        0.44        0.16
 6. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 7. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
 8. Lead........................................        0.04        0.03
 9. Manganese...................................        0.29        0.18
10. Molybdenum..................................        0.79        0.49
11. Nickel......................................        1.9         0.75
12. Silver......................................        0.05        0.03
13. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
14. Tin.........................................        0.03        0.03
15. Zinc........................................        0.08        0.06 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (c) Upon agreement with the control authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (d) Upon agreement with the control authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (e) The control authority has the option of imposing mass-based 
standards in place of the concentration-based standards. To convert to 
mass-based standards, multiply each parameter's concentration-based 
standard times the average daily flow of process wastewater discharged 
by the source into the POTW.

Subpart C--Non-Chromium Anodizing


Sec. 438.30  Applicability.

    (a) Except for facilities that discharge to a POTW, this subpart 
applies to discharges of process wastewater resulting from non-chromium 
anodizing, as defined in Sec. 438.31.
    (b) Facilities which commingle wastewater from non-chromium 
anodizing with wastewater subject to subparts A, B, or D of this part 
are not subject to this subpart but are subject to subparts A, B, or D 
of this part, as applicable.
    (c) Facilities that discharge to a POTW and perform anodizing 
without the use of chromic acid or dichromate sealants are subject to 
40 CFR part 413 or 40 CFR part 433, as applicable.


Sec. 438.31  Special definitions.

    As used in this subpart, non-chromium anodizing means anodizing 
without the use of chromic acid or dichromate sealants.


Sec. 438.32  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitations representing the application of BPT. Discharges 
must remain within the pH range 6 to 9 and must not exceed the 
following:

                          Effluent Limitations
                                  [BPT]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
               Regulated parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. TSS..........................................       60          31
2. O&G (as HEM).................................       52          26
3. Aluminum.....................................        8.2         4.0
4. Manganese....................................        0.13        0.09
5. Nickel.......................................        0.50        0.31
6. Zinc.........................................        0.38        0.22 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).


[[<strong>Page</strong> 545]]

Sec. 438.33  Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitation representing the application of BCT: Limitations 
for TSS, O&G (as HEM) and pH are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.32.


Sec. 438.34  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitation representing the application of BAT: Limitations 
for aluminum, manganese, nickel and zinc are the same as the 
corresponding limitation specified in Sec. 438.32.


Sec. 438.36  New source performance standards (NSPS).

    New point sources subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following new source performance standards (NSPS), as applicable.
    (a) Any new point source subject to the provisions of this section 
that commenced discharging after [date 10 years prior to the date that 
is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] and before 
[date that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] 
must continue to achieve the applicable standards specified in 40 CFR 
433.16. Those standards shall not apply after the expiration of the 
applicable time period specified in 40 CFR 122.29(d)(1); thereafter, 
the source must achieve the applicable standards specified in 
Sec. 438.32 and Sec. 438.34.
    (b) The following performance standards apply with respect to each 
new point source that commences discharge after [date that is 60 days 
after the publication date of the final rule]. Discharges must remain 
within the pH range of 6 to 9 and must not exceed the following:

                          Performance Standards
                                 [NSPS]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
               Regulated parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. TSS..........................................       52          22
2. O&G (as HEM).................................       15          12
3. Aluminum.....................................        8.2         4.0
4. Manganese....................................        0.13        0.09
5. Nickel.......................................        0.50        0.31
6. Zinc.........................................        0.38        0.22 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

Subpart D--Printed Wiring Boards


Sec. 438.40  Applicability.

    (a) This subpart applies to discharges of process wastewater 
resulting from the manufacture, maintenance and repair of printed 
wiring boards (printed circuit boards).
    (b) Printed wiring board operations conducted at a metal finishing 
job shop (as defined in Sec. 438.21) are not subject to this subpart.


Sec. 438.42  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any 
existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following effluent limitations representing the application of BPT. 
Discharges must remain within the pH range 6 to 9 and must not exceed 
the following:

                          Effluent Limitations
                                  [BPT]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
               Regulated parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TSS.........................................       60          31
 2. O&G (as HEM)................................       52          26
 3. TOC (as indicator)..........................      101          67
 4. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 5. Chromium....................................        0.25        0.14
 6. Copper......................................        0.55        0.28
 7. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 8. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
 9. Lead........................................        0.04        0.03
10. Manganese...................................        1.3         0.64
11. Nickel......................................        0.30        0.14
12. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
13. Tin.........................................        0.31        0.14
14. Zinc........................................        0.38        0.22 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.43  Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitation representing the application of BCT: Limitations 
for TSS, O&G (as HEM) and pH are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.42.


Sec. 438.44  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any 
existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following effluent limitation representing the application of BAT: 
Limitations for TOC (as indicator), TOP, chromium, copper, cyanide (T), 
cyanide (A), lead, manganese, nickel, sulfide (as S), tin and zinc are 
the same as the corresponding limitation specified in Sec. 438.42.
    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.45  Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7 and 403.13, any existing 
source subject to this subpart must achieve the following pretreatment 
standards:

                         Pretreatment Standards
                                 [PSES]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
               Regulated parameter                  Maximum     Monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TOC (as indicator)..........................      101          67
 2. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 3. Chromium....................................        0.25        0.14
 4. Copper......................................        0.55        0.28
 5. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 6. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
 7. Lead........................................        0.04        0.03
 8. Manganese...................................        1.3         0.64
 9. Nickel......................................        0.30        0.14
10. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
11. Tin.........................................        0.31        0.14
12. Zinc........................................        0.38        0.22 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (b) Upon agreement with the control authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the control authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (d) The control authority has the option of imposing mass-based

[[<strong>Page</strong> 546]]

standards in place of the concentration-based standards. To convert to 
mass-based standards, multiply each parameter's concentration-based 
standard times the average daily flow of process wastewater discharged 
by the source into the POTW.


Sec. 438.46  New source performance standards (NSPS).

    New point sources subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following new source performance standards (NSPS), as applicable.
    (a) Any new point source subject to the provisions of this section 
that commenced discharging after [date 10 years prior to the date that 
is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] and before 
[date that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] 
must continue to achieve the applicable standards specified in 40 CFR 
433.16. Those standards shall not apply after the expiration of the 
applicable time period specified in 40 CFR 122.29(d)(1); thereafter, 
the source must achieve the applicable standards specified in 
Sec. 438.42 and Sec. 438.44.
    (b) The following performance standards apply with respect to each 
new point source that commences discharge after [date that is 60 days 
after the publication date of the final rule]. Discharges must remain 
within the pH range of 6 to 9 and must not exceed the following:

                          Performance Standards
                                 [NSPS]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
               Regulated parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\     avg.<SUP>1</SUP>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TSS.........................................       28          18
 2. O&G (as HEM)................................       15          12
 3. TOC (as indicator)..........................      101          67
 4. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 5. Chromium....................................        0.17        0.07
 6. Copper......................................        0.01        0.01
 7. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 8. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
 9. Lead........................................        0.04        0.03
10. Manganese...................................        0.29        0.18
11. Nickel......................................        1.9         0.75
12. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
13. Tin.........................................        0.09        0.07
14. Zinc........................................        0.08        0.06 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (d) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.47  Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).

    New sources subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS), as applicable.
    (a) Any new source subject to the provisions of this section that 
commenced discharging after [date 10 years prior to the date that is 60 
days after the publication date of the final rule] and before [date 
that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] must 
continue to achieve the standards specified in 40 CFR 433.17 for ten 
years beginning on the date the source commenced discharge or during 
the period of depreciation or amortization of the facility, whichever 
comes first, after which the source must achieve the standards 
specified in Sec. 438.45.
    (b) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7, the following standards 
apply with respect to each new source that commences discharge after 
[date that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule]:

                         Pretreatment Standards
                                 [PSNS]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
              Regulated  parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\    avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TOC (as indicator)..........................      101          67
 2. TOP.........................................        9.0         4.3
 3. Chromium....................................        0.17        0.07
 4. Copper......................................        0.01        0.01
 5. Cyanide (T).................................        0.21        0.13
 6. Cyanide (A).................................        0.14        0.07
 7. Lead........................................        0.04        0.03
 8. Manganese...................................        0.29        0.18
 9. Nickel......................................        1.9         0.75
10. Sulfide (as S)..............................       31          13
11. Tin.........................................        0.09        0.07
12. Zinc........................................        0.08        0.06 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (c) Upon agreement with the control authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (d) Upon agreement with the control authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (e) The control authority has the option of imposing mass-based 
standards in place of the concentration-based standards. To convert to 
mass-based standards, multiply each parameter's concentration-based 
standard times the average daily flow of process wastewater discharged 
by the source into the POTW.

Subpart E--Steel Forming and Finishing


Sec. 438.50  Applicability.

    (a) This subpart applies to discharges of process wastewater from 
surface finishing or cold forming operations on steel wire, rod, bar, 
pipe or tubing. This subpart does not apply to process wastewater from 
these same operations when they are performed on base materials other 
than steel.
    (b) Wastewater discharges from the following operations on steel 
are not subject to this subpart: any hot forming operation; and cold 
forming, continuous electroplating, or continuous hot dip coating of 
sheets, strips or plates. Wastewater discharges from performing these 
operations on steel are subject to 40 CFR part 420.


Sec. 438.51  Special definitions.

    As used in this subpart:
    (a) Acid pickling means the removal of scale and/or oxide from 
steel surfaces using acid solutions. The mass-based limitations for 
acid pickling operations include wastewater flow volumes from acid 
treatment with and without chromium, acid pickling neutralization, 
annealing, alkaline cleaning, electrolytic sodium sulfate descaling, 
and salt bath descaling.
    (b) Alkaline cleaning means the application of solutions containing 
caustic soda, soda ash, alkaline silicates, or alkaline phosphates to a 
metal surface primarily for removing mineral deposits, animal fats, and 
oils. The mass-based limitations for alkaline cleaning operations 
include wastewater flow volumes from alkaline cleaning for oil removal, 
alkaline treatment without cyanide, aqueous degreasing, annealing, and 
electrolytic cleaning operations.
    (c) Cold forming means operations conducted on unheated steel for 
purposes of imparting desired mechanical properties and surface 
qualities (density, smoothness) to the steel. The mass-based 
limitations for cold forming operations are based on zero wastewater 
discharge from welding operations.
    (d) Continuous Annealing means a heat treatment process in which 
steel is exposed to an elevated temperature in a controlled atmosphere 
for an extended period of time and then cooled. The mass-based 
limitations for continuous annealing operations include wastewater flow 
volumes from heat treating operations.
    (e) Electroplating means the application of metal coatings 
including,

[[<strong>Page</strong> 547]]

but not limited to, chromium, copper, nickel, tin, zinc, and 
combinations thereof, on steel products using an electro-chemical 
process. The mass-based limitations for electroplating operations 
includes wastewater flow volumes from acid pickling, annealing, 
alkaline cleaning, electroplating without chromium or cyanide, and 
electroless plating operations.
    (f) Hot Dip Coating means the coating of pre-cleaned steel parts by 
immersion in a molten metal bath. The mass-based limitations for hot 
dip coating operations includes wastewater flow volumes from acid 
pickling, annealing, alkaline cleaning, chemical conversion coating 
without chromium, chromate conversion coating, galvanizing, and hot dip 
coating operations.
    (g) Lubrication means the process of applying a substance to the 
surface of the steel in order to reduce friction or corrosion. The 
mass-based limitations for lubrication operations includes wastewater 
flow volumes from corrosion preventive coating operations as defined in 
Sec. 438.61(b).
    (h) Mechanical Descaling means the process of removing scale by 
mechanical or physical means from the surface of steel. The mass-based 
limitations for mechanical descaling operations includes wastewater 
flow volumes from abrasive blasting, burnishing, grinding, impact 
deformation, machining, and testing operations.
    (i) Painting means applying an organic coating to a steel bar, rod, 
wire, pipe, or tube. The mass-based limitations for painting operations 
includes wastewater flow volumes from spray or brush painting and 
immersion painting.
    (j) Pressure Deformation means applying force (other than impact 
force) to permanently deform or shape a steel bar, rod, wire, pipe, or 
tube. The mass-based limitations for pressure deformation operations 
includes wastewater flow volumes from forging operations and extrusion 
operations.


Sec. 438.52  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any 
existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following effluent limitations representing the application of BPT. 
Discharges must remain within the pH range 6 to 9 and must not exceed 
the following:

                                           Effluent Limitations [BPT]
                                                     Table 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                   TSS                        O&G (as HEM)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.0709          0.0369          0.0312          0.0239
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.0709          0.0369          0.0312          0.0239
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.00355         0.00184         0.00156         0.00120
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.142           0.0737          0.0623          0.0478
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.0206          0.0107          0.00903         0.00693
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.00170         0.000884        0.000748        0.000574
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.000284        0.000148        0.000125        0.0000956
(i) Painting....................................      0.00922         0.00479         0.00405         0.00311
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.00355         0.00184         0.00156         0.00120
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                   TOC                             TOP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.181           0.103           0.0188          0.00896
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.181           0.103           0.0188          0.00896
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.00901         0.00514         0.000937        0.000448
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.361           0.206           0.0375          0.0180
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.0523          0.0300          0.00543         0.00260
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.000433        0.00247         0.000450        0.000215
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.000721        0.000411        0.0000750       0.0000359
(i) Painting....................................      0.0235          0.0134          0.00244         0.00117
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.00901         0.00514         0.000937        0.000448
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                 Cadmium                        Chromium
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.000292        0.000188        0.000509        0.000277
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.000292        0.000188        0.000509        0.000277
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0

[[<strong>Page</strong> 548]]


(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.0000146       0.00000938      0.0000255       0.0000139
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.000583        0.000376        0.00102         0.000553
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.0000845       0.0000545       0.000148        0.0000801
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.00000699      0.00000450      0.0000123       0.00000663
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.00000116      0.00000075      0.00000204      0.00000110
(i) Painting....................................      0.0000379       0.0000244       0.0000662       0.0000359
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.0000146       0.00000938      0.0000255       0.0000139
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                 Copper                           Lead
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.00114         0.000565        0.0000737       0.0000522
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.00114         0.000565        0.0000737       0.0000522
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.0000570       0.0000283       0.00000368      0.00000261
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.00228         0.00113         0.000148        0.000105
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.000331        0.000164        0.0000214       0.0000152
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.0000274       0.0000136       0.00000177      0.00000125
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.00000455      0.00000226      0.00000029      0.00000021
(i) Painting....................................      0.000148        0.0000734       0.00000957      0.00000678
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.0000570       0.0000283       0.00000368      0.00000261 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                Manganese                      Molybdenum
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.000269        0.000183        0.00164         0.00103
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.000269        0.000183        0.00164         0.00103
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.0000135       0.00000914      0.0000820       0.0000511
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.000537        0.000366        0.00328         0.00205
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.0000779       0.0000531       0.000476        0.000297
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.00000644      0.00000439      0.0000394       0.0000246
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.00000107      0.00000073      0.00000656      0.00000409
(i) Painting....................................      0.0000350       0.0000238       0.000214        0.000133
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.0000135       0.00000914      0.0000820       0.0000511
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                 Nickel                          Silver
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.00104         0.000642        0.000456        0.000187
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.00104         0.000642        0.000456        0.000187
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.0000520       0.0000321       0.0000228       0.00000934
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.00208         0.00129         0.000912        0.000374
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.000302        0.000186        0.000133        0.0000542
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.0000250       0.0000154       0.0000110       0.00000448
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.00000415      0.00000257      0.00000182      0.00000075
(i) Painting....................................      0.000135        0.0000834       0.0000593       0.0000243
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.0000520       0.0000321       0.0000228       0.00000934 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


[[<strong>Page</strong> 549]]


                                                     Table 7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                             Sulfide (as S)                        Tin
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.0630          0.0267          0.00274         0.00139
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.0630          0.0267          0.00274         0.00139
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.00315         0.00134         0.000137        0.0000694
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.126           0.0534          0.00547         0.00278
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.0183          0.00774         0.000793        0.000403
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.00151         0.000641        0.0000656       0.0000333
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.000252        0.000107        0.0000110       0.00000555
(i) Painting....................................      0.00818         0.00347         0.000356        0.000181
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.00315         0.00134         0.000137        0.0000694
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                 Table 8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Pollutant                              Zinc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Maximum
       Forming/finishing operation         Maximum daily      monthly
                                                \1\           avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling.......................      0.000793        0.000456
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...................      0.000793        0.000456
(c) Cold Forming........................      0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing................      0.0000397       0.0000228
(e) Electroplating......................      0.00159         0.000912
(f) Hot Dip Coating.....................      0.000230        0.000133
(g) Lubrication.........................      0.0000191       0.0000110
(h) Mechanical Descaling................      0.00000317      0.00000182
(i) Painting............................      0.000103        0.0000593
(j) Pressure Deformation................      0.0000397       0.0000228
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                               Cyanide (T)                     Cyanide (A)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.000865        0.000513        0.000580        0.000282
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.

    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a). (d) Permit limitations 
must be established in accordance with Sec. 438.58.


Sec. 438.53  Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitation representing the application of BCT: Limitations 
for TSS, O&G (as HEM), and pH are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.52.


Sec. 438.54  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any 
existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following effluent limitation representing the application of BAT: 
Limitations for TOC (as indicator), TOP, cadmium, chromium, copper, 
cyanide (T), cyanide (A), lead, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, silver, 
sulfide (as S), tin, and zinc are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.52.
    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.55  Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7 and 403.13, any existing 
source subject to this subpart must achieve the following pretreatment 
standards: Limitations for TOC (as indicator), TOP, cadmium, chromium, 
copper, cyanide (T), cyanide (A), lead, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, 
silver, sulfide (as S), tin, and zinc are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.52.

[[<strong>Page</strong> 550]]

    (b) Upon agreement with the control authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (c) Upon agreement with the control authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (d) Pretreatment standards must be established in accordance with 
Sec. 438.58.


Sec. 438.56  New source performance standards (NSPS).

    New point sources subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following new source performance standards (NSPS), as applicable.
    (a) Any new point source subject to the provisions of this section 
that commenced discharging after [date 10 years prior to the date that 
is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] and before 
[date that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] 
must continue to achieve the applicable new source standards specified 
in 40 CFR part 420. Those standards shall not apply after the 
expiration of the applicable time period specified in 40 CFR 
122.29(d)(1); thereafter, the source must achieve the applicable 
standards specified in Secs. 438.52 and 438.54.
    (b) The following performance standards apply with respect to each 
new point source that commences discharge after [date that is 60 days 
after the publication date of the final rule]. Discharges must remain 
within the pH range of 6 to 9 and must not exceed the following:

                                          Performance Standards [NSPS]
                                                     Table 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                   TSS                        O&G (as HEM)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.0571          0.0358          0.0312          0.0239
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.0571          0.0358          0.0312          0.0239
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.00286         0.00179         0.00156         0.00120
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.115           0.0716          0.0623          0.00478
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.0166          0.0104          0.00903         0.00693
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.00137         0.000859        0.000748        0.000574
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.000229        0.000144        0.000125        0.0000956
(i) Painting....................................      0.00743         0.00466         0.00405         0.00311
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.00286         0.00179         0.00156         0.00120
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                   TOC                             TOP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily   monthly avg.    Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\             \1\             \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.181           0.103           0.0188          0.00896
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.181           0.103           0.0188          0.00896
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.00901         0.00514         0.000937        0.000448
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.361           0.206           0.0375          0.0180
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.0523          0.0298          0.00543         0.00260
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.00433         0.00247         0.000450        0.000215
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.000721        0.000411        0.0000750       0.0000359
(i) Painting....................................      0.0235          0.0134          0.00244         0.00117
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.00901         0.00514         0.000937        0.000448
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                 Cadmium                        Chromium
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.0000267       0.0000184       0.000355        0.000143
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.0000267       0.0000184       0.000355        0.000143
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.00000133      0.00000092      0.0000178       0.00000714
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.0000534       0.0000368       0.000710        0.000286
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.00000773      0.00000533      0.000103        0.0000415
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.00000064      0.00000044      0.00000851      0.00000343
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.00000011      0.00000007      0.00000142      0.00000057
(i) Painting....................................      0.00000347      0.00000239      0.0000461       0.0000186
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.00000133      0.00000092      0.0000178       0.00000714 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


[[<strong>Page</strong> 551]]


                                                     Table 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                 Copper                           Lead
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.000898        0.000327        0.0000692       0.0000517
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.000898        0.000327        0.0000692       0.0000517
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.0000449       0.0000164       0.00000346      0.00000258
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.00180         0.000654        0.000139        0.000104
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.000261        0.0000949       0.0000201       0.0000150
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.0000216       0.00000785      0.00000166      0.00000124
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.00000359      0.00000131      0.00000028      0.00000021
(i) Painting....................................      0.000117        0.0000425       0.00000899      0.00000671
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.0000449       0.0000164       0.00000346      0.00000258 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                Manganese                      Molybdenum
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.000600        0.000364        0.00164         0.00103
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.000600        0.000364        0.00164         0.00103
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.0000300       0.0000182       0.0000820       0.0000511
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.00120         0.000728        0.00328         0.00205
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.000174        0.000106        0.000476        0.000297
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.0000144       0.00000873      0.0000394       0.0000246
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.00000240      0.00000146      0.00000656      0.00000409
(i) Painting....................................      0.0000780       0.0000473       0.000214        0.000133
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.0000300       0.0000182       0.0000820       0.0000511
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                                 Nickel                          Silver
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.00391         0.00156         0.0000955       0.0000582
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.00391         0.00156         0.0000955       0.0000582
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.000196        0.0000779       0.00000477      0.00000291
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.00782         0.00312         0.000191        0.000117
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.00114         0.000452        0.0000277       0.0000169
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.0000939       0.0000374       0.00000229      0.00000140
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.0000157       0.00000623      0.00000038      0.00000023
(i) Painting....................................      0.000509        0.000203        0.0000125       0.00000756
(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.000196        0.0000779       0.00000477      0.00000291 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                             Sulfide (as S)                        Tin
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling...............................      0.0630          0.0267          0.0000606       0.0000453
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...........................      0.0630          0.0267          0.0000606       0.0000453
(c) Cold Forming................................      0               0               0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing........................      0.00315         0.00134         0.00000303      0.00000226
(e) Electroplating..............................      0.126           0.0534          0.000122        0.0000905
(f) Hot Dip Coating.............................      0.0183          0.00774         0.0000176       0.0000132
(g) Lubrication.................................      0.00151         0.000641        0.00000145      0.00000109
(h) Mechanical Descaling........................      0.000252        0.000107        0.00000024      0.00000018
(i) Painting....................................      0.00818         0.00347         0.00000788      0.00000588

[[<strong>Page</strong> 552]]


(j) Pressure Deformation........................      0.00315         0.00134         0.00000303      0.00000226 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                 Table 8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Pollutant                              Zinc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Maximum
       Forming/finishing operation         Maximum daily      monthly
                                                \1\           avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Acid Pickling.......................      0.000163        0.000111
(b) Alkaline Cleaning...................      0.000163        0.000111
(c) Cold Forming........................      0               0
(d) Continuous Annealing................      0.00000811      0.00000553
(e) Electroplating......................      0.000325        0.000222
(f) Hot Dip Coating.....................      0.0000471       0.0000321
(g) Lubrication.........................      0.00000389      0.00000265
(h) Mechanical Descaling................      0.00000065      0.00000044
(i) Painting............................      0.0000211       0.0000144
(j) Pressure Deformation................      0.00000811      0.00000553 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.


                                                     Table 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Pollutant                               Cyanide (T)                     Cyanide (A)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Maximum                         Maximum
           Forming/finishing operation             Maximum daily      monthly      Maximum daily      monthly
                                                        \1\           avg.\1\           \1\           avg.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Electroplating..............................      0.000865        0.000513        0.000580        0.000282
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pounds per 1000 lbs. (gm/kg) of product.

    (c) Upon agreement with the permitting authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (d) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (e) Performance standards must be established in accordance with 
Sec. 438.58.


Sec. 438.57  Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).

    New sources subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS), as applicable.
    (a) Any new source subject to the provisions of this section that 
commenced discharging after [date 10 years prior to the date that is 60 
days after the publication date of the final rule] and before [date 
that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule] must 
continue to achieve the applicable new source standards specified in 40 
CFR part 420 for ten years beginning on the date the source commenced 
discharge or during the period of depreciation or amortization of the 
facility, whichever comes first, after which the source must achieve 
the standards specified in Sec. 438.55.
    (b) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7, the following standards 
apply with respect to each new source that commences discharge after 
[date that is 60 days after the publication date of the final rule]: 
Limitations for TOC (as indicator), TOP, cadmium, chromium, copper, 
cyanide (T), cyanide (A), lead, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, silver, 
sulfide (as S), tin, and zinc are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.56.
    (c) Upon agreement with the control authority and pursuant to 
Sec. 438.4(d), facilities with cyanide treatment have the option of 
achieving the limitation for either cyanide (T) or cyanide (A).
    (d) Upon agreement with the control authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (e) Pretreatment standards must be established in accordance with 
Sec. 438.58.


Sec. 438.58  Calculation of NPDES and pretreatment permit effluent 
limitations.

    (a) Production-based limitations in NPDES permits must comply with 
40 CFR 122.45(b)(2)(i). The average rate of production reported by the 
owner or operator in accordance with 40 CFR 403.12(b)(3) shall be based 
not upon the design production capacity but rather upon a reasonable 
measure of actual production of the facility, such as the production 
during the high month of the previous year, or the monthly average for 
the highest of the previous five years. For new sources or new 
dischargers, actual production shall be estimated using projected 
production.
    (b) The following protocols shall be used when calculating the 
operating rate for Subpart E:
    (1) For similar, multiple production lines with process waters 
treated in the same wastewater treatment system, the reasonable measure 
of production (the daily operating rate) shall be determined from the 
combined production of the similar production lines during the same 
time period.
    (2) For process wastewater treatment systems where wastewater from 
two or more different production lines are

[[<strong>Page</strong> 553]]

commingled in the same wastewater treatment system, the reasonable 
measure of production (the daily operating rate) shall be determined 
separately for each production line (or combination of similar 
production lines) during the same time period.
    (c) Mass effluent limitations and pretreatment requirements for 
each forming/finishing operation shall be computed by multiplying the 
average daily operating rate (or other reasonable measure of 
production), as determined in accordance with Sec. 438.58(b), by the 
respective effluent limitations guidelines or standards. The mass 
effluent limitations or pretreatment requirements applicable at a given 
NPDES or pretreatment compliance monitoring point shall be the sum of 
the mass effluent limitations or pretreatment requirements for each 
regulated pollutant parameter within each applicable forming/finishing 
operation with process wastewater discharging to that compliance 
monitoring point.
    (d) Mass NPDES permit effluent limitations or pretreatment 
requirements derived from this part shall remain in effect for the term 
of the NPDES permit or pretreatment control mechanism, except:
    (1) When the permit is modified in accordance with Sec. 122.62 of 
this chapter or local POTW permit modification provisions; or
    (2) Where the NPDES permit authorizes alternate effluent 
limitations for increased or decreased production levels in accordance 
with Sec. 122.45(b)(2)(ii)(A)(1) of this chapter.
    (e) Production from unit operations that do not generate or 
discharge process wastewater shall not be included in the calculation 
of the operating rate.

Subpart F--Oily Wastes


Sec. 438.60  Applicability.

    (a) This subpart applies to process wastewater from facilities 
specified in Sec. 438.1(a) that discharge wastewater exclusively from 
oily operations (as defined in Sec. 438.61) and are not otherwise 
subject to subparts G or H of this part.
    (b) Facilities introducing process wastewater into a POTW at a rate 
that does not exceed 2 million gallons per year are not subject to the 
pretreatment standards (Secs. 438.65 and 438.67) of this subpart.


Sec. 438.61  Special definitions.

    (a) As used in this subpart, oily operations means one or more of 
the following: Alkaline cleaning for oil removal; aqueous or solvent 
degreasing; corrosion preventive coating (as specified in 
Sec. 438.61(b)); floor cleaning; grinding; heat treating; deformation 
by impact or pressure; machining; painting; steam cleaning; laundering; 
and testing (such as, hydrostatic, dye penetrant, ultrasonic, magnetic 
flux).
    (b) Corrosion preventive coating means the application of removable 
oily or organic solutions to protect metal surfaces against corrosive 
environments. Corrosion preventive coatings include, but are not 
limited to: petrolatum compounds, oils, hard dry-film compounds, 
solvent-cutback petroleum-based compounds, emulsions, water-displacing 
polar compounds, and fingerprint removers and neutralizers. Corrosion 
preventive coating does not include electroplating, or chemical 
conversion coating (including phosphate conversion coating) operations.


Sec. 438.62  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any 
existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following effluent limitations representing the application of BPT. 
Discharges must remain within the pH range 6 to 9 and must not exceed 
the following:

                          Effluent Limitations
                                  [BPT]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
              Regulated  parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\   avg. \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. TSS..........................................        63          31
2. O&G (as HEM).................................        27          20
3. TOC (as indicator)...........................       633         378
4. TOP..........................................         9.0         4.3
5. Sulfide (as S)...............................        31         13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.63  Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitation representing the application of BCT: Limitations 
for TSS, O&G (as HEM) and pH are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.62.


Sec. 438.64  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best available technology economically achievable (BAT).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any 
existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the 
following effluent limitation representing the application of BAT: 
Limitations for TOC (as indicator), TOP and sulfide (as S) are the same 
as the corresponding limitation specified in Sec. 438.62.
    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.65  Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7 and 403.13, and except at 
facilities where the process wastewater introduced into a POTW does not 
exceed 2 million gallons per year, any existing source subject to this 
subpart must achieve the following pretreatment standards:

                         Pretreatment Standards
                                 [PSES]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
              Regulated  parameter                  Maximum     monthly
                                                   daily \1\   avg. \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. TOC (as indicator)...........................       633         378
2. TOP..........................................         9.0         4.3
3. Sulfide (as S)...............................        31         13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (c) The control authority has the option of imposing mass-based 
standards in place of the concentration-based standards. To convert to 
mass-based standards, multiply each parameter's concentration-based 
standard times the average daily flow of process wastewater discharged 
by the source into the POTW.


Sec. 438.66  New source performance standards (NSPS).

    (a) Any new point source subject to this subpart must achieve 
performance standards for TSS, O&G (as HEM), TOC (as indicator), TOP, 
sulfide (as S) and pH, which are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.62.
    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must

[[<strong>Page</strong> 554]]

choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).


Sec. 438.67  Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).

    (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7, or except at facilities 
where the process wastewater introduced into a POTW does not exceed 2 
million gallons per year, any existing source subject to this subpart 
must achieve pretreatment standards for TOC (as indicator), TOP and 
sulfide (as S), which are the same as the corresponding standard 
specified in Sec. 438.65.
    (b) Upon agreement with the permitting authority, facilities must 
choose to monitor for TOP or TOC, or implement a management plan for 
organic chemicals as specified in Sec. 438.4(a).
    (c) The control authority has the option of imposing mass-based 
standards in place of the concentration-based standards. To convert to 
mass-based standards, multiply each parameter's concentration-based 
standard times the average daily flow of process wastewater discharged 
by the source into the POTW.

Subpart G--Railroad Line Maintenance


Sec. 438.70  Applicability.

    (a) This subpart applies to discharges of process wastewater from 
facilities that perform routine cleaning and light maintenance on 
railroad engines, cars, car-wheel trucks, or similar parts or machines, 
and discharge wastewater exclusively from oily operations (as defined 
in Sec. 438.61(a)) or from washing of the final product.
    (b) Facilities engaged in the manufacture, overhaul or heavy 
maintenance of railroad engines, cars, car-wheel trucks, or similar 
parts or machines are not subject to this subpart. These facilities may 
be subject to Subpart A or F of this part.


Sec. 438.72  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitations representing the application of BPT. Discharges 
must remain within the pH range 6 to 9 and must not exceed the 
following:

                          Effluent Limitations
                                  [BPT]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
               Regulated  parameter                  Maximum    monthly
                                                    daily \1\   avg.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. BOD<INF>5</INF>...........................................         34         12
2. TSS............................................         30         16
3. O&G (as HEM)...................................         11         8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

Sec. 438.73  Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitation representing the application of BCT: Limitations 
for BOD<INF>5</INF>, TSS, O&G (as HEM) and pH are the same as the 
corresponding limitation specified in Sec. 438.72.


Sec. 438.76  New source performance standards (NSPS).

    Any new point source subject to this subpart must achieve 
performance standards for BOD<INF>5</INF>, TSS, O&G (as HEM) and pH, 
which are the same as the corresponding limitation specified in 
Sec. 438.72.

Subpart H--Shipbuilding Dry Docks


Sec. 438.80  Applicability.

    (a) This subpart applies to discharges of process wastewater 
generated in or on dry docks and similar structures, such as graving 
docks, building ways, marine railways and lift barges at shipbuilding 
facilities (or shipyards). This subpart applies to the following when 
generated by operations from within a dry dock or similar structure: 
process wastewater generated inside and outside the vessel (including 
bilge water) and wastewater generated from barnacle removal conducted 
as preparation for ship maintenance, rebuilding or repair.
    (b) The following wastewater discharges are not subject to this 
subpart:
    (1) Wastewater from ``on-shore'' operations (that is, other than 
dry docks and similar structures) at a shipyard.
    (2) Wastewater generated on board ships and boats when they are 
afloat (that is, not in dry docks or similar structures). Wastewater 
generated on U.S. military ships and boats afloat in U.S. waters are 
subject to the Uniform Discharge Standards (UNDS) at 40 CFR part 1700.
    (3) Flooding water (as defined in Sec. 438.81(a)), dry dock ballast 
water (as defined in Sec. 438.81(b)), and storm water.


Sec. 438.81  Special definitions.

    As used in this subpart:
    (a) Flooding water means water that is used to float ships or boats 
into the dry dock or similar structure and is discharged prior to 
performing any MP&M operations, or water that is used to float ships or 
boats out of the dry dock or similar structure after all MP&M 
operations have ceased.
    (b) Dry dock ballast water means water that enters and exits the 
dry dock or similar structure for the purpose of sinking or raising the 
dry dock.


Sec. 438.82  Effluent limitations attainable by the application of the 
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitations representing the application of BPT. Discharges 
must remain within the pH range 6 to 9 and must not exceed the 
following:

                          Effluent Limitations
                                  [BPT]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum
               Regulated  parameter                  Maximum    monthly
                                                    daily \1\   avg. \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. TSS............................................         81         44
2. O&G (as HEM)...................................         16        11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ mg/L (ppm).

Sec. 438.83  Effluent limitations attainable by application of the best 
control technology for conventional pollutants (BCT).

    Except as provided in 40 CFR 125.30 through 125.32, any existing 
point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following 
effluent limitation representing the application of BCT: Limitations 
for TSS, O&G (as HEM) and pH are the same as the corresponding 
limitation specified in Sec. 438.82.


Sec. 438.86  New source performance standards (NSPS).

    Any new point source subject to this subpart must achieve 
performance standards for TSS, O&G (as HEM) and pH, which are the same 
as the corresponding limitation specified in Sec. 438.82.

[[<strong>Page</strong> 555]]



                 Appendix A to Part 483--Typical Products in Metal Products & Machinery Sectors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              AEROSPACE                             AIRCRAFT                             BUS & TRUCK

Guided Missiles & Space Vehicle       Aircraft Engines & Engine Parts       Bus Terminal & Service Facilities
Guided Missile & Space Vehicle Prop.  Aircraft Frames Manufacturing         Courier Services, Except by Air
Other Space Vehicle & Missile Parts   Aircraft Parts & Equipment             Freight Truck Terminals, W/ or W/O
                                      Airports, Flying Fields, & Services    Maintenance
                                                                            Intercity & Rural Highways
                                                                             (Buslines)
                                      ....................................  Local & Suburban Transit (Bus &
                                                                             subway)
                                      ....................................  Local Passenger. Trans. (Lim., Amb.,
                                                                             Sight See)
                                      ....................................  Local Trucking With Storage
                                      ....................................  Local Trucking Without Storage
                                      ....................................  Motor Vehicle Parts & Accessories
                                      ....................................  School Buses
                                      ....................................  Trucking
                                      ....................................  Truck & Bus Bodies
                                      ....................................  Truck Trailers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT                        HARDWARE                         HOUSEHOLD EQUIPMENT

Communications Equipment              Architectural & Ornamental Metal      Commercial, Ind. & Inst. Elec.
Connectors for Electronic              Work                                  Lighting Fixtures
 Applications                         Bolts, Nuts, Screws, Rivets &         Current-Carrying Wiring Devices
Electric Lamps                         Washers                              Electric Housewares & Fans
Electron Tubes                        Crowns & Closures                     Electric Lamps
Electronic Capacitors                 Cutlery                               Farm Freezers
Electronic Coils & Transformers       Fabricated Metal Products             Household Appliances
Electronic Components                 Fabricated Pipe & Fabricated Pipe     Household Cooking Equipment
Radio & TV Communications Equipment    Fittings                             Household Refrig. & Home & Farm
Telephone & Telegraph Apparatus       Fabricated Plate Work (Boiler Shops)   Freezers
                                      Fabricated Structural Metal           Household Laundry Equipment
                                      Fasteners, Buttons, Needles & Pins
                                      Fluid Power Valves & Hose Fittings
                                      Hand & Edge Tools
                                      Hand Saws & Saw Blades                Household Vacuum Cleaners
                                      Hardware                              Lighting Equipment
                                      Heating Equipment, Except Electric    Noncurrent-Carrying Wiring Devices
                                      Industrial Furnaces & Ovens           Radio & Television Repair Shops
                                      Iron & Steel Forgings                 Radio & Television Sets Except
                                      Machine Tool Accessories & Measuring   Commn. Types
                                       Devices                              Refrig. & Air Cond. Serv. & Repair
                                      Machine Tools, Metal Cutting Types     Shops
                                      Machine Tools, Metal Forming Types    Residential Electrical Lighting
                                      Metal Shipping Barrels, Drums Kegs,    Fixtures
                                       Pails
                                      Metal Stampings
                                      Power Driven Hand Tools
                                      Prefabricated Metal Buildings &
                                       Components
                                      Screw Machine Products
                                      Sheet Metal Work
                                      Special Dies & Tools, Die Sets,
                                       Jigs, Etc
                                      Steel Springs
                                      Valves & Pipe Fittings
                                      Wire Springs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             INSTRUMENTS                            JOB SHOP                     MOBILE INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT

Analytical Instruments                Perform Work on Products for Use In   Construction Machinery & Equipment
Automatic Environmental Controls       Any MP&M Sector But Owns Less Than   Farm Machinery & Equipment
Coating, Engraving, & Allied           50% of the Products On-Site (e.g.,   Garden Tractors & Lawn & Garden
 Services                              Electroplating, Plating, Polishing,   Equipment
Dental Equipment & Supplies            Anodizing, and Coloring)             Hoist, Industrial Cranes & Monorails
Ophthalmic Goods                                                            Industrial Trucks, Tractors,
Fluid Meters & Counting Devices                                              Trailers, Tanks & Tank Components
Instruments to Measure Electricity                                          Mining Machinery & Equipment, Except
Laboratory Apparatus & Furniture                                             Oil Field
 Manufacturing Industries
Measuring & Controlling Devices
Optical Instruments & Lenses
Orthopedic, Prosthetic, & Surgical
 Supplies
Pens, Mechanical Pencils, & Parts
Process Control Instruments
Search & Navigation Equipment
Surgical & Medical Instruments &
 Apparatus
Watches, Clocks, Associated Devices
 & Parts
            MOTOR VEHICLE                        OFFICE MACHINE                           ORDNANCE

Auto Exhaust System Repair Shops      Calculating & Accounting Equipment    Ammunition
Automobile Dealers (new & used)       Computer Maintenance & Repair         Ordinance & Accessories
Auto. Dealers (Dunebuggy, Go-Cart,    Computer Peripheral Equipment         Small Arms
 Snowmobile)                          Computer Related Services             Small Arms Ammunition
Automovile Service (includes Diag. &  Computer Rental & Leasing
 Insp. Cntrs.)                        Computer Storage Devices
Automotive Equipment                  Computer Terminals
Automotive Glass Replacement Shops    Electrical & Electronic Repair
Automotive Repairs Shops              Electronic Computers
Automotive Stampings                  Office Machines
Automotive Transmission Repair Shops  Photographic Equipment & Supplies
Carburetors, Pistons Rings, Valves
Electrical Equipment for Motor
General Automotive Repair Shops
Mobile Homes
Motor Vehicle & Automotive Bodies
Motor Vehicle Parts & Accessories
Motorcycle Dealers
Motorcycles

[[<strong>Page</strong> 556]]


Passenger Car Leasing
Recreational & Utility Trailer
 Dealers
Taxicabs
Top & Body Repair & Paint Shops
Travel Trailers & Campers
Vehicles
Vehicular Lighting Equipment
Welding Shops (includes Automotive)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      PRECIOUS METALS & JEWELRY               PRINTED WIRING BOARD                        RAILROAD

Costume Jewelry                       Printed Circuit Boards                Line-Haul Railroads
Jewelers' Materials & Lapidary Work   Printed Circuit Boards for            Railcars, Railway Systems
Jewelry, Precious Metal                Television and Radio                 Switching & Terminal Stations
Musical Instruments                   Wiring Boards
Silverware, Plated Ware, & Stainless
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           SHIPS AND BOATS               STATIONARY INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT          STEEL FORMING & FINISHING

Boat Building & Repairing             Air & Gas Compressors                 Cold-Finished Steel Bars
Deep Sea Domestic Transportation of   Automatic Vending Machines            Steel Pipe and Tubes
 Freight                              Ball & Roller Bearings                Steel Wiredrawing and Steel Nails
Deep Sea Passenger Transportation,    Blowers & Exhaust & Ventilation Fans   and Spikes
 Except by Ferry                      Commercial Laundry Equipment          Miscellaneous Fabricated Wire
Freight Transportation on the Great   Conveyors & Conveying Equipment        Products (e.g., steel wire rope,
 Lakes                                Electric Industrial Apparatus          cable, netting)
Marinas                               Elevators & Moving Stairways
Ship Building & Repairing             Equipment Rental & Leasing
Towing & Tugboat Service              Food Product Machinery
Water Passenger Transportation        Fluid Power Cylinders & Actuators
 Ferries                              Fluid Power Pumps & Motors
Water Transportation of Freight       General Industrial Machinery
Water Transportation Services         Heavy Construction Equipment Rental
                                      Industrial Machinery
                                      Industrial Patterns
                                      Industrial Process Furnaces & Ovens
                                      Internal Combustion Engines
                                      Measuring & Dispensing Pumps
                                      Mechanical Power Transmission
                                       Equipment
                                      Metal Working Machinery
                                      Motors & Generators
                                      Oil Field Machinery & Equipment
                                      Packaging Machinery
                                      Paper Industries Machinery
                                      Printing Trades Machinery &
                                       Equipment
                                      Pumps & Pumping Equipment
                                      Refrigeration & Air & Heating
                                       Equipment
                                      Relays & Industrial Controls
                                      Rolling Mill Machinery & Equipment
                                      Scales & Balances, Except Laboratory
                                      Service Industry Machines
                                      Special Industry Machinery
                                      Spped Changers, High Speed Drivers &
                                       Gears
                                      Steam, Gas, Hydraulic Turbines,
                                       Generator Units
                                      Switchgear & Switchboard Apparatus
                                      Textile Machinery
                                      Transformers
                                      Welding Apparatus
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    MISCELLANEOUS METAL PRODUCTS
Miscellaneous Fabricated Wire
 Products
Miscellaneous Metal Work
Miscellaneous Repair Shops & Related
 Services
Miscellaneous Transportation
 Equipment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


               Appendix B to Part 438--TOP Pollutants List
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Nominal
   Total organics parameter pollutants      CAS number     quantitation
                                                           value (mg/L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Acrolein............................        107-02-8            0.05
 2. Benzoic acid........................         62-85-0            0.05
 3. Carbon disulfide....................         75-15-0            0.01
 4. Dibenzofuran........................        132-64-9            0.01
 5. Dibenzothiophene....................        132-65-0            0.01
 6. Isophorone..........................         78-59-1            0.01
 7. n-Hexadecane........................        544-76-3            0.01
 8. n-Tetradecane.......................        929-59-4            0.01
 9. Aniline.............................         62-53-3            0.01
10. Chloroform (trichloromethane).......         67-66-3            0.01
11. Methylene chloride (dichloromethane)         75-09-2            0.01
12. Chloroethane (ethyl chloride).......         75-00-3            0.05
13. 1,1-Dichloroethane..................         75-34-3            0.01

[[<strong>Page</strong> 557]]


14. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane                        71-55-6            0.01
 (methylchloroform).....................
15. Tetrachloroethene...................        127-18-4            0.01
16. 1,1-Dichloroethylene (vinylidene             75-35-4            0.01
 chloride)..............................
17. Trichloroethylene...................         79-01-6            0.01
18. Biphenyl............................         92-52-4            0.01
19. p-Cymene............................         99-87-6            0.01
20. Ethylbenzene........................        100-41-4            0.01
21. Toluene.............................        108-88-3            0.01
22. N-Nitrosodimethylamine..............         62-75-9            0.05
23. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine..............         86-30-6            0.02
24. Chlorobenzene.......................        108-90-7            0.01
25. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene..................        606-20-2            0.01
26. Phenol..............................        108-95-2            0.01
27. 4-Chloro-m-cresol                            59-50-7            0.01
 (parachlorometacresol or 4-chloro-3-
 methylphenol)..........................
28. 2,4-Dinitrophenol...................         51-28-5            0.05
29. 2,4-Dimethylphenol..................        105-67-9            0.01
30. 2-Nitrophenol (o-nitrophenol).......         88-75-5            0.02
31. 4-Nitrophenol (p-nitrophenol).......        100-02-7            0.05
32. Acenaphthene........................         83-32-9            0.01
33. Anthracene..........................        120-12-7            0.01
34. 3,6-Dimethylphenanthrene............       1576-67-6            0.01
35. Fluorene............................         86-73-7            0.01
36. Fluoranthene........................        206-44-0            0.01
37. 2-Isopropylnaphthalene..............       2027-17-0            0.01
38. 1-Methylfluorene....................       1730-37-6            0.01
39. 2-Methylnaphthalene.................         91-57-6            0.01
40. 1-Methylphenanthrene................        832-69-9            0.01
41. Naphthalene.........................         91-20-3            0.01
42. Phenanthrene........................         85-01-8            0.01
43. Pyrene..............................        129-00-0            0.01
44. Benzyl butyl phthalate..............         85-68-7            0.01
45. Dimethyl phthalate..................        131-11-3            0.01
46. Di-n-butyl phthalate................         84-74-2            0.01
47. Di-n-octyl phthalate................        117-84-0            0.01
48. Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate.........        117-81-7            0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 463--PLASTICS MOLDING AND FORMING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY

    6. The authority citation for part 463 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342 and 
1361.

    7. Section 463.1 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 463.1  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (c) Processes that coat a plastic material onto a substrate may 
fall within the Electroplating, Metal Finishing, or Metal Products and 
Machinery provisions of 40 CFR parts 413, 433, and 438, as applicable. 
These coating processes are excluded from the effluent limitations 
guidelines and standards for the electroplating, metal finishing, and 
metal products and machinery point source categories and are subject to 
the plastics molding and forming regulation in this part.
* * * * *

PART 464--METAL MOLDING AND CASTING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY

    8. The authority citation for part 464 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342 and 
1361.

    9. Section 464.02 is amended by revising the last sentence of 
paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) to read as follows:


Sec. 464.02  General definitions.

    (a) * * * Processing operations following the cooling of castings 
not covered under aluminum forming, except for grinding scrubber 
operations which are covered here, are covered under the 
electroplating, metal finishing, and metal products and machinery point 
source categories (40 CFR parts 413, 433, and 438), as applicable.
    (b) * * * Except for grinding scrubber operations which are covered 
here, processing operations following the cooling of castings are 
covered under the electroplating, metal finishing, and metal products 
and machinery point source categories (40 CFR parts 413, 433, and 438), 
as applicable.
    (c) * * * Except for grinding scrubber operations which are covered 
here, processing operations following the cooling of castings are 
covered under the electroplating, metal finishing, and metal products 
and machinery point source categories (40 CFR parts 413, 433, and 438), 
as applicable.
    (d) * * * Processing operations following the cooling of castings 
not covered under nonferrous metals forming are covered under the 
electroplating, metal finishing, and metal products and machinery point 
source categories (40 CFR parts 413, 433, and 438), as applicable.
* * * * *

PART 467--ALUMINUM FORMING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY

    10. The authority citation for Part 467 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342 and 
1361.

    11. Section 467.01 is amended by revising the fourth sentence of 
paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec. 467.01  Applicability.

    (a) * * * For the purposes of this part, surface treatment of 
aluminum is considered to be an integral part of aluminum forming 
whenever it is performed at the same plant site at which aluminum is 
formed and such operations are not considered for regulation under the 
Electroplating, Metal Finishing, or Metal Products and

[[<strong>Page</strong> <strong>558</strong>]]

Machinery provisions of 40 CFR parts 413, 433, and 438, as applicable. 
* * *
* * * * *

PART 471--NONFERROUS METAL FORMING AND METAL POWDERS POINT SOURCE 
CATEGORY

    12. The authority citation for Part 471 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342 and 
1361.

    13. Section 471.01 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 471.01  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (c) Surface treatment includes any chemical or electrochemical 
treatment applied to the surface of the metal. For the purposes of this 
regulation, surface treatment of metals is considered to be an integral 
part of the forming of metals whenever it is performed at the same 
plant site at which the metals are formed. Such surface treatment 
operations are not regulated under Electroplating, Metal Finishing, or 
Metal Products and Machinery Point Source Category regulations, 40 CFR 
parts 413, 433, and 438, respectively.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-33 Filed 1-2-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

</PRE>