1

Fact Sheet

NPDES Permit Number: AKG-52-7000

Public Notice Start Date: OCTOBER 2, 1998

Public Notice Expiration Date: NOVEMBER 1, 1998

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Plans

To Reissue a Wastewater Discharge Permit to

Seafood Processors Discharging Wastes and Wastewaters within

Three Nautical Miles of the Pribilof Islands, Alaska;

and

To Issue a Wastewater Discharge Permit to the City of St. Paul

and

The State of Alaska Proposes to Certify the Permit

and Issue a Consistency Determination

EPA Proposes NPDES Permit Reissuance

EPA proposes to reissue a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to

the owners and operators of seafood processing facilities and vessels discharging seafood

processing wastes and other wastewaters within three nautical miles of the Pribilof Islands and to

include in the Permit authorization for the city of St. Paul to discharge treated domestic

wastewater. The draft permit sets forth effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other

conditions for discharges of seafood processing wastes and wastewaters and for the city of St.

Paul’s domestic discharge.

The Fact Sheet includes:

< information on public comment, public hearing and appeal procedures.

< a description of the current discharges.

< a listing of proposed effluent limitations and other requirements and conditions.

< maps and specific requirements for discharge locations.

The State of Alaska proposes certification and consistency determination
2

The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) proposes to certify the NPDES

permit under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. In addition, the Alaska Division of

Governmental Coordination (DGC) proposes to issue a determination that the permit is consistent

with the Alaska Coastal Management Program under Section 307(c) of the Coastal Zone

Management Act.

EPA invites comments on the draft permit

EPA will consider all substantive comments before issuing a final permit. Those wishing to

comment on the draft permit or wishing to request a public hearing be held may do so in writing

by the expiration date of the Public Notice. A request for a public hearing must state the nature

of the issues to be raised as well as the requester’s name, address, and telephone number. After

the Public Notice expires, and all comments have been considered, EPA Region 10 Office of

Water Director will make a final decision regarding permit issuance.

Persons wishing to comment on State Certification should contact the State of Alaska Department

of Environmental Conservation, Watershed Management Section, Attn: Robert Dolan, at 555

Cordova Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99501, for information on how to submit comments.

Persons wishing to comment on the State Determination of Consistency with the Alaska Coastal

Management Program should contact the State of Alaska, Southcentral Regional Office, Office of

Management and Budget, Division of Governmental Coordination, 3601 “C” Street, Suite 370,

Anchorage, Alaska 99503-2798, for information on their Public Notice requirements.

If no substantive comments are received, the tentative conditions in the draft permit will become

final, and the permit will become effective upon issuance. If comments are received, EPA will

address the comments and issue the permit. The permit will become effective 30 days after the

issuance date.

Any interested person may appeal the permit in the Federal Court of Appeals, in accordance with

Section 509(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act, within 120 days following the Federal Register

issuance notice of EPA’s final permit decision under 40 CFR § 124.15. Persons affected by a

general permit may not challenge the conditions of the permit as a right of further EPA

proceedings. Instead, they may either challenge the permit in the Federal Court of Appeals or

apply for an individual NPDES permit and then request formal hearing on the issuance and denial

of an individual permit.

Documents are available for review

The following documents may be reviewed between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through

Friday at EPA Region 10 Library on the 10th floor, Park Place Building, 1200 Sixth Avenue,

Seattle, Washington.

< The Draft Permit and Fact Sheet

< The Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
3

< The Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Pribilof Islands General NPDES

Permit (EPA, Jones & Stokes, and Science Applications International Corporation

(SAIC)) August 1998

< The Biological Assessment of Seafood Processing Discharges and St. Paul’s

Domestic Wastewater Discharge on Threatened, Endangered and Special Status

Species of the Pribilof Islands, Alaska (EPA, SAIC, and Jones & Stokes) August

1998

< Ocean Discharge Criteria Evaluation for the Proposed Pribilof Islands General

NPDES Permit and Addendum for the City of St. Paul Domestic Wastewater

Discharge (EPA, Jones & Stokes, and SAIC) August 1998

Copies of these documents are available from Region 10's Public Environmental Resource Center

on the 14th Floor, Park Place Building, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington, Telephone 800-

424-4EPA (4372) (within Region 10 only) or (206) 553-1200 or request copies by e-mail to

“philip.jeff@epamail.epa.gov”.

For other information, contact Florence Carroll, in Seattle at (206) 553-1760 or by e-mail to

“carroll.florence@epamail.epa.gov”.

The documents listed above may also be reviewed at the following places in Alaska:

USEPA Alaska Operations Office USEPA Alaska Operations Office

Federal Building, Room 537 410 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 100

222 West 7th Avenue Juneau, Alaska 99801

Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7588 Telephone: (907) 586-7619

City of St. Paul City of St. George

City Manager’s Office Public Works Office

Telephone: (907) 548-3110 Telephone: (907) 859-2263
i

TABLE OF CONTENT

1 THE BASIS FOR A GENERAL NPDES PERMIT ............................ 1

1.1 The Basis for Issuance of a General Permit ............................. 1

1.2 EPA Determination for a General Permit for the Pribilof Islands ............. 1

1.3 Coverage under the Pribilof General Permit ............................ 2

1.4 Requirements of an individual permit ................................. 2

1.4.1 Requirements for a general permittee to apply for an individual permit . . 3

1.4.2 Application to discharge under an individual permit ........... . . . . . . 3

2 THE BASIS FOR ISSUING THIS PERMIT UNDER THE OCEAN DISCHARGE

CRITERIA .......................................................... 4

2.1 Summary of the 1997 Monitoring Program ............................. 4

2.1.1 Effluent Characterization ..................................... 4

2.1.2 Water Quality ............................................. 5

2.1.3 Sediment Chemistry and Benthic Community Sampling .............. 5

2.2 EPA Determination ............................................ 6

3 THE BASIS FOR A GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES OCCURRING

WITHIN THREE NAUTICAL MILES OF THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS ............ 6

3.1 Comparison of the 1996 General Permit with the Proposed General Permit .... 6

3.2 New coverage under the reissued Permit ............................... 7

3.3 Coverage area .................................................. 7

 4 DESIGNATED AREAS OF SPECIAL CONCERN EXCLUDED FROM COVERAGE

OF THE PERMIT .................................................. 7

4.1 National Wildlife Refuge ........................................... 7

4.2 Steller Sea Lion Critical Habitat: Rookery and Haulout Areas ............... 8

4.2.1 Rookeries ................................................ 8

4.2.2 Haulout Areas ............................................. 8

4.2.3 Potential Impacts .......................................... 8

4.3 Northern Fur Seal Critical Habitat: Rookeries and Haulout Areas ............ 9

4.3.1 Rookeries ................................................ 9

4.3.2 Haulouts ................................................ 10

4.3.3 Potential Impacts ......................................... 10

4.4 Marine Birds, Shorebirds, and Waterfowl: Nesting Areas and Critical Habitat . . 11

4.4.1 Nesting Areas ............................................ 11

4.4.2 Habitat Areas ............................................ 11

4.4.3 Potential Impacts ......................................... 12

5 The Basis for the Exclusions from Coverage of the Permit ...................... 12

5.1 Ocean Discharge Criteria ......................................... 12
ii

5.2 Endangered Species Act .......................................... 13

5.3. Marine Mammal Protection Act .................................... 14

5.4 EPA Determination ............................................. 14

6 THE BASIS FOR LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ....... 15

6.1 Limitations .................................................... 15

6.1.1 Technology-based Limitations ................................ 15

6.1.2 Water Quality-Based Limitations .............................. 15

6.2 Monitoring Requirements ......................................... 16

6.2.1 Effluent Monitoring ....................................... 16

6.2.2 Discharge Monitoring ...................................... 18

6.2.3 Seafloor Monitoring ....................................... 18

6.2.4 Sea Surface and Shoreline Monitoring .......................... 18

6.2.5 Biological Monitoring ...................................... 18

7 POLLUTANTS ALLOWED TO BE DISCHARGED ......................... 19

7.1 Discharges Covered by the Permit .................................. 19

7.1.1 Seafood Processing Wastes and Wastewaters .................... 19

7.1.2 Processing Disinfectants .................................... 20

7.1.3 Gray Water and Domestic Wastewater ......................... 20

7.1.4. Other Wastewaters ........................................ 21

7.2 Discharges not Authorized by the Permit ............................. 21

8 SPECIAL CONDITIONS ........................................... 22

8.1 Vessel Location Reporting ........................................ 22

8.2 Existing Stationary Outfalls ....................................... 22

8.3 Ocean Disposal ................................................. 22

8.4 Discharge Outfall location and Condition ............................. 22

8.4.1 Stationary Outfall Depth .................................... 22

8.4.2 Mobile Vessels ........................................... 23

8.4.3 Outfalls ................................................. 23

8.5 New Facilities .................................................. 23

8.6 Pollution Prevention and Best Management Practices .................... 23

8.7 State Water Quality Standards ..................................... 24

9 REPORTING ....................................................... 24

9.1 Quarterly Reporting ............................................. 24

9.2 Non-Compliance Reporting ..................................... 24

10 OTHER REQUIREMENTS WHEN ISSUING A PERMIT ..................... 25

10.1 Coastal Zone Management Act ..................................... 25

10.2 State Certification of the Permit .................................... 25

10.3 Presidential Oversight of Federal Regulations .......................... 25
iii

10.4 Paperwork Reduction Act ........................................ 25

10.5 The Regulatory Flexibility Act ..................................... 26

11 DEFINITIONS and ACRONYMS ........................................ 26

12 REFERENCES ...................................................... 28
1

1 THE BASIS FOR A GENERAL NPDES PERMIT

1.1 The Basis for Issuance of a General Permit

Section 301(a) of the Clean Water Act (CWA, or the Act) provides that the discharge of

pollutants to surface waters of the United States is unlawful except in accordance with a

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. EPA’s regulations

authorize the issuance of general NPDES permits to categories of discharges when a

number of point sources discharges:

! involve the same or substantially similar types of operations;

! discharge the same types of wastes;

! are located within a geographic area;

! require the same effluent limitations;

! require the same operating conditions;

! require the same or similar monitoring requirements; and

! in the opinion of EPA are more appropriately controlled under a general permit

than under individual permits [40 CFR § 122.28].

1.2 EPA Determination for a General Permit for the Pribilof Islands

EPA has determined that the owners and operators of seafood processing facilities

engaged in the processing of seafood, both mobile vessels and shorebased facilities,

involve the same or substantially similar types of operations which discharge the similar

types of wastes, including seafood processing wastes, treated domestic wastewater, and

other designated wastewaters. The city of St. Paul discharges treated domestic

wastewater through an outfall shared with a seafood processor. Also vessels discharging

through stationary outfalls discharge gray water and on St. George there is a discharge

from a bunkhouse/galley package plant treating domestic wastewater. All of the types of

wastes and wastewaters discharged within three nautical miles (nmi) of St. Paul and St.

George Islands (except for Walrus Island) must comply with effluent limitations,

monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth the Permit.

As provided in 40 CFR §§ 124.8 and 124.56, this Fact Sheet briefly describes the facilities,

discharges, and receiving waters covered by the Permit. It also sets forth the principal
2

facts and the significant factual, legal, methodological, and policy questions considered in

preparing the Permit and its requirements.

Coverage under the Permit will expire five years from the date of issuance. An expired

general permit continues in force and effect until a new general permit is reissued [40 CFR

§ 122.28(b)]. Permittees authorized to discharge under the general permit must submit

new Notices of Intent [see 1.2] 180 days prior to the expiration date of the Permit..

As with individual NPDES permits, a violation of a condition contained in a general

NPDES permit constitutes a violation of the Act and may subject the permittee to

penalties specified in CWA § 309. Under the Civil Monetary Penalty Inflation Adjustment

Rule, the penalty amounts were increased effective January 30, 1997. [See FR 61(252):

69359-69366, December 31, 1996].

1.3 Coverage under the Pribilof General Permit

A Notice of Intent (NOI) to be covered under the Permit is required [40 CFR

 § 122.28(b)(2)(i)]. The requirements are outlined in the Permit. A new applicant seeking

authorization to discharge under the Permit must submit a timely NOI to EPA at least 60

days prior to the onset of operation and discharge. This time period will allow EPA

adequate time to review the NOI, consult with the applicant, the State, and other parties

as appropriate, and inform the applicant of EPA’s determination. 

Permittees previously authorized under the Pribilof Seafood General Permit

AK-G52-P000 must submit an NOI for coverage under the reissued Permit no

later than 30 days after issuance of this Permit.

1.4 Requirements of an individual permit

EPA has determined that the general NPDES permit for seafood processing facilities in

the Pribilof Islands will contain the following limitations and requirements for the

discharge of pollutants: technology-based effluent limitations of grinding process waste

solids to no greater than 0.5 inch in any dimension; water quality-based limitations; a onehalf mile no discharge exclusion zone around rookeries and haulouts for marine mammal

and nesting areas for seabirds; monitoring of the receiving water, seafloor, shoreline, and

biological communities (marine mammals and seabirds) where feasible and appropriate;

quarterly reporting of production and location of discharge, monitoring of the effluent

discharge; and a pollution prevention plan and implementation of best management

practices for reduction and elimination of wastes and waste products.

Individual NPDES permits for dischargers in the Pribilof Islands would require at least the

above permit requirements. Individual permits may also require additional water qualitybased limitations on effluent quantity and quality which are site-specific, additional
3

monitoring appropriate to these site-specific conditions, and monthly reporting of

production, discharges, and monitoring. In addition, an environmental assessment will be

required and an environmental impact statement may be required.

1.4.1 EPA requirements for a general permittee to apply for an individual permit

 [40 CFR § 122.28(b)(3)]

EPA may require any discharger covered by a general permit to apply for and

obtain an individual permit. In addition, any interested person may petition EPA to

take this action. EPA may consider the issuance of individual permits when:

! The discharger or “treatment works treating domestic sewage” is not in

compliance with the terms and conditions of the general permit;

! A change has occurred in the availability of demonstrated technology of

practices for the control or abatement of pollutants applicable to the point

source or treatment works treating domestic sewage;

! Effluent limitations guidelines are subsequently promulgated for the point

sources covered by the general permit;

! A Water Quality Management Plan containing requirements applicable to

such point sources is approved; or

! Circumstances have changed since the time of the request to be covered so

that the discharger is no longer appropriately controlled under the general

permit or either a temporary or permanent reduction or elimination of the

authorized discharge is necessary; or

! The discharger is a significant contributor of pollutants.

1.4.2 Application to discharge under an individual permit

[40 CFR § 122.18(b)(3)(iii)]

Owners and operators covered by a general permit may request to be excluded

from coverage under the general permit by submitting an application to EPA for an

individual permit with reasons supporting the request to be excluded from the

general permit. This request may be made by submitting an individual NPDES

permit application to EPA. This request shall be submitted no later than 90 days

after publication by EPA of the final general permit in the Federal Register, or, if a

new discharger, an application must be submitted no later than 180 days prior to

the commencement of operation of a new source or new discharger.
4

2 THE BASIS FOR ISSUING THIS PERMIT UNDER THE OCEAN 

DISCHARGE CRITERIA

The Ocean Discharge Criteria, promulgated at 40 CFR Part 125, Subpart M, in

accordance with CWA § 403, establish guidelines for permitting discharges into the

territorial seas, the contiguous zone, and the ocean. EPA conducts an Ocean Discharge

Criteria Evaluation (ODCE) which applies the criteria to available information and the

proposed permit. In conjunction with the ODCE, EPA decides on the basis of available

information whether or not the discharge will cause unreasonable degradation of the

marine environment. “Unreasonable degradation of the marine environment” means:

Significant adverse changes in ecosystem diversity, productivity, and stability of

the biological community within the area of discharge and surrounding biological

communities; 

Threat to human health through direct exposure to pollutants or through

consumption of exposed aquatic organisms; or

Loss of aesthetic, recreational, scientific, or economic values which is

unreasonable in relation to the benefit derived from the discharge.

The Ocean Discharge Criteria are comprised of ten criteria to be considered in the

determination of unreasonable degradation. These factors, in general, include the amount

and nature of the pollutants, the potential transport of the pollutants, the character and

uses of the receiving water and its biological communities, the existence of special aquatic

sites (including parks, refuges, etc.), any applicable requirements of an approved Coastal

Zone Management Program plan, and potential impacts on water quality, ecological

health, and human health [40 CFR § 125.122].

EPA has developed the Ocean Discharge Criteria Evaluation for the Proposed Pribilof

Islands General NPDES Permit and an Addendum for the City of St. Paul’s Domestic

Wastewater Discharge (Pribilof ODCE 1998) [EPA, Jones & Stokes, and SAIC 1998] to

provide more extensive details on these ten criteria as well as certain aspects of the

effluent discharges and the waters receiving pollutants. This technical support document

provides a significant expansion of this Fact Sheet as to the scientific basis for the Permit.

2.1 Summary of the 1997 Monitoring Program

2.1.1 Effluent Characterization

Effluent testing of seafood processing wastes and cleanup wastewaters and 

domestic wastewater from the city of St. Paul and the bunkhouse/galley on St.

George took place during the winter crab processing and during a very limited
5

summer halibut processing. The city of St. Paul’s discharge was tested during

both periods. 

The sampling and analyses for conventional pollutants, metals, and volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) indicate that conventional pollutants are discharged in small

quantities; that the metals found in the discharges primarily consisted of those

normally found in seawater plus copper and iron which could be leached from

pipes; and that VOCs created by the use of chlorine and two manufactured

chemicals were present in very small quantities primarily in the domestic

wastewater discharges.

2.1.2 Water Quality

Water quality was sampled and on-site testing of the water column took place

when there were discharges during winter crab processing and during limited

summer processing and also during domestic wastewater discharges. During both

periods the electronic water column measurements showed no significant effect of

discharges on dissolved oxygen, pH, salinity, or temperature of receiving waters.

Analytical results showed no significant effect of discharges from seafood

processors or the city on any of the water chemistry parameters evaluated during

the winter discharges. Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), ammonia, nitrite-N,

settleable matter, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, and total organic carbon were below

method detection limits for all stations. Nitrate-N, ortho-phosphorus, and total

phosphorus were detected in small concentrations, indicating normal marine

environmental conditions. 

Ammonia-N was measured in higher concentrations than ambient conditions, but

still well below allowable ammonia levels in seawater.

The summer analytical results showed no significant effects of the discharges on

any of the water chemistry parameters. Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD),

ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, settleable matter, and total organic carbon were below

method detection limits for all stations. Total Kjeldahl nitrogen, orthophosphorus, and total phosphorus were detected in low concentrations, indicating

normal marine environmental conditions. 

2.1.3 Sediment Chemistry and Benthic Community Sampling

The sediment chemistry and benthic community sampling was conducted during

the summer in conjunction with a dive survey covering the outfall areas at East

Landing and St. George as well as transects where mobile vessels had discharged

during previous crab processing periods. Two control sites were also sampled. 
6

No accumulations of wastes were observed. The sediments were well aerated with

no accumulation of sulfides or of anaerobic layers. Petroleum hydrocarbons and

bacteria--which if present would definitely indicate anthropogenic impacts--were

not found in any of the samples.

Benthic samples found that no effects from the discharges were discernible. The

strong wave action, currents, temperature extremes, and mechanical damage from

sea ice appears to rapidly disperse even large amounts of organic wastes that may

be deposited into the nearshore environment and which may have the potential of

adversely affecting the biota. 

2.2 EPA Determination

After consideration of the ten criteria and other factors contained in CWA § 403 and

based on the information gathered during the 1997 monitoring program, EPA has

determined that discharges authorized by the Permit and discharged in accordance with

the requirements of the Permit will not cause unreasonable degradation of the receiving

waters.

3 THE BASIS FOR A GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES 

OCCURRING WITHIN THREE NAUTICAL MILES OF THE PRIBILOF 

ISLANDS

3.1 Comparison of the 1996 General Permit with the Proposed General Permit

The Pribilof Seafood General Permit issued in 1996 did not authorize discharges within

0.5 nmi of special areas of concern, which in general included rookeries (with the

exception the three nmi zone around Walrus Island), haulout areas, and seabird nesting

areas during a period of May 1 through December 1.

The currently proposed Permit continues the nonauthorization of discharges within 0.5

nmi of rookeries (with the exception the three nmi zone around Walrus Island), haulout

areas, and seabird nesting areas. The safety exception for mobile vessels to anchor within

the 0.5 nmi exclusion zone also continues. The existing stationary outfalls at St. Paul and

St. George also continue to be covered under this Permit.

In addition, the proposed Permit requires an effluent monitoring program for seafood

processing permittees and the city of St. Paul. A biological monitoring program with the

objective to observe marine mammals and seabirds interaction with discharges and

possible shoreline accumulation has also been included. Pollution prevention and best

management practices are also required for the seafood processing permittee and the city

of St. Paul is to implement a hazardous household products control and disposal program
7

3.2 New coverage under the reissued Permit

This general permit has been expanded to cover the city of St. Paul’s domestic wastewater

which is treated by a series of septic tanks before discharge through an outfall shared with

a seafood processor into the Bering Sea.

The previous permit, as well as this permit, authorizes the discharge of domestic 

wastewater from bunkhouse package treatment plant on St. George. Including the city of

St. Paul in the proposed Permit is a realistic extension in order to cover all the discharges

occurring within three nmi of the Pribilof Islands. The city of St. Paul as well as the

bunkhouse/galley on St. George will have monitoring requirements for testing the effluent

during the effective period of the Permit. In addition, the city of St. Paul will initiate a

hazardous household waste program to reduce and/or eliminate the disposal of hazardous

products by means of the septic tank treatment system.

3.3 Coverage area

The Permit coverage of three nmi was selected for administrative purposes. The cities of

St. Paul and St. George extend their jurisdiction for taxes, ordinances, and other

responsibilities to three miles and can provide EPA and ADEC with information on which

vessels operate within the three mile area.

 4 DESIGNATED AREAS OF SPECIAL CONCERN EXCLUDED FROM

COVERAGE OF THE PERMIT

4.1 National Wildlife Refuge

Waters within 0.5 nmi of the boundary of a national wildlife refuge are excluded from

coverage by the Permit. The Pribilof Islands are part of the Alaska Maritime Wildlife

Refuge, Bering Sea Unit. The Alaska Maritime Wildlife Refuge may include lands owned

and/or managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

National wildlife refuges are maintained to protect the environmental integrity and

populations of fish and wildlife and their habitats, as well as to provide the scenic beauty

and quality of landscapes in the natural state and opportunities for wilderness recreational

activities [16 U.S.C .§ 661 et seq.]. 

4.2 Steller Sea Lion Critical Habitat: Rookery and Haulout Areas

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) reclassified the Steller sea lion population

west of 144 deg.W. longitude as endangered, effective June 4, 1997, pursuant to the

Endangered Species Act [ESA, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.]. Conservation of rookeries, 
8

haulouts, and foraging areas are essential to the maintenance of pinniped populations in

general, and to the recovery of the endangered population of Steller sea lions in particular. 

4.2.1 Rookeries

Waters within three nmi of the baseline or base point of a rookery of the Steller sea

lion are excluded from coverage of the Permit on a year-round basis. Walrus

Island, approximately 6 miles east of St. Paul Island, has been designated as a

major Steller sea lion rookery [FR 58(165): 45269-4586, August 27, 1993].

Rookeries are unique habitats where Steller sea lions mate, birth, and raise their

progeny on a consistent annual basis. The surrounding nearshore waters are an

integral component of the critical habitats, especially for foraging by postparturient females and by young animals when developing swimming and hunting

behaviors.

4.2.2 Haulout Areas

Waters within 0.5 nmi of the baseline or base point of a designated haulout of the

Steller sea lion are excluded from coverage of the Permit on a year-round basis. 

On St. Paul Island, Northeast Point and Sea Lion Rock have been designated as

major haulout areas. On St. George, South Rookery and Dalnoi Point have been

designated as major haulout areas [FR 58(165): 45269-4586, August 27, 1993].

Haulouts are areas used for rest and refuge by all ages and both sexes of sea

lions during the non-breeding season and by non-breeding adults and subadults

during the breeding season.

4.2.3 Potential Impacts

The Permit does not authorize the discharge of processing wastes from mobile and

shorebased dischargers within 0.5 nmi miles of the baseline or base point of Steller

sea lion haulout areas in St. Paul and St. George. Some sea lion contact with

seafood processing waste may occur during foraging periods and during travel to

and from rookeries and haulouts. The discharged effluent is not expected to

contain wastes that are toxic or have the potential to bioaccumulate. The

discharge could potentially contain processing equipment (e.g., ear plugs, rubber

gloves, and rubber packing bands) that could harm foraging animals if ingested;

however, the processors are not authorized to discharge such equipment and are

required to implement an inspection program to reduce/eliminate the possibility of 

the discharge of such equipment. Overall impact from the discharge is unlikely to

have a direct effect on Steller sea lions [Pribilof OCDE 1998].
9

Most seafood processing in the Pribilof Islands occurs from January to March and

September to December. Sea lion occupation of rookeries during the breeding

season is typically limited to the period extending from late May to early July. 

Potential contact with waste discharges would be reduced during the breeding

season [Pribilof OCDE 1998].

The domestic wastewater discharge from the city of St. Paul has the potential to

impact the Steller sea lions since the discharge is a year-round occurrence. 

However, since the discharged wastewaters are quickly diluted in the high energy

zone of the Bering Sea, direct effects are unlikely. 

Constituents in the domestic wastewater effluent could possibly attach to seafood

wastes. If these combined wastes are deposited on the shoreline, there may be

direct contact by sea lions. There is no information at this time that organic

compounds or pathogens are attaching to the seafood waste or that seafood waste

is being deposited onto the shoreline in significant amounts or for long enough

periods for marine mammals or seabirds to be exposed to it. EPA and NMFS are

discussing possible cooperative efforts to test for organic compounds or pathogens

during the effective period of this Permit.

4.3 Northern Fur Seal Critical Habitat: Rookeries and Haulout Areas

Historically, the Pribilof Islands were declared a special reserve for the

preservation of northern fur seals under the Fur Seal Act of 1910; it was unlawful

for any person to even land on these islands. Pursuant to the Fur Seal Act

Amendments of 1983, activities on the Pribilof Islands must be consistent with the

purposes of conserving, managing, and protecting fur seals and other wildlife [16

U.S.C. § 1161 et seq.].

4.3.1 Rookeries

Waters within 0.5 nmi of rookeries of the northern fur sea during the period May 1

through December 1 are excluded from coverage by the Permit.

Rookeries of the Pribilof Island northern fur seals are on both St. Paul and St.

George Islands. The Pribilof Island stock was declared depleted under the Marine

Mammal Protection Act in June 1988. The rookeries in the Pribilof Islands are

used by 72% of the world population and 99% of the North American stock of

northern fur seals [Biological Assessment 1998].
10

4.3.2 Haulouts

Waters within 0.5 nmi of haulouts of the northern fur sea during the period May 1

through December 1 are excluded from coverage by the Permit.

The majority of adult northern fur seals are found on land between June and

October. Rookeries and haulouts are not designated as separate areas on St. Paul

and St. George Islands. The rookeries and haulouts are mainly found on the

westward shore south of Zapadni Point, on the west and south sides of Reef Point,

on the southern shore between Reef Point and Polovina Point, on the northern,

eastern, and southern sides of Northeast Point, and Sea Lion Rock.

4.3.3 Potential Impacts

Northern fur seals may come into contact with discharged seafood wastes. Due to

the differences in timing of the majority of seafood waste discharges (November

through March) and the northern fur seal breeding period (June through October),

the potential for significant direct effects is limited. In addition, the Permit does

not authorize discharges from new shorebased or any mobile processing facilities

within 0.5 nmi offshore of land owned and managed by NMFS for the protection

of fur seal rookeries and haulout areas during the period extending from May 1

through December 1. Because of the seasonality of the discharges, direct contact

with process waste discharges during the breeding period is further reduced

[Pribilof OCDE 1998].

Some fur seal contact with seafood processing waste may occur during foraging

periods and during travel to and from rookeries during the king crab season in

September. The discharged effluent is not expected to contain wastes that are

toxic or have the potential to bioaccumulate. The discharge could potentially

contain processing equipment (e.g., ear plugs, rubber gloves, and rubber packing

bands) that could harm foraging animals if ingested; however, the processors are

not authorized to discharge such equipment and are required to implement an

inspection program to reduce/eliminate possibility of the discharge of such

equipment [Pribilof OCDE 1998].

The domestic wastewater discharge from the city of St. Paul has the potential to

impact the fur seals since the discharge is a year-round occurrence. However,

since the discharged wastewaters are quickly diluted in the high energy zone of the

Bering Sea, direct effects are unlikely. 

Constituents in the domestic wastewater effluent could possibly attach to seafood

wastes. If these combined wastes are deposited on the shoreline, there may be

direct contact by sea lions. There is no information at this time that organic
11

compounds or pathogens are attaching to the seafood waste or that seafood waste

is being deposited onto the shoreline in significant amounts or for long enough

periods for marine mammals or seabirds to be exposed to it. EPA and NMFS are

discussing possible cooperative efforts to test for organic compounds or pathogens

during the effective period of this Permit.

4.4 Marine Birds, Shorebirds, and Waterfowl: Nesting Areas and Critical Habitat

Seabirds (e.g., marine birds, shorebirds, and waterfowl) are significant components of the

marine ecosystem of the eastern Bering Sea shelf and are highly vulnerable to human

impacts. One of the largest seabird colonies in the world is found in the Pribilof Islands,

consisting of approximately 2.5 million seabirds belonging to 12 different species [U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service 1988]. The Alaska Maritime Refuge provides protection for

approximately 90 percent of the world’s red-legged kittiwake population and Alaska’s

largest murre colony [Pribilof OCDE 1998].

4.4.1 Nesting Areas

Most seabirds return to breeding colonies in April and lay eggs in May, June, and

July. While seabirds are rearing young, foraging is limited to nearshore waters. 

Most seabirds leave their breeding colonies by October. Many of the marine birds

nest in the Pribilof Islands wherever there are suitable sites, usually cliffs. 

Shorebirds are generally restricted to shoreline margins (bays, beaches, lagoons,

and mudflats) and are primarily migratory using the coastal areas for feeding,

resting, and breeding grounds. Waterfowl include ducks and geese, and during the

fall migration, the numbers of ducks increase dramatically as local populations are

supplemented by ducks from the north and west. Most diving ducks arrive on

their breeding grounds by late May, with the nesting period generally extending

through June, with brood rearing and molting occurring during July and August. 

The majority of the diving ducks are residents of Alaskan coastal areas in winter

[Pribilof OCDE 1998].

4.4.2 Habitat Areas

Important habitats for marine birds, shorebirds, and waterfowl include nearshore

waters, lagoons (e.g., Salt Lagoon), beaches, and rocky cliffs that serve as feeding

and breeding areas. Critical habitat for nesting seabirds has been purchased by the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service along the western shore of St. Paul Island, along

much of the shoreline of St. George Island and Otter and Walrus Islands and have

been incorporated into the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge [Pribilof

OCDE 1998].
12

4.4.3 Potential Impacts

Any potential impacts of seafood processing and related activities may be 

minimized for species who do not breed in the Pribilof Islands. For seabird species

that breed in the Pribilof Islands and are present during processing periods, the

conditions in the permit are designed to limit the potential for direct contact, such

as not allowing floating wastes or wastes on the shoreline which could attract

seabirds. Discharges from the stationary outfalls, including processing wastes,

domestic wastewater, and cleaning solutions, may expose species that prefer

nearshore marine waters to those kinds of wastes. The discharges are not,

however, expected to contain pollutants at toxic levels or to result in adverse

effects.

Scientific literature has considered the impacts of seafood wastes discharges on the

food supply, food web, community composition, and interspecies dynamics of 

seabirds. Seafood wastes as well as offal and garbage favor the expansion of large,

opportunistic birds, such as gulls, to the detriment of smaller seabirds and their

nestlings (EPA Fact Sheet 1994].

The domestic wastewater discharge from the city of St. Paul has a small potential

to impact the seabirds since the discharge is a year-round occurrence. However,

since the discharged wastewaters are quickly diluted in the high energy zone of the

Bering Sea, direct effects are unlikely. Also the seabirds would most likely to be

attracted to seafood wastes solids being discharged rather than to the domestic

wastewater discharge.

Constituents in the domestic wastewater effluent could possibly attach to seafood

wastes. If these combined wastes are deposited on the shoreline, there may be

direct contact by sea lions. There is no information at this time that organic

compounds or pathogens are attaching to the seafood waste or that seafood waste

is being deposited onto the shoreline in significant amounts or for long enough

periods for marine mammals or seabirds to be exposed to it. EPA and NMFS are

discussing possible cooperative efforts to test for organic compounds or pathogens

during the effective period of this Permit.

5 The Basis for the Exclusions from Coverage of the Permit

5.1 Ocean Discharge Criteria

Under the requirements of the Ocean Discharge Criteria for preventing unreasonable

degradation of ocean waters [CWA § 403], EPA must give due consideration to various
13

criteria [40 CFR § 125.122] in deciding whether to issue a permit such as the following:

The composition and vulnerability of the biological communities which may be

exposed to . . . pollutants, including the presence of unique species or communities

of species, the presence of species identified as endangered or threatened pursuant

to the Endangered Species Act, or the presence of those species critical to the

structure of function of the ecosystem, such as those important for the food chain;

The importance of the receiving water area to the surrounding biological

community, including the presence of spawning sites, nursery/forage areas,

migratory pathways, or areas necessary for other functions or critical stages in the

life cycle of an organism; 

and

The existence of special aquatic sites including, but not limited to, marine

sanctuaries and refuges, parks national and historic monuments, national seashores,

wilderness, and coral reefs[.]

The ODCE concludes that direct effects of the discharge of seafood processing solids and

wastewaters and domestic wastewaters on the marine environment do not contain toxic

pollutants that may bioaccumulate in aquatic organisms and therefore do not pose a longterm threat to the health of aquatic organisms or humans.

Solid wastes have not been observed to accumulate and persist in the vicinity of seafood

processing waste discharges from either the stationary outfalls or mobile vessels.

Disinfectants used during seafood processing cleanup are potentially toxic constituents

that will be discharged from seafood processing facilities. Hazardous household products

are also potentially toxic constituents that are discharged from domestic wastewater

sources through the stationary outfalls. However, it is expected that the concentration of

disinfectants and hazardous household products will be reduced due to dilution with other

wastewater prior to discharge and that these constituents will not be present at toxic

concentrations following discharge. In addition, all seafood processing permittees covered

under the Permit will be required to use best management practices to prevent pollutants

from entering the environment. The city of St. Paul will be required to investigate and

reduce or eliminate hazardous household products used in the community. 

5.2 Endangered Species Act [16 U.S.C. § 1531 et al.]

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) and its implementing regulations [50 CFR Part 402] 

require EPA to ensure, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior or Commerce,

that any action authorized by EPA is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of
14

any endangered or threatened species or adversely affect any critical habitat [40 CFR §

122.49(c)].

A list of endangered and threatened species and species of concern in the Pribilof Islands

was requested and provided to EPA by NMFS and USFWS. EPA prepared a biological

assessment because of the listings of several species.

EPA will submit to NMFS and USFWS, for their respective concurrences, the prepared

Biological Assessment (BA) and the draft Permit. Based on the BA, EPA has determined

that this Permit is not likely to adversely affect the listed species. The protection measures

in the Permit for the species of concern prohibit alterations of limited, high quality habitat

occupied and utilized during mating, birthing, and raising young from the discharges of

pollutants by seafood processing and domestic wastewater discharges. EPA has further

concluded that the discharges authorized by the Permit are not likely to have a direct

effect on any endangered or threatened species or their critical habitat.

5.3. Marine Mammal Protection Act [16 U.S.C. § 1361 et seq.]

Section 2 of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) states that marine mammals

are resources of great international significance, aesthetic, recreational, and economic, and

should be protected, conserved, and encouraged to develop optimum populations. In

particular, efforts should be made to protect the rookeries, mating ground, and areas of

similar significance for each species of marine mammal from the adverse effect of human

actions. 

5.4 EPA Determination

EPA concludes that, based on the Ocean Discharge Criteria Evaluation and the

responsibilities and obligations EPA has to comply with the ESA and MMPA, the 0.5 nmi

exclusion zones around the rookeries and haulouts of northern fur seals, seabird nesting

areas, and the Alaska Maritime Wildlife Refuge are responsive to the concerns of

endangered, threatened, and depleted species.

The 0.5 nmi year-round critical habitat for Steller sea lions is regulated in FR 58(165):

45269-4586, August 27, 1993, where it states that designated haulout areas have a 3000 ft

protective zone landward, overhead, and seaward. Even though the requirements do not

refer to the discharge of wastes and wastewaters from any sources, these waters are state

and federally managed to protect the Steller sea lions.

The 0.5 nmi zone is excluded for discharges from seafood processing (except for the

existing stationary outfalls) beginning May 1 and ending September 30 for critical habitat 
15

and nesting areas for seabirds and beginning May 1 and ending December 1 for rookeries

and haulouts for fur seals because that is when the seals and seabirds are most likely to be

present.

While there is no regulatory or other published basis for or against the 0.5 nmi exclusion

zone related to seabirds and fur seals for discharges from other sources than the stationary

outfalls, EPA considers the exclusion zone for these species to be consistent with the need

to protect the receiving waters important to biological resources and consistent with

EPA’s obligation to evaluate necessary measures to take in order to not adversely affect

endangered, threatened, or depleted species by EPA’s permit actions.

6 THE BASIS FOR LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

6.1 Limitations

6.1.1 Technology-based Limitations

In accordance with the designation of Alaskan seafood processors (except those in

Petersburg, Cordova, Anchorage, Juneau, Ketchikan, and Kodiak) as “remote,”

the Permit requires the least stringent technology-based effluent limitations in the

U.S. seafood processing industry. These technology-based limitations require that

process waste solids shall be ground to no greater than 0.5 inches in any dimension

prior to discharge. No additional technology-based treatment is required of

process wastewaters. The grind and discharge effluent limitation appears to be

appropriate for the treatment of seafood wastes in the Pribilof Islands.

6.1.2 Water Quality-Based Limitations

Water quality-based limitations require site-specific analyses of the dispersive and

assimilative capacities of a particular receiving water for particular quantity and

quality of a pollutant. Adequate dilution is important to the success of a general

NPDES permit in ensuring water quality and protecting the environment in

receiving waters. Dilution depends upon the physical and hydrodynamic

characteristics of a receiving water.

As part of water quality-based limitations, there is to be no accumulation of

seafood processing wastes on the seafloor, no accumulation of seafood wastes on

the shoreline, or floating solids, film, or sheens on the sea surface.

To date, the discharge of ground processing wastes has not resulted in any

persistent accumulated residues at the terminus of the stationary outfalls, most

likely due to extremely active hydrodynamic conditions near the outfalls. Although
16

oceanographic studies have focused on many physical aspects of the Bering Sea,

limited studies have been conducted on the nearshore coastal waters of the Pribilof

Islands. However, a recent study suggest the presence of a hydrographic front

around St. Paul and St. George Islands [Stabeno and Schumacker 1997].

The Stabeno and Schumacher 1997 study, even though very limited, found that the

discharges from the stationary outfalls at East Landing are taken by the tidal

currents in a clockwise direction southwest around Reef Point and then northnortheast from the coast of St. Paul Island. Current observations show that the

flow around the island decreases in strength with distance away from shore. There 

are also occurrences of current reversals caused by strong wind events. At St.

George Island a similar flow was demonstrated and suggests a connection exists

between the two islands. 

At various times crab wastes have been observed on the shoreline at East Landing. 

These occurrences usually were reportedly a result of broken outfalls or winds

blowing on-shore of ground crab wastes from the outfall discharges as well as

larger pieces of the crab carapaces, possibly resulting from crab fishing boats

dumping dead loss overboard. At St. George there was a reported occurrence of

crab waste during the processing season of 1997 when strong winds were from the

West. In all cases, the crab wastes were either collected and disposed of or

subsequent tidal action cleared the wastes from the shorelines. 

Specific water quality-based limitations for seafood processing or domestic

wastewater discharges are not included in the Permit since no pollutants of

concern were detected in the sampling and testing in quantities to cause significant

impact on the marine environment. Pollutants are discharged in quantities unlikely

to be toxic or have the potential to bioaccumulate. Narrative water quality

requirements include seafloor, sea surface, and shoreline monitoring programs. 

The State will be requested to certify that the requirements of the Permit meet

water quality standards. 

6.2 Monitoring Requirements

6.2.1 Effluent Monitoring

! During the effective period of the Permit, shorebased processors

discharging through the stationary outfalls on St. Paul and St. George will

be required to participate in an effluent monitoring program by sampling

their effluent as follows:
17

Conventional pollutants -- Four times during each winter crab processing

season and one time during the summer halibut season in the third year of

the Permit;

Metals, Mercury, and Volatile Organic Compounds -- one time during the

winter crab season in the third year of the Permit.

! During the effective period of the Permit, mobile processing vessels

discharging within three nmi miles of the Pribilof Islands will be required to

participate in an effluent monitoring program by testing their effluent as

follows:

Conventional pollutants -- One time during each winter crab processing

season;

Metals, Mercury, and Volatile Organic Compounds -- one time during the

winter crab season in the third year of the Permit.

! Water quality, sediment chemistry, and benthic monitoring will only be

required if there is a significant change in the character of the effluent being

discharged or if there is an accumulation of seafloor wastes.

A waiver to the above effluent monitoring program for mobile vessels may be

approved temporarily on a case-by-case basis when getting samples off the vessel

is not possible due to inclement and dangerous weather. The permittee is to notify

EPA if such hazardous conditions occur. The notification should also give a

tentative schedule for when the sampling can be done.

Conventional pollutants consist of BOD, TSS, oil and grease, total phosphorous,

total residual chlorine, temperature, pH, chemical oxygen demand, total organic

carbon, and ammonia-N. In addition, flow measurements will be required to

determine the mass loadings. Sources of domestic wastewater will also test for

fecal coliform bacteria but not for total residual chlorine. Metals, including

mercury, and VOCs will be tested.

If there is a significant change in the effluent from any tested source that causes

concern, EPA and ADEC may determine that additional sampling and testing is

necessary to protect the marine environment.

Sampling and testing has taken place during only one winter crab processing

season and one summer halibut processing season. This one set of data has 
18

provided baseline information concerning the effluent characterization; however,

an on-going confirmation of the discharges needs to be carried out to protect the

marine environment from the potential impact of pollutants.

6.2.2 Discharge Monitoring

! Each processor will be required to verify daily that wastes are being ground

to 0.5 inch or less prior to discharge and to record each inspection of this

observation and report any occurrences in the quarterly report that indicate

that the grinder(s) is/are not grinding to 0.5 inch or less.

! Each processor will be required to implement and record a daily visual

inspection of the sump or other place of observation for, and removal of,

gloves, earplugs, rubber packing bands, or other equipment used in

processing seafood that may find its way into the discharge stream. 

Permittees are to report any occurrences on the quarterly report.

6.2.3 Seafloor Monitoring

Shorebased facilities on St. Paul and St. George will be required to conduct an

inspection of the condition and integrity of the outfall lines during the second and

fourth years of the Permit. While making these inspections, the divers will make

note of any seafloor waste accumulations observed during the inspection. 

Permittees must report any accumulations to EPA and ADEC who may require a

more extensive seafloor survey. Mobile vessels will not be required to conduct a

seafloor survey since previous surveys have shown that there are no accumulations

in the areas where the floating processors had been processing and discharging.

6.2.4 Sea Surface and Shoreline Monitoring

The sea surface and shoreline monitoring program is to provide daily assessments

of the conditions of the shoreline and sea surface during periods of operation and

discharge. Visual observation is the method for doing these assessments. In

addition to inspecting for seafood wastes, permittees will be required to also report

any occurrences of processing equipment found on the shoreline. Any occurrences

of seafood wastes or processing equipment will be recorded in daily logs and

reported to EPA and ADEC as outlined in the noncompliance reporting section of

the Permit.

6.2.5 Biological Monitoring

Biological monitoring, for the purposes of this Permit, is defined as observations of

the marine mammals and seabirds and their interaction with discharges from the
19

stationary outfalls or from mobile vessels which cause floating wastes on the

surface of the water or on the shoreline.

The observers, permittees or members of the community, will use the following

questions as a guide to developing a program for reporting observations: whether

or not seabirds and marine mammals are attracted to the outfalls and are seen

eating the wastes being discharged; whether or not seabirds and marine mammals

are attracted to any waste accumulations on the shoreline and are feeding on the

wastes, getting wastes on their feathers or fur; whether or not the interaction with

discharge plumes causes seabirds or marine mammals to accumulate oils on their

feathers or fur; whether or not the discharge is attracting gulls that are not usually

found in the Pribilof Islands; identification of the types of marine mammals or

seabirds, how many, when, where, behavior; and what were the weather

conditions, wind direction, tides, or other pertinent information.

This type of observation should be done in conjunction with the shoreline and sea

surface monitoring program, including the safety provisions. Any observations of

sea lions, fur seals, or seabirds near the outfalls, mobile vessels, or shorelines will

be submitted with the quarterly reports. Video tapes and photographs are good

methods of recording the biological monitoring.

7 POLLUTANTS ALLOWED TO BE DISCHARGED

7.1 Discharges Covered by the Permit

7.1.1 Seafood Processing Wastes and Wastewaters

Discharges from seafood processing facilities are classed as solid wastes or

wastewaters. Solid wastes consist primarily of unused portions of fish and shellfish

that have been processed. The unused portions of processed raw fish and shellfish

can include heads, skin, scales, viscera, fins, and shells discarded during cleaning

and butchering operations. Wastewaters include water and disinfectants used to

maintain sanitary conditions in compliance with requirements for the production of

food for human consumption. 

Major pollutants include TSS (including certain “residues” under the Alaska State

Water Quality Standards), BOD, non-petroleum oil and grease, and nutrients. 

These process waste and wastewater pollutants result from the butchering of

seafood and, along with color, turbidity, pH, and temperature, may differ from the

constituency of the receiving waters.
20

7.1.2 Processing Disinfectants

Processing disinfectants are authorized for discharge under the Permit. Sodium

hypochlorite and ammonium chloride are the primary disinfectants used in the

control of microbial contamination of seafood processing equipment and

containers. As a result of the periodic use of these disinfectants used to sanitize

equipment, free chorine may be present in residual amounts. During the winter

1997 monitoring, the effluent of nine facilities was tested using a HACH model

CN-66 Colorimeter. The results show that total chlorine residual was present in

amounts from nondetect to 0.79 mg/L (the higher number was from a cleanup

discharge). While disinfectants are potentially toxic constituents, the concentration

of disinfectants will be reduced due to dilution with other wastewaters prior to

discharge and in the receiving waters, and will not be present at toxic

concentrations following discharge.

7.1.3 Gray Water and Domestic Wastewater

Gray water (including showers, baths, laundries, sinks, kitchens, galleys, or other

domestic sources which do not contain human body wastes or urine) from mobile

vessels or vessels discharging through the stationary outfalls, may be discharged

without treatment. Sanitary wastes (human body wastes from toilets, urinals) must

be treated appropriately via approved marine sanitation devices, the package

treatment plant (bunkhouse/galley on St. George), or the city of St. Paul’s septic

tank treatment system.

Mobile vessel permittees will be asked to provide more information about their

marine sanitation devices (MSDs): when certified, type, capacity, certification

levels of TSS and fecal coliform bacteria. Discharge from MSDs is prohibited in

U.S. territorial waters (within the three mile limit).

The city of St. Paul collects domestic wastewater which is treated in a series of

septic tanks before discharge through a stationary outfall. The city’s discharge has

been sampled and tested three times. The results indicate that the septic tanks are

removing substantially all floating and settleable solids prior to discharge. 

The city is required to develop and implement a household/community hazardous

product information program to reduce and eliminate the use of hazardous

products which most likely are the source of the two chemicals found in previous

VOC sampling--toluene and 1,4-dichlorobenzene--as well as other potentially

hazardous materials. After the city has implemented the hazardous product

program, testing for VOCs will be required during the third year of the Permit.
21

Previous testing results of VOCs detected two manufactured chemicals, toluene

and 1,4-dichlorobenzene, were present during the sampling. The six toluene

samples taken during the three monitoring periods ranged from 0.00258 mg/L to

0.242 mg/L and the five samples tested for 1,4-dichlorobenzene ranged from

0.00115 mg/L to 0.024 mg/L. The city will sample East Landing for VOCs during

the third year of the permit and if the VOC sample shows toluene in excess of 0.09

mg/L and 1,4-dichlorobenzene in excess of 0.011 mg/L, the city will be required to

sample at the lift stations and to resample at East Landing to try to find the

source(s) of these two chemicals. 

State of Alaska regulations [18 AAC 72.040} allow ADEC to modify the

minimum treatment requirements from secondary to primary for domestic

wastewater discharge to marine water upon approval of the design and

construction of the system. The city of St. Paul presumedly received this waiver

when the State approved the design of the system to be constructed in 1988. The

waiver allowed a “primary” treatment system which substantially removes all

floating and settleable solids before discharge. Through the permit certification

(CWA § 401) process, ADEC will need to grant the continuing waiver from

secondary treatment.

The city of St. Paul has requested ADEC to issue a mixing zone for fecal coliform

bacteria in order to comply with state water quality standards.

7.1.4. Other Wastewaters

Other wastewaters, including cooling water, boiler water, freshwater pressure

relief water, refrigeration condensate, water used to transfer seafood to the facility,

and live tank water, are authorized for discharge without treatment under the

Permit.

7.2 Discharges not Authorized by the Permit

The Permit does not authorize discharge of any pollutants which are not specified as

allowable under the Permit. This includes, but is not limited to, petroleum hydrocarbons

and toxic pollutants listed in 40 CFR § 401.15. Vessels must comply with 33 CFR Part

151 (“Vessels carrying oil, noxious liquid substances, garbage, municipal or commercial

wastes, and ballast water”). 

Discharge of wastes and wastewaters from the production of surimi and/or fish paste

products that are washed repeatedly in water then pressed to remove residual waste; from

the processing fillets from pollock, cod, or any type of finfish; or from the processing of

seafood wastes into fish or bone meal are not authorized under this Permit.
22

8 SPECIAL CONDITIONS

8.1 Vessel Location Reporting

Processing vessels are not authorized to discharge within three nmi of Walrus Island and

0.5 nmi of major designated haulout areas of the Steller sea lion and the Alaska Maritime

Wildlife Refuge. In addition, vessels are not authorized to discharge within 0.5 nmi of

northern fur seal rookeries and haulouts during the period of May 1 to December 1 and

bird nesting areas and critical habitats during the period of May 1 through September 30.

Processing vessels may anchor within the 0.5 nmi mile exclusion zone when conditions

exist that would threaten the safety of the vessel or there is no other location available for

safety considerations. As required by the Permit, vessels must notify EPA and the city of

St. Paul or the city of St. George, and the respective harbor masters when entering into

the exclusion zone

8.2 Existing Stationary Outfalls

Discharges for the currently existing stationary outfalls, previously permitted under the

1989 General NPDES Permit for Seafood Processors in Alaska, will be allowed to

continue provided there is no evidence of wastes on the sea surface or shoreline or

accumulated on the seafloor, the facilities comply with the shoreline and sea surface and

seafloor monitoring program, and results from effluent testing do not indicate a significant

change in the characterization of the discharge or any other indication that the discharge is

adversely affecting the marine environment.

8.3 Ocean Disposal

Halibut and crab wastes ground to 0.5 inch and unground snail shells may be disposed of

by dumping the wastes into depths of at least 45-50 fathoms and at least seven nmi west of

St. Paul and at least three nmi west of St. George. Permittees must keep a log to be

submitted with the quarterly report of the disposal operations.

8.4 Discharge Outfall location and Condition

8.4.1 Stationary Outfall Depth

Facilities or vessels shall discharge seafood processing wastes through stationary

outfalls that are at least 15 feet below the sea surface at MLLW. 
23

8.4.2 Mobile Vessels

Vessels shall discharge seafood processing wastes at least three feet below the sea

surface at MLLW (except for mobile vessels that have through-the-hull discharge

points).

8.4.3 Outfalls

There shall be no discharge if the outfall line is severed, fails, leaks, or is displaced

from the design specifications or location.

8.5 New Facilities

Any new applicants wishing to establish a processing facility on St. Paul or St. George or

to process within three nmi of the Pribilof Islands must meet the requirement of no

discharge with 0.5 nmi mile of the Steller sea lion haulouts and Alaska Maritime Wildlife

Refuge year round; the northern fur seal rookeries and haulouts during the period of 

May 1 to December 1; and bird nesting areas and habitats during the period of May 1

through September 30.

New applicants must submit an NOI 60 days prior to beginning operations in the Pribilof

Islands. The applicant must receive a letter of authorization before discharging within

three nmi of the Pribilof Islands. Discharges of wastes and wastewaters from the

production of surimi and/or fish paste products that are washed repeatedly in water then

pressed to remove residual wastes; from the processing of fillets from pollock or any type

of cod; and from the processing of seafood wastes into fish or bone meal cannot be

covered by the Pribilof general permit and the applicant must apply for an individual

permit. 

8.6 Pollution Prevention and Best Management Practices

It is the national policy that, whenever feasible, pollution should be prevented or reduced

at the source, that pollution which cannot be prevented should be recycled in an

environmentally safe manner, that pollution which cannot be prevented or recycled should

be treated in an environmentally safe manner, and that disposal or release into the

environment should be employed only as a last resort and should be conducted in an

environmentally safe manner [Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 13101 et

seq.].

Permittees shall discharge from the facility or vessel in accordance with best 

management practices which address the provisions of the Pollution Prevention Act.

Best Management Practices (BMPs) are to control or abate the discharge of pollutants in

accordance with 40 CFR § 122.44(k). In-plant management of water and materials has
24

been found to be central in waste management efforts. Materials accounting, audits of inplant utilization of water and materials, and best management practices are recommended

as the profitable approach to waste management in seafood processing plants. The Permit

requires the development and implementation of BMPs which prevent or minimize the

generation and release of pollutants to receiving waters. Mobile vessels operating and

discharging more than 0.5 nmi from shore can implement BMPs which minimize process

waste solids and disperse process wastes through mobility. Shorebased facilities can

implement BMPs which focus upon the minimization of process waste solids.

BMPs, however, need to go beyond the reduction of seafood processing wastes. The use

of disinfectants and other products on-board a vessel or at a shorebased facility should be

reviewed for optimum use without over-disinfecting or over-use, and the disposal of such

products and their containers should be considered a priority under the BMPs and

pollution prevention program. Seafood processors are required to implement a pest (e.g.,

rat) control program under local, state, and federal rules; that same program shall become

part of the BMPs. Good housekeeping, use of “green” products, low phosphate

detergents, grease traps in galleys, and employee training (e.g., keeping gloves, ear plugs,

rubber packing bands, and other processing equipment out of the discharge) will provide

the permittees with a means to prevent unwanted pollution and a discharge that may not

be in compliance with Permit requirements and/or Alaska State Water Quality Standards. 

8.7 State Water Quality Standards

All discharges shall be in compliance with Alaska Water Quality Standards [18 Alaska

Administrative Code Part 70]

9 REPORTING

9.1 Quarterly Reporting

Permittees shall report on a quarterly basis: reports are due by the end of the month

following any calendar quarter processing occurs in the Pribilof Islands and authorized by

this Permit.

The quarterly report will include location of vessels processing within three nmi of the

Pribilof Islands, both by GPS and landmarks or a map showing locations; all seafood

processors shall report processing data, observations of shoreline, sea surface, biological

monitoring, processing equipment, and grinding size inspections. 

9.2 Non-Compliance Reporting

The following occurrence shall be reported by telephone to EPA and ADEC within 24

hours from the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances: endangerment to
25

human health or the environmental; unanticipated bypass; an upset; persistent

environmental effects, including processing wastes on the shoreline or floating scum or

solids on the receiving waters; and any problems with the outfalls, including breakage or

dislocation.. All other instances of noncompliance shall be reported with the quarterly

report, including finding processing equipment in the discharge or on the shoreline,

observations of seabirds, fur seals, and sea lions interacting with discharges. Written

reports will required on a case-by-case basis when wastes on the shoreline are reported or

when breakages or other problems with the outfalls are reported.

10 OTHER REQUIREMENTS WHEN ISSUING A PERMIT

10.1 Coastal Zone Management Act [16 U.S.C. § 1451 et seq.]

The Coastal Zone Management Act and its implementing regulations [15 CFR Part 930]

prohibit EPA from issuing a permit for an activity affecting land or water use in the coastal

zone until EPA applies for certification that the proposed activity complies with the State

Coastal Zone Management Program, and the State or its designated agency issues a

determination that the Permit complies with the State Coastal Zone Management

Program. EPA will submit the proposed permit to the State of Alaska, Office of the

Governor, Division of Governmental Coordination, to ensure that the Permit complies

with this requirement.

10.2 State Certification of the Permit

Section 301(b)(1)(C) of the Clean Water Act requires that an NPDES permit contain

conditions which ensure compliance with applicable State water quality standards or

limitations. Section 401 of the Act requires that states certify that federally issued permits

are in compliance with state law. No permits can be issued until the requirements of CWA

§ 401 are satisfied. EPA is requesting ADEC to review and provide appropriate

certification to the draft general NPDES permit for the Pribilof Islands, pursuant to 40

CFR § 124.53.

10.3 Presidential Oversight of Federal Regulations [Executive Order 12866]

The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from the review

requirements of Executive Order 12866 providing for presidential oversight of the

regulatory process pursuant to Section 6 of that order.

10.4 Paperwork Reduction Act [44 U.S.C. § 3501 et seq.]

EPA has reviewed the requirements imposed on regulated facilities in the Permit under the

Paperwork Reduction Act. Most of the information collection requirements have already

been approved by the Office of Management and Budget in submissions made for the

NPDES permit program.
26

10.5 The Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. § 553 et seq.]

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., a Federal agency must

prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis “for any proposed rule” for which the

agency “is required by section 553 of [the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)], or any

other law, to publish general notice of proposed rulemaking.” The RFA exempts from this

requirement any rule that the issuing agency certifies “will not, if promulgated, have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.” EPA has

concluded that NPDES general permits are permits under the APA and thus not subject to

APA rulemaking requirements or the RFA. Notwithstanding that general permits are not

subject to the RFA, EPA has determined that this general permit, if issued, will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

11 DEFINITIONS and ACRONYMS

AAC means Alaska Administrative Code.

ADEC means Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation.

Bypass means the intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of a treatment

facility.

CFR means the Code of Federal Regulations.

Coastal zone means the waters within three nautical miles of the Pribilof Islands.

Cooling water means once-through non-contact cooling water.

CWA means the Clean Water Act.

Discharge of a pollutant means any addition of any "pollutant" or combination of

pollutants to "waters of the United States" from any "point source".

Domestic wastewater means water borne human waste or gray water.

EPA means the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Exclusion zone means within one-half nmi of areas of special concerns or in the cases of

Steller sea lion rookeries, 3 nmi. 

GPS means Global Positioning System.
27

Gray water means materials discharged from sinks, safety showers, eye-wash stations,

hand-washing stations, galley, laundries, bath, and shower wastewater which do not

contain human body wastes.

Irreparable harm means significant undesirable effects occurring after the date of permit

issuance which will not be reversed after cessation or modification of the discharge.

Marine environment means that territorial seas, the contiguous zone and the oceans.

Marine sanitation device includes any equipment for installation on board a vessel which

is designed to receive, retain, treat, or discharge sewage, or any process to treat such

sewage.

MLLW means mean lower low water.

MSD means marine sanitation device.

NMFS means United States National Marine Fisheries Service.

NOI means a "Notice of Intent," that is, an application, to be authorized to discharge

under a general NPDES permit.

Pollutant means dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, filter backwash, sewage,

garbage, sewage sludge, munitions, chemical wastes, biological materials, radioactive

materials, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt and industrial,

municipal, and agricultural waste discharged into water.

Seafood means the raw material, including freshwater and saltwater fish and shellfish, to

be processed, in the form in which it is received at the processing plant.

Seafood process waste means the waste fluids, organs, flesh, bones, woody fiber and

chitinous shells produced in the conversion of aquatic animals and plants from a raw form

to a marketable form.

Severe property damage means substantial physical damage to property, damage to the

treatment facilities which causes them to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent

loss of natural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a

bypass. Severe property damage does not mean economic loss caused by delays in

production.

Sewage means human body wastes and the wastes from toilets and other receptacles

intended to receive or retain body wastes.
28

Unreasonable degradation of the marine environment means: (1) Significant adverse

changes in ecosystem diversity, productivity and stability of the biological community

within the area of discharge and surrounding biological communities, (2) Threat to human

health through direct exposure to pollutants or through consumption of exposed aquatic

organisms, or (3) Loss of esthetic, recreational, scientific or economic values which is

unreasonable in relation to the benefit derived from the discharge.

Upset means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary

noncompliance with technology-based permit effluent limitations because of factors

beyond the reasonable control of the permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance

to the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities,

inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive maintenance, or careless or improper

operation.

U.S.C. means United States Code.

USFWS means United States Fish and Wildlife Service.

Water depth means the depth of the water between the surface and the seafloor as

measured at mean lower low water (0.0).

12 REFERENCE

EPA. Development document for effluent limitations guidelines and new source

performance standards for the fish meal, salmon, bottom fish, clam, oyster, sardine,

seafood processing industry point source category. U.S. Environment Protection Agency. 

EPA 440/1-75/041a. September 1975

EPA. Effluent guidelines and standards; canned and preserved seafood processing point

source category; suspension of regulations. Federal Register 45(98): 32675-32676, 

May 19, 1980.

EPA. Seafood processing study: Executive summary. U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Water. EPA 440/1-80/020. September 1980.

EPA, Jones & Stokes, and SAIC. Addendum to the Ocean Discharge Criteria Evaluation

for the Propose Pribilof Island Seafood Processing General NPDES Permit for the City of

St. Paul Domestic Wastewater Discharge. September 1998.

EPA, Jones & Stokes, and SAIC. Biological assessment of the seafood processing

discharges on threatened, endangered and special status species of the Pribilof Islands,

Alaska. August 1998.
29

EPA, Jones & Stokes, and SAIC. Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Pribilof

Islands Seafood Processing General NPDES Permit. August 1998.

EPA, Jones & Stokes, and SAIC. Ocean Discharge Criteria Evaluation for the Propose

Pribilof Island Seafood Processing General NPDES Permit. August 1998.

Federal Register. Listing of Steller Sea Lions as Threatened Under the Endangered

Species Act. Vol. 55, No. 227. April 5, 1990. pp. 49204-49237.

Federal Register. Designated Critical Habitat; Steller Sea Lion. Vol. 58, No. 134, August

27, 1993, pp. 358-35900.

Federal Register. Change in Listing Status of Steller Sea Lions Under the Endangered

Species Act. Vol. 62, No. 86, May 5, 1997.

Jordan. Reassessment of effluent limitations guidelines and new source performance

standards for the canned and preserved seafood processing point source category. 

Prepared by Edward C. Jordan Company for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Effluent Guidelines Division. December 1997.

NMFS. Final recovery plan for Steller sea lions. National Marine Fisheries Service,

NOAA. January 1993.

PPRC. Pollution prevention opportunities in the fish processing industry. Pacific

Northwest Pollution Prevention Research Center, Seattle, Washington.