Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0074-1296
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2004-09-02T04:00Z

FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
1
of
33
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing
(
40
CFR
407)
Detailed
Investigation
for
2004/
2005
Planning
Process
Executive
Summary
During
the
Screening
Level
Review
phase
of
the
2004/
2005
planning
process,
canned
and
preserved
fruits
and
vegetables
processing
was
one
of
eight
industrial
categories
identified
solely
through
Factor
4
concerns.
Issues
driving
the
concerns
include
1)
discharges
of
nutrients
and
conventional
pollutants,
2)
no
limits
for
biochemical
oxygen
demand
(
BOD),
and
3)
improvements
in
industry
capacity
to
control
discharges.
Based
on
information
reported
to
the
Toxic
Release
Inventory
(
TRI)
and
the
Permit
Compliance
System
(
PCS),
toxic
discharges
from
coal
mining
operations
are
low
relative
to
other
industrial
categories.
However,
most
of
these
pollutants
do
not
have
toxic
weighting
factors,
so
discharges
of
these
substances
cannot
be
assessed
in
terms
of
potential
risk.
For
the
toxic
weighted
pound
equivalent
(
TWPE)
discharged,
a
few
facilities
generally
drive
these
discharges
for
this
industry.
In
addition,
a
number
of
potential
new
subcategories
were
identified
by
stakeholders
and
are
discussed
here.
(
Note:
the
new
subcategories
are
not
included
in
any
of
the
tables
or
analyses.)

The
information
in
the
record
at
this
time
does
not
support
a
decision
to
revise
these
effluent
guidelines.
In
the
event
that
stakeholders
provide
additional
data
and
supporting
information,
on
any
of
the
issues
identified
above,
EPA
will
reevaluate
them
at
that
time.
In
the
absence
of
revisions
to
the
effluent
guidelines,
these
concerns
could
be
addressed
through
improved
information
dissemination
and
outreach
by
EPA.
The
Agency
could
prepare
a
fact
sheet
with
answers
to
frequently
asked
questions
(
FAQs),
including
the
names
of
current
contacts
within
the
Office
of
Water.
In
addition,
the
Agency
could
announce
the
availability
of
this
fact
sheet
at
the
regular
meetings
for
permit
writers
and
pretreatment
coordinators
held
by
the
Office
of
Wastewater
Management
(
OWM)
and
through
internet
postings
and
email
alerts
to
the
Engineering
and
Analysis
Division
(
EAD)
stakeholders
mailing
list.
Finally,
due
to
the
relatively
small
number
of
facilities
discharging
the
bulk
of
the
TWPE,
EPA
could
also
provide
assistance
to
permit
writers
in
preparing
BPJ­
based
permits.

Overview
This
report
presents
information
for
the
following
topics:
Background
Industry
and
Related
Subcategories
Wastewater
Characteristics
and
Pollutant
Sources
Pollutants
Discharged
Treatment
Technology
and
Pollution
Prevention
Concerns
Identified
Pre­
Proposal
Concerns
Identified
in
Comments
to
Proposal
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
2
of
33
Additional
Concerns
Identified
Post­
Proposal
Followup
Contacts
Possible
Solutions
Attachments
provide
the
following
supporting
information:
EPA
Databases
and
References
Used
in
this
Review
Point
Source
Categories
Identified
Solely
Through
Factor
4
Guidelines
Applicability
and
Regulatory
History
PCS
Discharges
TRI
Discharges
Reported
Pollutant
Loadings
Background
In
preparation
for
proposing
the
Preliminary
Effluent
Guidelines
Program
Plan
for
2004/
2005
("
Preliminary
Plan,"
published
in
February
2004),
EPA
analyzed
four
factors
identified
in
the
draft
"
National
Strategy
for
Industrial
Clean
Water"(
Edocket
OW­
2003­
0074­
0215).
See
Attachment
A
for
more
background
about
the
304(
m)
planning
Process.
The
four
factors
focus
on:
1
Potential
impacts
to
human
health
and
the
environment.
Preliminary
results
are
summarized
in
the
"
Factor
1
Analysis:
Human
Health
and
Environmental
Impacts
 
Status
of
Screening
Level
Review
Phase"
(
Edocket
OW­
2003­
0074­
0410).
2
Identification
of
an
applicable
and
demonstrated
technology,
process
change,
or
pollution
prevention
alternative
that
can
effectively
reduce
pollutants
discharged.
Preliminary
results
are
summarized
in
the
"
Factor
2
Analysis:
Technology
Advances
and
Process
Changes
 
Status
of
Screening
Level
Review
Phase."
(
Edocket
OW­
2003­
0074­
0287).
3
Evaluation
of
the
cost,
performance,
and
affordability
of
the
technology,
process
change,
or
pollution
prevention
measures
identified
using
the
second
factor.
4
Implementation
and
efficiency
concerns.
Preliminary
results
are
presented
in
the
"
Factor
4
Analysis:
Implementation
and
Efficiency
Considerations
 
Status
of
Screening
Level
Review
Phase"
(
Edocket
OW­
2003­
0074­
0329)

When
all
of
the
results
were
integrated
prior
to
proposing
the
Preliminary
Plan,
EPA
determined
that
8
point
source
categories
with
existing
effluent
guidelines
had
been
identified
solely
through
Factor
4
concerns.
(
See
list
in
the
Attachment
B.)
In
order
to
determine
the
best
course
of
action
to
address
these
concerns,
EPA
performed
an
analysis
of
issues
and
potential
solutions
for
each
of
the
8
categories.
The
results
of
that
analysis
for
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing
are
presented
in
this
report.

Industry
and
Related
Subcategories
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
3
of
33
The
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing
point
source
category
is
regulated
at
40
CFR
407.
See
Attachment
C
for
the
applicability
and
regulatory
background.
This
point
source
category
includes
facilities
reporting
under
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(
SIC)
industry
group
203,
Canned,
Frozen,
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetables.
Specifically,
it
includes
SIC
2033
(
Canned
Fruits,
Vegetables,
Preserves,
Jams,
and
Jellies),
2034
(
Dried
and
Dehydrated
Fruits,
Vegetables,
and
Soup
Mixes),
2035
(
Pickled
Fruits
and
Vegetables,
Vegetable
Sauces,
and
Seasonings),
SIC
2037
(
Frozen
Fruits,
Fruit
Juices,
and
Vegetables),
and
SIC
2096
(
Potato
Chips,
Corn
Chips,
and
Similar
Snacks).
Juice
manufacturing
(
covered
by
SIC
2033
and
2037)
was
identified
at
a
subcategory
of
concern
during
the
Factor
4
analysis.

Based
on
comments
and
information
received
by
stakeholders,
EPA
also
evaluated
whether
it
should
consider
additional
subcategories
of
the
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetable
Processing
ELG
for
Distilled
and
Blended
Liquors,
SIC
Code
2085;
Malt
Beverages,
SIC
Code
2082;
and
Soybean
Oil
Mills,
SIC
Code
2075.
EPA
determined
it
was
appropriate
to
consider
these
industrial
operations
as
potential
new
subcategories
of
part
407
because
the
processes,
operations,
wastewaters,
and
pollutants
at
these
plants
are
similar
to
those
at
fruit
and
vegetable
processing
plants.
Each
of
these
potential
subcategories
is
discussed
in
the
Possible
Solutions
section
of
this
report.
°
SIC
2033
­
Canned
Fruits,
Vegetables,
Preserves,
Jams,
and
Jellies
Establishments
primarily
engaged
in
canning
fruits,
vegetables,
and
fruit
and
vegetable
juices;
and
in
manufacturing
catsup
and
similar
tomato
sauces,
or
natural
and
imitation
preserves,
jams,
and
jellies.

°
SIC
2034
­
Dried
and
Dehydrated
Fruits,
Vegetables,
and
Soup
Mixes
Establishments
primarily
engaged
in
sun
drying
or
artificially
dehydrating
fruits
and
vegetables,
or
in
manufacturing
packaged
soup
mixes
from
dehydrated
ingredients.

°
SIC
2035
­
Pickled
Fruits
and
Vegetables,
Vegetable
Sauces
and
Seasonings,
and
Salad
Dressings
Establishments
primarily
engaged
in
pickling
and
brining
fruits
and
vegetables,
and
in
manufacturing
salad
dressings,
vegetable
relishes,
sauces,
and
seasonings.

°
SIC
2037
­
Frozen
Fruits,
Fruit
Juices,
and
Vegetables
Establishments
primarily
engaged
in
freezing
fruits,
fruit
juices,
and
vegetables.
These
establishments
also
produce
important
by­
products
such
as
fresh
or
dried
citrus
pulp.

°
SIC
2096
­
Potato
Chips,
Corn
Chips,
and
Similar
Snacks
Establishments
primarily
engaged
in
manufacturing
potato
chips,
corn
chips,
and
similar
snacks.

The
following
tables
present
the
facilities
in
this
category
that
report
to
the
Permit
Compliance
System
(
PCS)
and
to
the
Toxic
Release
Inventory
(
TRI).
(
Note:
Since
this
industry
ranked
low
during
the
screening
phase,
EPA
did
not
verify
any
of
the
information
reported
to
PCS
and
TRI,
and
has
used
it
as
reported.
Although
information
in
PCS
and
TRI
is
limited,
it
can
provide
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
4
of
33
insight
into
this
industry.
See
Attachment
A
for
more
details
about
PCS
and
TRI.)
Table
1
shows
the
number
of
facilities
identified
for
this
industry.
Table
2
lists
the
facilities
reporting
to
PCS
under
these
SIC
codes.
Table
3
lists
those
reporting
to
TRI
under
these
SIC
codes.
Attachments
D
and
E
list
these
facilities
along
with
their
reported
discharges.

Table1.
Number
of
Facilities
SIC
1997
Census
PCS
TRI
Total
Major
Minor
Total
reporters
No
reported
discharge
Direct
discharge
Indirect
discharge
Both
direct
&
indirect
2033
695
70
8
62
12
11
1
0
0
2034
152
1
0
1
8
5
0
3
0
2035
354
12
2
10
11
7
0
4
0
2037
258
20
7
13
57
42
9
5
1
2096
368
2
1
1
20
14
2
4
0
Source:
PCSLoads2000,
TRIReleases2000
Table
2.
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing
Facilities
Reporting
to
PCS,
Sorted
by
State
SIC
NPDES
ID
FACILITY
NAME
CITY
STATE
2033
CT0000850
FIS
(
FOOD
INGREDIENTS
SPECIALI
NEW
MILFORD
CT
2035
DE0000736
PINNACLE
FOODS
CORPORATION
MILLSBORO
DE
2033
FL0000043
TROPICANA
NORTH
AMERICA
(
also
reports
to
TRI)
BRADENTON
FL
2033
FL0002801
SFE
CITRUS
PROCESSORS
AUBURNDALE
FL
2033
FL0001457
FLORIDA
JUICE
INC.
LAKELAND
FL
2033
FL0000477
THE
MINUTE
MAID
COMPANY
DUNEDIN
FL
2033
FL0001201
BARTOW
HOLDING
COMPANY
INC.
BARTOW
FL
2037
FL0000485
PASCO
BEVERAGE
COMPANY
(
also
reports
to
TRI)
DADE
CITY
FL
2037
FL0002755
FLORIDA
SELECT
CITRUS
GROVELAND
FL
2037
ID0000663
J
R
SIMPLOT
CO
(
also
reports
to
TRI)
HEYBURN
ID
2037
ID0000612
MCCAIN
FOODS
INC
BURLEY
ID
SIC
NPDES
ID
FACILITY
NAME
CITY
STATE
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
5
of
33
(
also
reports
to
TRI)
2033
MA0004936
VERYFINE
PRODUCTS
INC.
LITTLETON
MA
2035
NC0001074
MT.
OLIVE
PICKLE
COMPANY
MT.
OLIVE
NC
2033
NY0002585
BURNS
PHILIP
FOOD
NORTH
ROSE
NY
2037
OR0002402
HEINZ
FROZEN
FOOD
CO
(
also
reports
to
TRI)
ONTARIO
OR
2037
PA0010430
HANOVER
FOODS
CORP
(
also
reports
to
TRI)
CENTRE
HALL
PA
2096
PA0007498
WISE
FOODS
INC.
BERWICK
PA
2037
WA0021067
QUINCY
CITY
OF
QUINCY
WA
Table
3.
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing
Facilities
Reporting
to
TRI,
Sorted
by
State
SIC
TRI
ID
FACILITY
NAME
CITY
STATE
2034
95380RGRSF151SW
ROGERS
FOODS
INC.
TURLOCK
CA
2034
95352GNRLF705EW
GILROY
FOODS
MODESTO
CA
2035
33126PRTYC1800N
PURITY
PRODS.
INC.
MIAMI
FL
2037
34208TRPCN10011
TROPICANA
PRODS.
INC.
BRADENTON
FL
2037
33525LYKSPHWY30
PASCO
BEVERAGE
CO.
DADE
CITY
FL
2037
31520RCHSK200GL
RICH
SEAPAK
CORP.
BRUNSWICK
GA
2037
83318RDFDSHIGHW
MCCAIN
FOODS
USA
INC.
BURLEY
ID
2037
83336JRSMPHIGHW
J.
R.
SIMPOLOT
CO.
HEYBURN
FOOD
GROUP
HEYBURN
ID
2033
61550NSTLS216NM
NESTLE
USA
CONFECTIONS
&
SNACKS
DIV.
MORTON
IL
2035
61821KRFTN1701W
KRAFT
FOODS
N.
A.
INC.
CHAMPAIGN
IL
2035
46203RYLFD2322E
ROYAL
FOOD
PRODS.
INC.
INDIANAPOLIS
IN
2096
46041FRTLYROAD3
FRITO­
LAY
INC.
FRANKFORT
IN
2096
66609FRTLY4236K
FRITO­
LAY
INC.
TOPEKA
KS
2037
04740MCCNFSTATI
MCCAIN
FOODS
USA
INC.
EASTON
ME
2037
04742TLNTC87HIG
ATLANTIC
CUSTOM
PROCESSORS
L.
L.
C.
FORT
FAIRFIELD
ME
2037
58201JRSMP3630G
J.
R.
SIMPLOT
CO.
GRAND
FORKS
ND
2037
13069GNRLF607PH
AGRILINK
FOODS
INC.
FULTON
NY
2096
13904FRTLYCOLES
FRITO­
LAY
INC.
KIRKWOOD
NY
2034
97321RGNFR52525
OREGON
FREEZE
DRY
INC.,
ALBANY
OR
SIC
TRI
ID
FACILITY
NAME
CITY
STATE
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
6
of
33
PLANT
#
2
2037
97818LMBWSCOLUM
LAMB
WESTON
BOARDMAN
OR
2037
97914RDFDS175NE
H.
J.
HEINZ
CO.
L.
P.
HEINZ
FROZEN
FOOD
DIV.
ONTARIO
OR
2037
16828HNVRFRTE45
HANOVER
FOODS
CORP.
CENTRE
HALL
PA
2037
16428WLCHSSLAKE
WELCH'S
NORTH
EAST
PA
2035
75042KRFTN2340F
KRAFT
FOODS
N.
A.
INC.
GARLAND
TX
2096
78218FRTLY4855G
FRITO­
LAY
INC.
SAN
ANTONIO
TX
2037
99352LMBWS2013S
LAMB
WESTON
RICHLAND
FACILITY
RICHLAND
WA
2037
54467RDFDS1701H
MCCAIN
FOODS
USA
INC.
PLOVER
WI
2096
53511FRTLY2810K
FRITO­
LAY
INC.
BELOIT
WI
Of
the
40
reporting
facilities,
8
are
located
in
Florida.
The
rest
are
located
in
18
states
around
the
country.
It
is
worth
noting
that
Florida
is
in
Region
IV,
and
facilities
are
also
located
in
Georgia
and
North
Carolina,
meaning
that
25%
(
10)
of
the
reporting
facilities
are
located
in
this
Region.
The
map
on
the
following
page
shows
the
locations
of
the
facilities
reporting
to
TRI
or
PCS.

1997
U.
S.
Census
data
indicates
the
change
in
the
number
of
the
number
of
fruit
and
vegetable
processing
facilities
between
1992
and
1997.
Depending
on
sector,
the
value
of
goods
shipped
has
declined
by
as
much
as
10%
or
increased
by
as
much
as
28%
during
the
same
time
period.
See
Table
4
below.
Advance
comparative
statistics
for
1997
to
2002
for
NAICS
code
311
(
food
manufacturing
including
grains,
fruits
and
vegetables,
dairy,
meats,
seafood,
and
miscellaneous
food)
a
very
small
increase
in
the
number
of
establishments
(
less
than
1%)
and
an
8%
increase
in
the
value
of
shipments
(
not
adjusted
for
inflation).
See
Table
5
below.
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
8
of
33
Table
4.
1992
and
1997
Census
Data
SIC
Industry
Sector
Number
of
Establishments
Value
of
Goods
Shipped
(
millions
of
dollars)

1997
1992
%
Change
1997
1992
%
Change
2033
Canned
Fruits,
Vegetables
Preserves,
Jams,
and
Jellies
695
683
1.8
14.5
15.0
­
3.7
2034
Dried
and
Dehydrated
Fruits,
Vegetables,
and
Soup
Mixes
152
159
­
1.9
2.9
2.8
1.3
2035
Pickled
Fruits
&
Vegetables,
Vegetable
Sauces
&
Seasonings,
and
Salad
Dressings
354
377
­
6.1
7.1
7.8
­
9.6
2037
Frozen
Fruits,
Fruit
Juices,
and
Vegetables
258
255
1.2
9.6
7.5
27.9
2096
Potato
Chips,
Corn
Chips,
and
Similar
Snacks
368
408
­
9.8
9.1
7.3
25.6
Source:
1997
U.
S.
Economic
Census
Table
5.
1997
and
2002
Census
Data
NAICS
Industry
Segment
Number
of
Establishments
Value
of
Goods
Shipped
(
billions
of
dollars)

2002
1997
%
Change
2002
1997
%
Change
311
Food
Manufacturing
26,374
26,302
0.27
457
422
8.4
Source:
2002
U.
S.
Economic
Census
Wastewater
Characteristics
and
Pollutant
Sources
Fruit
and
vegetable
processing
is
seasonal
for
most
producers.
Water
use
and
wastewater
pollutant
loads
vary
according
to
the
specific
raw
material
processes
(
e.
g.,
2,400
gal/
ton
apples
to
17,000
gal/
ton
cauliflower).
Total
pollutant
loads
are
directly
correlated
to
the
amount
of
water
used
in
processing.
Water
conservation
practices
can
reduce
pollutant
loads.
Most
processors
employ
secondary
(
biological)
treatment.
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
9
of
33
Table
6
presents
information
about
wastewater
flows
for
this
industry
and
Table
7
presents
the
sources
of
process
wastewater
in
this
point
source
category.

Table
6.
Wastewater
Flows
SIC
No.
of
Major
Facilities
Reporting
Nonzero
Flows
Median
Facility
Flow
2000
(
MG)
Range
of
Facility
Flows
(
MG)
Total
Flow
(
MG)

2033
7
82
15
to
542
1,330
2034
none
­
­
­

2035
2
103
84
to
123
207
2037
7
889
9
to
1510
5,170
2096
1
101
NA
101
Source:
PCSLoads2000.
NA
 
no
range
was
calculated,
only
1
facility
reported
nonzero
flow.

Table
7.
Sources
of
Process
Wastewater
in
Fruits
and
Vegetable
Processing
Process
Wastewater
Pollutants
Washing:
general
cleaning
and
dirt
removal
of
raw
products
suspended
solids
including
fibers
and
soil
particles;
possibly
pesticides
residues
Grading,
stemming,
pitting,
and
seeding
dissolved
organic
material
(
BOD
5),
suspended
solids
including
fibers
and
soil
particles,
and
possibly
pesticides
residues
Peeling,
steam
or
lye
and
washing
sodium
hydroxide
(
high
pH),
BOD
5,
and
suspended
solids
Blanching
(
scald
with
water
or
steam)
dissolved
organic
material
(
BOD
5)
and
suspended
solids
Post­
blanching
washing
and
cooling
dissolved
organic
material
(
BOD
5)
and
suspended
solids
Fluming
(
conveyance)
dissolved
organic
material
(
BOD
5)
and
suspended
solids
Filling
and
packaging
,
including
adding
syrup,
brine,
etc.
dissolved
organic
material
(
BOD
5),
salt,
oil
and
grease
(
depending
on
product)
Process
Wastewater
Pollutants
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
10
of
33
Sanitation
and
plant
clean­
up
dissolved
organic
material
(
BOD
5)
and
suspended
solids,
residual
disinfectant
(
e.
g.,
chlorine)

Sources:
Waste
Management
and
Utilization
in
Food
Production
and
Process,
1995;
State
of
the
Art
Report,
2004;
Clean
Technologies
in
U.
S.
Industries:
Food
Processing,
2004.

Pollutants
Discharged
Pollutant
discharges
to
surface
waters
as
reported
to
PCS
and
TRI
were
evaluated
as
part
of
the
Factor
1
Analysis:
Human
Health
and
Environmental
Impacts.
Pounds
reported
as
discharged
were
converted,
wherever
possible,
to
their
toxic
weighted
pound
equivalents
to
provide
a
sense
of
relative
hazard
associated
with
those
discharges.
(
Note:
indirect
discharge
amounts
reflect
reductions
that
are
expected
to
occur
at
the
receiving
treatment
facility.)
Both
TRI
and
PCS
contain
information
about
pollutants
discharged
by
fruits
and
vegetables
processing
facilities.
(
This
analysis
does
not
include
loading
estimates
for
the
three
new
subcategories
distilled
and
blended
liquors,
malt
beverages,
and
soybean
oil
mills.
However,
that
information
is
evaluated
in
the
Technical
Support
Document
at
5.4.1.)

PCS:
Of
the
18
Facilities
reporting
discharges
to
PCS,
5
facilities
account
for
over
95%
of
the
pounds
discharged.
A
single
facility
in
Washington
state
accounts
for
49%
of
the
pounds
discharged.
When
looking
at
toxic
weighted
discharges,
5
facilities
account
for
96%
of
the
toxic
weighted
pound
equivalents
(
TWPE)
discharged.
A
single
facility
in
Massachusetts
(
SIC
2033)
accounting
for
over
70%
of
the
total
PCS
TWPE.

TRI:
Of
the
28
facilities
reporting
discharges
to
TRI,
5
facilities
(
2
of
which
are
in
Idaho)
account
for
over
90%
of
the
pounds
discharged.
Of
these,
discharges
from
a
single
facility
in
Idaho
account
for
46%
of
the
pounds
discharged
and
a
second
facility
in
Idaho
accounts
for
an
additional
25%.
When
looking
at
toxic
weighted
discharges,
3
facilities
account
for
99%
of
the
TWPE
discharged.
A
single
facility
in
Georgia
(
SIC
2037)
contributes
almost
91%
of
the
TWPE
reported
to
TRI
for
this
industry.
The
2
facilities
in
Idaho
contribute
an
additional
8%.

Overall:
Of
the
40
facilities
(
6
report
to
both
databases),
the
4
facilities
in
Region
X
(
2
in
Idaho
and
2
in
Washington)
discharge
67%
if
the
total
pounds
reported
as
discharged.
The
next
highest
discharge
is
a
facility
in
North
Carolina
which
accounts
for
an
additional
17%
of
the
pounds
discharged.
When
looking
at
toxic
weighted
discharges,
a
single
facility
in
Georgia
accounts
for
78%
of
the
TWPE
discharged
by
this
industry.
Another
10%
is
contributed
by
a
single
facility
in
Massachusetts.
An
additional
7%
is
discharged
by
the
two
facilities
in
Idaho.

Discharged
pollutants
that
can
be
characterized
as
nonconventional,
conventional,
or
priority
pollutants.
Table
8
below
shows
the
relative
contributions
of
each
pollutant
type.
See
Attachment
D
for
the
discharges
in
toxic
weighted
pounds
as
reported
to
PCS
by
each
facility
and
see
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
11
of
33
Attachment
E
for
the
discharges
in
toxic
weighted
pounds
as
reported
to
TRI
by
each
facility
See
Attachment
F
for
a
breakout
of
these
discharges
by
pollutant.
A
discussion
of
each
pollutant
type
discharged
follows
the
table.

Table
8.
Pollutant
Discharges
Reported
to
PCS
and
TRI
Pollutant
Category
&
Primary
Pollutants
PCS
LBS
PCS
TWPE
TRI
ALL
Discharge
lbs
TRI
ALL
TWPE
All
Pollutants
16,020,109
2,905
7,713,669
17,674
Nonconventional
14,614,715
2,638
7,713,669
17,674
TOTAL
DISSOLVED
SOLIDS
7,603,747
0
0
0
TOTAL
SULFIDE
764
2,140
0
0
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
73,127
134
21,022
32
CHLORINE,
Total
Residual
261
127
35,253
17,167
CHLORIDE
4,137,463
101
0
0
NITROGEN,
Nitrate
Total
(
as
N)
1,422,715
88
7,657,242
475
Conventional
1,404,936
 
0
0
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
990,347
 
BOD
5­
DAY
(
CARBONACEOUS)
368,122
 
OIL
AND
GREASE
46,467
 
Priority
457
267
0
0
ARSENIC
34
117
COPPER
119
74
SELENIUM
34
38
Nonconventional
Pollutants
Nonconventional
pollutants
comprise
over
91%
of
the
pounds
of
discharged
pollutants
reported
to
TRI
and
PCS
as
well
as
over
91%
of
the
TWPE
discharged.
Total
sulfide
contributes
74%
of
the
total
TWPE
discharges.
Other
pollutants
contributing
to
the
TWPE
discharges
are
ammonia
as
nitrogen,
chlorine
(
total
residual)
and
chloride
in
PCS.
In
TRI,
chlorine
(
total
residual)
contributes
97%
of
the
total
TWPE
discharged.

Conventional
Pollutants
Only
9%
of
the
discharged
pounds
reported
to
PCS
are
conventional
pollutants,
primarily
total
suspended
solids
(
TSS)
and
biochemical
oxygen
demand
(
BOD).
However,
toxic
weights
are
not
available
for
conventional
pollutant
parameters.
No
information
on
conventional
pollutants
is
available
through
TRI.

Priority
Pollutants
Priority
pollutants
contributed
about
9%
of
the
total
TWPE
reportedly
discharged
by
this
industry.
Among
the
priority
pollutants,
arsenic,
copper,
selenium,
and
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
12
of
33
lead
accounted
for
98%
of
the
discharged
TWPE.
No
priority
pollutant
discharges
were
reported
in
TRI.

For
purposes
of
comparison,
the
TWPE
for
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing
are
presented
in
the
following
tables
along
with
the
industries
reporting
the
highest
discharges
in
each
database.
(
Note:
These
tables
do
not
include
the
loadings
for
three
new
subcategories.)
Table
9
presents
the
information
reported
to
PCS
and
Table
10
presents
the
information
reported
to
TRI.
For
a
description
of
the
derivation
of
the
values
in
these
tables,
see
the
memo
in
the
public
record
titled
"
Description
and
Results
of
EPA
Methodology
to
Synthesize
Screening
Level
Results
for
the
Effluent
Guidelines
Program
Plan
for
2004/
2005,"
which
is
available
through
Edocket
at
document
number
OW­
2003­
0074­
0391.

Table
9.
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing
TWPE
Reported
to
PCS
Compared
to
Top
Ranking
Results
40
CFR
Part
Point
Source
Category
PCS
Reported
TWPE
PCS
Rank
423
Steam
electric
power
generation
2,933,209
1
414
Organic
chemicals,
plastics
and
synthetic
fibers
1,805,928
2
422
Phosphate
manufacturing
1,095,321
3
415
Inorganic
chemicals
manufacturing
853,568
4
421
Nonferrous
metals
manufacturing
434,925
5
440
Ore
mining
and
dressing
383,560
6
410
Textile
mills
296,601
7
419
Petroleum
refining
198,251
8
455
Pesticide
chemicals
manufacturing,
formulating
178,977
9
418
Fertilizer
manufacturing
116,464
10
407
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing
2,905
32
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
13
of
33
Table
10.
Fruits
and
Vegetables
TWPE
Reported
to
TRI
Compared
to
Top
Ranking
Results
40
CFR
Part
Point
Source
Category
TRI
Reported
TWPE
TRI
Rank
414
Organic
chemicals,
plastics
and
synthetic
fibers
7,303,782
1
423
Steam
electric
power
generation
1,856,645
2
421
Nonferrous
metals
manufacturing
978,450
3
430
Pulp,
paper
and
paperboard
(
Phase
II)
628,785
4
415
Inorganic
chemicals
manufacturing
624,250
5
429
Timber
products
processing
404,926
6
419
Petroleum
refining
385,347
7
455
Pesticide
chemicals
manufacturing,
formulating
324,393
8
428
Rubber
manufacturing
166,343
9
463
Plastic
molding
and
forming
106,189
10
407
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing
17,675
23
Treatment
Technology
and
Pollution
Prevention
Standard
treatment
is
biological
treatment
with
primary
solids
removal,
oil
and
grease
removal,
and
neutralization
(
pH
adjustment)
depending
on
products.
Treatment
systems
must
be
sufficiently
robust
to
handle
seasonal
variations
in
pollutant
loads.

Direct
discharge
plants
may
disinfect
wastewater
with
chlorine
prior
to
discharge.
Advanced
treatment
would
replace
chlorine
disinfection
with
ozone
or
ultraviolet
light.

Most
advances
involve
water
conservation
and
other
pollution
prevention
practices.
See
Table
11
for
water
conservation
and
pollution
prevention
alternatives.
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
14
of
33
Table
11.
Water
Conservation
and
Pollution
Prevention
Alternatives
Process
Water
Conservation
and
Pollution
Prevention
Alternatives
Washing:
general
cleaning
and
dirt
removal
of
raw
products
°
Perform
washing
and
cleaning
at
the
agricultural
site,
so
wastes
are
reused
at
the
farm.
°
Air
flotation
to
remove
suspended
debris
from
raw
crop
materials.
°
Minimize
water
use.

Grading,
stemming,
pitting,
and
seeding
°
Minimize
water
use.

Peeling,
steam
or
lye
and
washing
°
Use
dry
peeling
methods.

Blanching
(
scald
with
water
or
steam)
°
Use
steam
blanching
rather
than
water
blanching.
°
In
the
future,
replace
blanching
with
nonthermal
means
of
destroying
microbes.

Post­
blanching
washing
and
cooling
°
Use
air
cooling.
°
Reuse
relatively
clean
cooling
water
for
peeling,
primary
washing,
or
post­
peeling
washing.

Fluming
(
conveyance)
°
Replace
water
flumes
with
pneumatic
(
air
based)
transport.
°
Reuse
relatively
clean
fluming
water
for
peeling,
primary
washing,
or
post­
peeling
washing.

Filling
and
packaging
,
including
adding
syrup,
brine,
etc.
°
Minimize
water
use.

Sanitation
and
plant
clean­
up
°
Use
low
volume/
high
pressure
cleaning
systems.

Sources:
Waste
Management
and
Utilization
in
Food
Production
and
Process,
1995;
State
of
the
Art
Report,
2004;
Clean
Technologies
in
U.
S.
Industries:
Food
Processing,
2004.

Concerns
Identified
Pre­
Proposal
The
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing
point
source
category
was
identified
by
several
responders
surveyed
by
the
Agency
in
the
process
of
preparing
the
2004/
2005
Plan.
Their
suggestions
are
summarized
below.
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
15
of
33
Previous
Suggestions
(
Section
2.4
of
the
"
Factor
4
Analysis:
Implementation
and
Efficiency
Considerations
 
Status
of
Screening
Level
Review
Phase"
(
Edocket
OW­
2003­
0074­
0329)
In
general,
responders
were
concerned
with
the
discharge
of
nutrients,
as
well
as
overloading
publicly
owned
treatment
works
(
POTWs)
and
small
streams
(
for
direct
dischargers)
with
conventional
pollutants
such
as
BOD.
Responders
identified
several
specific
industries
as
having
such
characteristics,
including
vegetables
processing.
Other
issues
identified
include
non­
approved
pretreatment
processes
in
relation
to
juice
manufacturing.

Permitting
Authorities
(
Section
2.5
of
the
"
Factor
4
Analysis")
State
permitting
authorities
(
Washington)
suggest
updating
these
guidelines
for
both
direct
and
indirect
dischargers.
Direct
dischargers
are
performing
well
below
the
limits,
and
permitting
authorities
have
found
it
difficult
to
address
that
gap
effectively
and
lower
discharges.
In
addition,
permitting
authorities
suggest
that
revising
these
guidelines
could
address
dissolved
oxygen
problems,
since
there
are
no
water
quality
criteria
for
BOD
(
biological
oxygen
demand)
and
no
equitable
way
to
determine
the
farfield
impacts
of
BOD.

Concerns
Identified
in
Comments
to
Proposal
Stakeholders
recommended
that
EPA
consider
additional
subcategories
for
this
industrial
category:
1)
Distilled
and
Blended
Liquors,
SIC
Code
2085;
2)
Malt
Beverages,
SIC
Code
2082;
and
3)
Soybean
Oil
Mills,
SIC
Code
2075.
Each
is
discussed
in
the
paragraphs
that
follow.

Distilled
and
Blended
Liquors
Based
on
information
in
the
1997
economic
census,
EPA
estimates
there
are
60
distilled
and
blended
liquor
facilities
in
the
United
States.
EPA's
primary
sources
of
wastewater
data
for
this
industry
is
information
reported
to
TRI
and
PCS
for
the
year
2000.
Three
facilities
reported
information
to
TRI
in
2000.
Of
these,
two
report
zero
discharge
and
one
reports
direct
discharge.
The
total
toxic
pounds
reported
by
the
direct
discharger
in
2000
was
driven
by
chlorine
and
was
78
toxic
weighted
pound
equivalents
(
TWPE).
Twenty­
seven
facilities
reported
direct
discharges
to
PCS
in
2000.
Of
these,
7
were
major
dischargers
and
20
were
minor
discharges.
Detailed
discharge
information
for
the
7
major
dischargers
in
PCS
indicates
that
the
total
toxic
pounds
discharged
by
these
7
facilities
was
94
TWPE.

Malt
Beverages
Based
on
information
in
the
1997
economic
census,
EPA
estimates
there
are
529
malt
beverage
facilities
in
the
United
States.
EPA's
primary
sources
of
wastewater
data
for
this
industry
is
information
reported
to
TRI
and
PCS
for
the
year
2000.
Twenty­
seven
malt
beverage
facilities
reported
information
to
TRI
in
2000.
Of
these,
13
were
indirect
dischargers,
5
were
direct
dischargers,
and
9
were
zero
dischargers.
The
total
toxic
pounds
reported
by
all
malt
beverage
facilities
in
TRI
was
7,594
TWPE
with
one
indirect
discharging
facility
contributing
97%
of
the
TWPE
from
sodium
nitrite.
Eleven
facilities
reported
direct
discharges
to
PCS
in
2000.
Of
these,
4
were
major
dischargers
and
7
were
minor
discharges.
Detailed
discharge
information
for
the
4
major
dischargers
in
PCS
indicates
that
the
total
toxic
pounds
discharged
by
these
facilities
was
25,781
TWPE.
One
facility
contributed
97%
of
the
TWPE
from
chlorine.
Based
on
the
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
16
of
33
information
in
TRI
and
PCS,
EPA
concludes
that
with
a
few
exceptions,
discharges
from
malt
beverage
facilities
rank
low
in
term
of
toxic
pounds
discharged.

Soybean
Oil
Mills
Based
on
information
in
the
1997
economic
census,
EPA
estimates
there
are
118
soybean
oil
mills
in
the
United
States.
EPA's
primary
sources
of
wastewater
data
for
this
industry
is
information
reported
to
TRI
and
PCS
for
the
year
2000.
Sixty­
five
soybean
oil
mills
reported
information
to
TRI
in
2000.
Of
these,
42
were
indirect
dischargers,
6
were
direct
dischargers,
4
were
both
indirect
and
direct
dischargers
and
13
were
zero
dischargers.
The
total
toxic
pounds
reported
by
all
malt
beverage
facilities
in
TRI
was
12,991
TWPE
with
two
direct
discharging
facility
contributing
98%
of
the
TWPE
from
sodium
nitrite
and
chlorine.
Nineteen
facilities
reported
direct
discharges
to
PCS
in
2000.
Of
these,
1
was
a
major
dischargers
and
the
remainder
were
minor
discharges.
Detailed
discharge
information
for
the
single
major
dischargers
in
PCS
indicates
that
the
facility's
permit
only
includes
limitations
for
conventional
pollutants.
Therefore,
the
TWPE
estimate
from
the
PCS
facilities
is
zero
(
0)
TWPE.
Based
on
the
information
in
TRI
and
PCS,
EPA
concludes
that
with
a
few
exceptions,
discharges
from
soybean
oil
mills
rank
low
in
term
of
toxic
pounds
discharged.

Additional
Concerns
Identified
Post­
Proposal
One
stakeholder
noted
that
POTWs
would
also
benefit
from
more
EPA
assistance
in
managing
high
strength
wastewater
(
BOD,
TSS,
Ammonia).
EPA
lists
these
among
the
15
POC's
in
the
new
Local
Limits
Guidance
Manual,
however
conventional
pollutant
management
it
is
not
integrated
into
many
aspects
of
this
manual.
In
addition,
the
pretreatment
community
should
be
reminded
of
the
relationship
between
accepting
high
strength
BOD
wastewater,
and
meeting
ammonia
limits.

Despite
potential
overloading,
POTWs
often
continue
to
accept
conventional
pollutants
such
as
BOD,
due
to
their
ability
to
collect
surcharges
on
those
pollutants.
There
is
a
tendency
for
them
to
continue
to
accept
these
pollutants
in
order
to
increase
income.
However,
in
addition
to
overloading
the
POTW
and
impairing
its
effectiveness,
the
pollutants
and
their
by­
products
are
degrading
the
infrastructure
of
the
POTWs.
This
leads
to
collapse
of
sewer
pipes
and
the
resulting
damage
to
streets
and
to
human
health
(
via
the
release
of
odors
and
volatile
pollutants).
The
cost
of
repairs
is
often
paid
by
taxpayers.
In
some
areas,
municipalities
routinely
clean
lines
clogged
by
oil
and
grease,
again
at
taxpayer
expense
instead
of
controlling
it
at
the
source.

Followup
Contacts
Don
Anderson,
EPA/
OST/
EAD
(
202)
566­
1021
Brian
Trulear,
EPA
Region
3,
(
214)
814­
5723
Carol
Staniec,
EPA
Region
5,
(
312)
886­
1436
Curt
McCormick,
EPA
Region
8
(
juice),
(
303)
312­
6377
Dave
J.
Knight,
Washington
State
DEQ,
(
360)
407­
6460
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
17
of
33
Possible
Solutions
EPA
appreciates
all
comments
and
suggestions
provided
by
the
stakeholders
and
EPA
Regional
staff.
However,
as
with
any
comments
received
by
the
Agency,
EPA
cannot
address
these
suggestions
without
adequate
supporting
data.
Some
stakeholders
identified
nutrient
discharges
from
fruit
and
vegetable
processing
plants
as
a
concern.
Information
in
PCS
and
TRI
does
not
indicate
that
fruit
and
vegetable
processing
plants
are
discharging
significant
quantities
of
nutrients
relative
to
other
industrial
categories.
State
permitting
authorities
also
suggested
that
EPA
should
revise
the
existing
guidelines
because
dischargers
are
performing
well
below
the
limits.
Because
TRI
and
PCS
information
indicate
toxic
discharges
from
fruit
and
vegetable
processing
plants
are
small
relative
to
other
industries,
EPA
has
concluded
that
a
revision
would
provide
only
small
incremental
gains,
if
any.
In
the
event
that
stakeholders
provide
additional
data
and
supporting
information,
on
these
or
any
of
the
issues
identified
above,
EPA
will
reevaluate
them
at
that
time.
In
the
absence
of
revisions
to
the
effluent
guidelines,
these
concerns
could
be
addressed
through
improved
information
dissemination
and
outreach
by
EPA.

Discharges
of
nutrients
and
conventional
pollutants:
EPA
could
provide
more
assistance
in
managing
high
strength
wastewater
(
BOD,
TSS,
Ammonia).
One
way
would
be
to
integrate
management
of
conventional
pollutants
into
its
new
Local
Limits
Guidance
Manual.
An
update
of
the
1971
document
"
Equitable
Recovery
of
Industrial
Waste
Treatment
Costs"
could
be
helpful
POTW's
needing
to
manage
their
capacity
and
recover
the
costs
for
high
strength
users
(&
users
with
high
peaking
factors
for
flows
or
loadings).
Water
Environment
Federation
(
WEF)
or
its
research
arm
(
WERF)
may
currently
be
working
on
producing
a
related
document,
and
EPA
could
coordinate
its
efforts
with
them.
The
Engineering
and
Analysis
Division
(
EAD)
can
share
these
concerns
with
the
Office
of
Wastewater
Management
(
OWM)
to
assist
them
in
improving
the
implementation
of
these
effluent
guidelines.

Currently,
Region
V
is
addressing
the
problem
of
publicly
owned
treatment
works
(
POTWs)
accepting
conventional
pollutants
beyond
the
point
of
overloading
by
requiring
POTWs
with
approved
programs
to
include
conventional
pollutants
in
their
local
limits.
This
requires
that
the
POTW
set
an
upper
limit
on
the
amount
of
conventional
pollutants
it
can
receive
based
on
plant
design,
and
to
allocate
that
load
among
its
dischargers.
For
POTWs
without
approved
programs,
the
Region
has
had
to
resort
to
legal
action.
They
are
also
addressing
oil
&
grease
issues
through
SSO
regulations.
EPA
could
offer
non­
regulatory
assistance
in
the
form
of
general
guidance
on
ways
to
control
BOD,
and
broader
dissemination
of
the
Agency's
guidance
on
setting
local
limits.
In
addition,
the
Water
Environment
Federation
(
WEF)
is
preparing
a
new
Manual
of
Practice
(
MOP)
titled
Financing
and
Charges
for
Wastewater
Systems
­
MOP
27
which
is
expected
to
elaborate
on
how
to
establish
a
fair
and
effective
surcharge
program.
Once
this
MOP
is
available,
EPA
could
include
it
in
it's
informational
materials.

No
limits
for
BOD:
See
the
suggestions
discussed
in
the
previous
paragraphs.
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
18
of
33
Improvements
in
industry
capacity
to
control
discharges:
See
the
suggestions
discussed
in
the
previous
paragraphs.

Additional
subcategories:
Based
on
the
information
available
at
this
time,
EPA
has
concluded
it
is
not
appropriate
to
develop
new
ELGs
for
distilled
and
blended
liquors
under
part
407
because
discharges
from
this
potential
subcategory
rank
low
in
terms
of
TWPE.
EPA
has
also
concluded
it
is
not
appropriate
to
develop
new
ELGs
for
malt
beverages
or
for
soybean
oil
mills
under
part
407,
because
only
a
few
facilities
drive
the
TWPE
for
each
of
these
industries.

Summary
of
Potential
Solutions:
The
concerns
for
overloading
could
be
addressed
through
improved
information
dissemination
and
outreach
by
EPA.
The
Agency
could
prepare
a
fact
sheet
with
answers
to
frequently
asked
questions
(
FAQs),
including
available
and
upcoming
guidance,
which
could
be
posted
on
EPA's
web
site.
In
addition,
the
Agency
could
announce
the
availability
of
this
fact
sheet,
and
the
name
of
the
current
EAD
staff
available
to
answer
questions
at
the
regular
meetings
for
permit
writers
and
pretreatment
coordinators
held
by
OWM
and
also
through
email
alerts
to
the
EAD
mailing
list.
Finally,
due
to
the
relatively
small
number
of
facilities
discharging
the
bulk
of
the
TWPE,
EPA
could
also
provide
assistance
to
permit
writers
in
preparing
BPJ­
based
permits.
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
19
of
33
Attachment
A
EPA
Databases
and
References
Used
in
this
Review
Overview
of
the
304(
m)
Planning
Process
CWA
Section
304(
m)(
1)
requires
EPA
to
establish
a
schedule
for
the
annual
review
and
revision
of
all
existing
effluent
guidelines
and
to
identify
categories
of
point
sources
discharging
toxic
or
non­
conventional
pollutants
for
which
EPA
has
not
published
effluent
guidelines.
To
accomplish
this
review,
EPA
conducted
a
screening­
level
analysis
using
readily
available
information
from
EPA's
Permit
Compliance
System
(
PCS)
and
Toxics
Release
Inventory
(
TRI)
databases.
EPA
estimated
the
mass
of
pollutants
discharged
from
each
category,
weighted
the
pollutant
releases
based
on
chemical
toxicity,
and
ranked
the
categories
based
on
the
toxicweighted
pollutant
releases.

In
addition
to
reported
discharges
in
PCS
and
TRI,
EPA
used
other
readily
available
data,
as
well
as
information
from
public
outreach,
including
industry
categories
recommended
by
stakeholders
for
regulatory
development
or
regulatory
revision,
to
evaluate
implementation
and
efficiency
considerations.

For
additional
details
on
EPA's
screening­
level
analysis
refer
the
following
documents
in
EPA
Docket
Number
OW­
2003­
0074:

Memorandum:
Description
and
Results
of
EPA
Methodology
to
Synthesize
Screening
Level
Results
for
the
Effluent
Guidelines
Program
Plan
for
2004/
2005,
DCN
548,
Section
3.0;

Development
of
PCSLoads
2000,
DCN
620,
Section
2.1.2
(
this
document
explains
how
pollutant
loads
were
calculated
from
PCS
data);
and

Evaluation
of
RSEI
Model
Runs,
DCN
618,
Section
2.1.1.

Information
from
EPA's
Permit
Compliance
System
(
PCS)
and
Toxics
Release
Inventory
(
TRI)
databases
were
used
to
create
the
PCSLoads2000
and
TRIReleases2000
databases.
These
databases
were
the
primary
source
of
information
used
to
conduct
this
review.
Since
this
industry
ranked
low
during
the
screening
phase,
however,
EPA
did
not
verify
any
of
the
information
reported
to
PCS
and
TRI,
and
has
used
it
as
reported.

TRIReleases2000
The
Toxic
Release
Inventory
(
TRI)
is
the
major
source
of
data
for
the
TRIReleases2000
database.
TRI
is
the
common
name
for
Section
313
of
the
Emergency
Planning
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
20
of
33
and
Community
Right­
to­
Know
Act
(
EPCRA).
Each
year,
facilities
that
meet
certain
thresholds
must
report
their
releases
and
other
waste
management
activities
for
listed
toxic
chemicals.
That
is,
facilities
must
report
the
quantities
of
toxic
chemicals
recycled,
collected
and
combusted
for
energy
recovery,
treated
for
destruction,
or
disposed
of.
A
separate
report
must
be
filed
for
each
chemical
that
exceeds
the
reporting
threshold.
The
TRI
list
of
chemicals
for
reporting
year
2000
includes
more
than
600
chemicals
and
chemical
categories.
For
this
review,
EPA
used
data
for
reporting
year
2000,
because
they
were
the
most
recent
available
at
the
time
the
review
began.

There
are
three
criteria
that
a
facility
must
meet
to
be
required
to
submit
a
TRI
report
for
that
reporting
year.
The
criteria
are:

(
1)
SIC
Code
Determination:
Facilities
in
SIC
Codes
20
through
39,
seven
additional
SIC
codes
outside
this
range,
and
federal
facilities
must
concern
themselves
with
TRI
reporting.
EPA
rarely
checks
or
refutes
facility
claims
regarding
the
SIC
code
identification.
The
primary
SIC
code
determines
TRI
reporting.

(
2)
Number
of
Employees:
Facilities
must
have
10
or
more
full­
time
employees
or
their
equivalent.
EPA
defines
a
"
full­
time
equivalent"
as
a
person
that
works
2,000
hours
in
the
reporting
year
(
there
are
several
exceptions
and
special
circumstances
that
are
well­
defined
in
the
TRI
reporting
instructions).

(
3)
Activity
Thresholds:
If
the
facility
is
in
a
covered
SIC
code
and
has
10
or
more
fulltime
employee
equivalents
it
must
conduct
an
activity
threshold
analysis
for
every
chemical
and
chemical
category
on
the
current
TRI
list.
The
facility
must
determine
whether
it
manufactures,
processes,
OR
otherwise
uses
each
chemical
at
or
above
the
appropriate
activity
threshold.
Reporting
thresholds
are
not
based
on
the
amount
of
release.
All
TRI
thresholds
are
based
on
mass,
not
concentration.
Different
thresholds
apply
for
persistent
bioaccumulative
toxic
(
PBT)
chemicals
than
for
non­
PBT
chemicals.

In
TRI,
facilities
report
annual
loads
released
to
the
environment
of
each
toxic
chemical
or
chemical
category
that
meets
reporting
requirements.
They
must
report
onsite
releases
to
air,
receiving
streams,
disposal
to
land,
underground
wells,
and
several
other
categories.
They
must
also
report
the
amount
of
toxic
chemicals
in
wastes
transferred
to
off­
site
locations,
including
discharges
to
POTWs
and
other
off­
site
locations,
such
as
commercial
waste
disposal
facilities.

For
this
review,
EPA
focused
on
the
amount
of
chemicals
facilities
reported
either
discharging
directly
to
a
receiving
stream
or
transferring
to
a
POTW.
For
facilities
discharging
directly
to
a
stream,
the
loads
were
taken
directly
from
the
reported
TRI
data
for
calendar
year
2000.
For
facilities
that
transfer
toxic
chemicals
to
POTWs,
EPA
first
adjusted
the
TRI
pollutant
loads
reported
to
be
transferred
to
POTWs
to
account
for
pollutant
removal
that
occurs
at
the
POTW
prior
to
discharge
to
the
receiving
stream.
This
adjustment
was
made
using
POTW
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
21
of
33
removal
efficiencies
from
EPA's
Risk
Screening
Environmental
Indicators
(
RSEI)
model
(
see
Section
2.1.1
of
the
docket
for
more
information
on
TRI
and
the
RSEI
model).

Reporting
facilities
are
not
required
to
sample
and
analyze
wastestreams
to
determine
the
quantities
of
toxic
chemicals
released.
They
may
estimate
releases
based
on
mass
balance
calculations,
published
emission
factors,
site­
specific
emission
factors,
or
other
approaches.
Facilities
are
required
to
indicate,
by
a
reporting
code,
the
basis
of
their
release
estimate.
TRI's
reporting
guidance
is
that
for
chemicals
reasonably
expected
to
be
present
but
measured
below
the
detection
limit,
facilities
should
use
one
half
the
detection
limit
to
estimate
the
mass
released.
The
guidance
is
slightly
different
for
dioxins
and
dioxin­
like
compounds
in
that
it
allows
non­
detects
to
be
treated
as
zero.

TRI
provides
the
option
for
facilities
to
report
releases
as
specific
numbers
or
as
ranges,
if
appropriate.
Specific
estimates
are
encouraged
if
data
are
available
to
ensure
the
accuracy;
however,
EPA
allows
facilities
to
report
releases
in
the
following
ranges:
1
to
10
pounds,
11
to
499
pounds,
and
500
to
999
pounds.
For
this
analysis,
EPA
used
the
mid­
point
of
each
reported
range
to
represent
a
facility's
releases.

EPA
weighted
the
direct
and
indirect
pollutant
releases
to
surface
waters
using
toxic
weighting
factors
(
TWFs)
developed
by
Office
of
Water/
Engineering
and
Analysis
Division
(
EAD),
to
calculate
toxic
weighted
pound
equivalents
(
TWPE)
for
each
reported
release.
See
4.2.3
and
4.2.4
for
more
discussion
of
TWFs
and
calculation
of
TWPE.
EPA
compiled
data
taken
from
TRI,
the
adjusted
releases
from
POTWs
to
surface
waters,
the
calculated
TWPE,
and
the
relationship
between
SIC
codes
and
point
source
category
into
a
Microsoft
Access
 
database
named
TRIReleases2000.
Some
corrections
were
made
to
this
database
as
further
study
was
conducted
on
the
TRI
data.
Limitations
of
TRI
are
discussed
in
Section
IV
of
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
this
planning
process.

PCSLoads2000
The
Permit
Compliance
System
(
PCS)
is
the
major
source
of
data
for
the
PCSLoads2000
database.
PCS
is
a
computerized
management
information
system
maintained
by
EPA's
Office
of
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Assurance
(
OECA).
It
was
created
to
track
permit,
compliance,
and
enforcement
status
of
facilities
regulated
by
the
National
Pollutant
Discharge
Elimination
System
(
NPDES)
program
under
the
Clean
Water
Act
(
CWA).

More
than
65,000
industrial
facilities
and
water
treatment
plants
have
obtained
permits
for
water
discharges
of
regulated
pollutants.
To
provide
an
initial
framework
for
setting
permit
issuance
priorities,
EPA
developed
a
major/
minor
classification
system
for
industrial
and
municipal
wastewater
discharges.
Major
discharges
almost
always
have
the
capability
to
impact
receiving
waters
if
not
controlled
and,
therefore,
have
been
accorded
more
regulatory
attention
than
minor
discharges.
There
are
approximately
6,400
facilities
(
including
sewerage
systems)
with
major
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
22
of
33
discharges
for
which
PCS
has
extensive
records.
Permitting
authorities
classify
discharges
as
major
based
on
an
assessment
of
six
characteristics:

(
1)
toxic
pollutant
potential;
(
2)
ratio
of
discharge
flow
to
stream
flow;
(
3)
conventional
pollutant
loading;
(
4)
public
health
impact;
(
5)
water
quality
factors;
and
(
6)
proximity
to
coastal
waters.

Facilities
with
major
discharges
must
report
compliance
with
NPDES
permit
limits
via
monthly
Discharge
Monitoring
Reports
(
DMRs)
submitted
to
the
permitting
authority.
The
permitting
authority
enters
the
reported
DMR
data
into
PCS,
including
the
type
of
violation
(
if
any),
concentration
and
quantity
values,
and
the
Quarterly
Non­
Compliance
Report
(
QNCR)
indicators.
Minor
discharges
may,
or
may
not,
adversely
impact
receiving
water
if
not
controlled.
Therefore,
EPA
does
not
require
DMRs
for
facilities
with
minor
discharges.
For
this
reason,
the
PCS
database
includes
data
only
for
a
limited
set
of
minor
dischargers
when
the
states
choose
to
include
these
data.
As
a
consequence,
extensive
data
are
not
available
for
minor
discharges
in
PCS.

Parameters
in
PCS
include
water
quality
parameters
(
such
as
pH
and
temperature),
specific
chemicals,
bulk
parameters
(
such
as
BOD
5
and
TSS),
and
flow
rates.
Although
other
pollutants
may
be
discharged,
PCS
only
contains
data
for
the
parameters
identified
in
the
facility's
NPDES
permit.
Facilities
typically
report
monthly
average
pounds
per
day
discharged,
but
also
report
daily
maxima,
and
pollutant
concentrations.

For
this
review,
EPA
used
data
for
reporting
year
2000,
to
correspond
to
the
data
obtained
from
TRI.
EPA
used
its
Effluent
Data
Statistics
(
EDS)
system
program
to
calculate
annual
pollutant
discharges
using
the
monthly
reports
in
PCS.
Because
units
of
measure
vary
widely
in
PCS,
EPA
developed
the
EDS
system
to
estimate
mass
loadings
based
on
data
stored
in
PCS.
The
EDS
system
uses
existing
PCS
reported
mass
loading
values
or
multiplies
reported
discharge
flows
and
effluent
concentrations
to
estimate
loadings
for
each
outfall
(
discharge
pipe),
taking
into
account
the
various
units
of
concentration
and
flow
rates.

Where
concentrations
were
reported
as
below
detection
limit
(
BDL)
EPA
assumed
the
parameter
concentration
was
equal
to
zero
for
parameters
never
detected
by
the
facility
in
2000.
For
parameters
sometimes
detected
and
sometimes
not,
the
"
BDL"
concentration
was
set
equal
to
half
of
the
detection
limit.
.
The
EDS
system
program
sums
the
monthly
loads
to
calculate
annual
discharges,
interpolating
(
using
average
reported
loads)
for
months
with
missing
reports.

EPA
weighted
the
calculated
annual
pollutant
discharges
using
EAD's
TWFs
to
calculate
TWPE
for
each
reported
discharge,
as
it
did
for
the
reported
TRI
releases.
See
sections
4.2.3
and
4.2.4
for
more
discussion
of
TWFs
and
calculation
of
TWPE.
EPA
compiled
data
taken
from
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
23
of
33
PCS,
the
calculated
TWPE,
and
the
relationship
between
SIC
codes
and
point
source
category
into
a
Microsoft
Access
 
database
named
PCSLoads2000.
As
further
study
was
conducted
on
the
PCS
data,
some
corrections
were
made.

Other
Information
Sources
In
addition
to
TRI
and
PCS,
EPA
used
the
following
sources
of
information
in
its
review
of
this
industry:

°
1997
Economic
Census
data;
and
2002
Economic
Census
data.

°
Contacts
with
reporting
facilities
to
verify
reported
releases
and
facility
categorization.

°
Council
for
Agricultural
Science
and
Technology,
1995.
Waste
Manaagement
and
Utilization
in
Food
Production
and
Process,
Chapter
5,
Water
and
Wastewater
Use
in
the
the
Food
Processing
Industry.
Accessed
at:
<
http://
www.
p2pays.
org/
ref/
01/
0069205.
pdf>
on
June
15,
2004.

°
Food
Manufacturing
Coalition
for
Innovation
and
Technolgy
Transfer,
State­
of­
the­
Art
Report,
Wastewater
Reduction
and
Recycling
in
Food
Processing
Operations.
Accessed
at:
<
http://
foodsci.
unl.
edu/
fmc/
7wastewa.
htm>
on
June
15,
2004.

°
U.
S.­
Asia
Environmental
Partnership,
Clean
Technologies
in
U.
S.
Indlustries:
Food
Processing.
Accessed
at
<
http://
www.
p2pays.
org/
ref/
09/
08853.
htm>
on
June
15,
2004
°
World
Bank
Group,
1998.
Pollution
Prevention
and
Abatement
Handbook,
Fruit
and
Vegetable
Processing.
Accessed
on
June
15,
2004
at:
<
http://
ifcln1.
ifc.
org/
ifcext/
enviro.
nsf/
AttachmentsByTitle/
gui_
fruitveg_
WB/$
FILE/
fruitandvg_
PPAH.
pdf
>
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
24
of
33
Attachment
B
Point
Source
Categories
Identified
Solely
Through
Factor
4
Industry
Formal
Comment
Process
Previous
Suggestions
(
Sec.
2.4)
Draft
Strategy
Outreach
Comments
on
Draft
Strategy
(
Sec.
2.2)
Comments
on
2002/
2003
Plan
(
Sec.
2.3)
Permitting
Authorities
(
Sec.
2.5)
AMSA
&
ASIWPCA
(
Sec.
2.6)

Coal
Mining

Coil
Coating

Dairy
Products
Processing

Electrical
and
Electronic
Components

Fruits
and
Vegetable
Processing

Metal
Molding
and
Casting

Mineral
Mining
and
Processing

Seafood
Processing

FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
25
of
33
Attachment
C
Applicability
and
Regulatory
History
Applicability
of
40
CFR
Part
407
The
current
effluent
guidelines
for
the
Fruits
and
Vegetable
Processing
Source
Category,
40
CFR
Part
407,
contain
8
subcategories
(
Subpart
A
­
H).

Subpart
A
­
Apple
Juice
Subcategory.
The
provisions
of
this
subpart
are
applicable
to
discharges
resulting
from
the
processing
of
apples
into
apple
juice
or
apple
cider.

Subpart
B
­
Apple
Products
Subcategory.
The
provisions
of
this
subpart
are
applicable
to
discharges
resulting
from
the
processing
of
apples
into
apple
products.
The
processing
of
apples
into
caustic
peeled
or
dehydrated
products
is
specifically
excluded.

Subpart
C
­
Citrus
Products
Subcategory.
The
provisions
of
this
subpart
are
applicable
to
discharges
resulting
from
the
processing
of
citrus
into
citrus
products.

Subpart
D
­
Frozen
Potato
Products
Subcategory.
The
provisions
of
this
subpart
are
applicableto
discharges
resulting
from
the
processing
of
white
potatoes
into
frozen
potato
products.

Subpart
E
­
Dehydrated
Potato
Products
Subcategory.
The
provisions
of
this
subpart
are
applicable
to
discharges
resulting
from
the
processing
of
white
potatoes
into
dehydrated
potato
products.

Subpart
F
­
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
Subcategory.
The
provisions
of
this
subpart
are
applicable
to
discharges
resulting
from
the
processing
of
the
following
fruit
products:
apricots;
caneberries;
sweet,
sour
and
brined
cherries;
cranberries;
dried
fruit;
grape
juice
canning
and
pressing;
olives;
peaches;
pears;
fresh
and
processed
pickles,
and
pickle
salting
stations;
pineapples;
plums;
raisins;
strawberries;
and
tomatoes.

Subpart
G
­
Canned
and
Preserved
Vegetables
Subcategory.
The
provisions
of
this
subpart
are
applicable
to
discharges
resulting
from
the
processing
of
the
following
vegetable
products:
beets;
broccoli;
carrots;
canned
and
frozen
corn;
dehydrated
onions
and
garlic;
dehydrated
vegetables;
dry
beans;
lima
beans;
mushrooms;
canned
onions;
peas;
sauerkraut
canning
and
cutting;
snap
beans;
spinach;
squash;
and
canned
potatoes.

Subpart
H
­
Canned
and
Miscellaneous
Specialties
Subcategory.
Applicable
to
discharges
resulting
from
the
processing
of
the
following
specialty
products:
added
ingredients;
baby
food;
corn,
potato,
and
tortilla
chips;
ethnic
foods;
jams
and
jellies;
mayonnaise
and
dressings;
soups;
and
tomato­
starch­
cheese
canned
specialties.
definitions:
The
term
chips,
potato
shall
mean
the
processing
of
fried
chips,
made
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
26
of
33
from
fresh
or
stored
white
potatoes,
all
varieties.
The
term
chips,
corn
shall
mean
the
processing
of
fried
corn,
made
by
soaking,
rinsing,
milling
and
extruding
into
a
fryer
without
toasting.

Potential
new
Subcategories:
°
SIC
2075
­
Soybean
Oil
Mills;
°
SIC
2082
­
Malt
Beverages;
and
°
SIC
2085
­
Distilled
and
Blended
Liquors
REGULATORY
BACKGROUND
Regulatory
History
Final
effluent
limitations
for
Subparts
A
­
E
were
promulgated
March
21,
1974.
Final
effluent
limitations
for
Subparts
F,
G,
and
H
were
promulgated
April
16,
1976.

The
technology
basis
of
existing
regulations
(
BPT)
was
in­
plant
waste
management
and
operating
methods
and
end­
of­
pipe
preliminary
screening,
primary
treatment,
and
secondary
biological
treatment.
BAT
and
NSPS
are
the
same
as
BPT
followed
by
disinfection
(
chlorination).
For
some
facilities,
more
intensive
biological
treatment
and
final
multi­
media
or
sand
filtration
may
be
required
to
meet
BAT
limits.

Existing
Limitations
°
BAT
and
NSPS
limitations
guidelines
are
normalized
on
the
basis
of
metric
ton
(
kkg)
of
raw
material.

°
EPA
established
no
limitations
for
PSES
or
PSNS.

°
NSPS
for
Subparts
F,
G,
and
H
is
reserved.
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
27
of
33
Table
C­
1.
Effluent
Guidelines
for
Canned
and
Preserved
Fruits
and
Vegetables
Processing,
Part
407
Pollutant
BPT
30­
day
averages
(
kg/
kkg)
NSPS
30­
day
averages
(
kg/
kkg)

BOD
5
0.05
to
3.34
0.07
to
0.55
TSSb
0.00
to
5.09
0.1
to
0.55
Oil
and
Greasea
20
mg/
L
none
pH
within
the
range
6
to
9c
within
the
range
6
to
9b
a
Oil
and
grease
limits
for
Subpart
H,
only.
b
BPT
TSS
limit
for
"
added
ingredients"
in
Subpart
H
is
0
kg/
kkg.
NSPS
limits
for
Subpart
H
are
"
reserved."
c
pH
range
6
to
9.5
for
subparts
F,
G,
and
H.
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
28
of
33
Attachment
D
PCS
Discharges
SIC
NPDES
ID
NAME
CITY
Flow(
MGD)
LBS/
YR1
TWPE1
Percent
of
Total
SIC
TWPE1
Cumulati
ve
Percent
of
Total
SIC
TWPE1
2033
MA0004936
VERYFINE
PRODUCTS
INC.
LITTLETON
1
80,220
2,145
87%
87%

2033
FL0000043
TROPICANA
NORTH
AMERICA
BRADENTON
1
295,363
305
12%
99%

2033
CT0000850
FIS
(
FOOD
INGREDIENTS
SPECIALI
NEW
MILFORD
0
65,891
17
1%

2033
FL0002801
SFE
CITRUS
PROCESSORS
AUBURNDALE
0
16,267
0
0%

2033
FL0001457
FLORIDA
JUICE
INC.
LAKELAND
0
10,273
0
0%

2033
FL0000477
THE
MINUTE
MAID
COMPANY
DUNEDIN
0
1,249
0
0%

2033
NY0002585
BURNS
PHILIP
FOOD
NORTH
ROSE
0
22,562
2033
TOTAL
0
491,825
2,467
2035
NC0001074
MT.
OLIVE
PICKLE
COMPANY
MT.
OLIVE
0.34
4,162,272
102
99%
99%

2035
DE0000736
PINNACLE
FOODS
CORPORATION
MILLSBORO
0
13,414
1
2035
TOTAL
0
4,175,686
103
2037
PA0010430
HANOVER
FOODS
CORP
CENTRE
HALL
0.21
56,724
129
38%
38%

2037
WA0021067
QUINCY
CITY
OF
QUINCY
3
8,024,960
102
30%
69%

2037
ID0000663
J
R
SIMPLOT
CO
HEYBURN
2
1,343,020
50
15%
84%

2037
ID0000612
MCCAIN
FOODS
INC
BURLEY
4
1,245,541
31
9%
93%

2037
OR0002402
HEINZ
FROZEN
FOOD
CO
ONTARIO
2
625,288
22
7%
100%

2037
FL0000485
PASCO
BEVERAGE
COMPANY
DADE
CITY
3
215,989
1
0%
100%

2037
FL0002755
FLORIDA
SELECT
CITRUS
GROVELAND
0
438
0
0%
100%

2037
TOTAL
0
11,511,959
335
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
29
of
33
Attachment
E
TRI
Discharges
SIC
Code
Facility
TRI
ID
Facility
Name
Facility
City
Facility
State
Total
lbs
Total
TWPE
Percent
Total
of
SIC
TWPE
Cumulative
Percent
Total
of
SIC
TWPE
2033
61550NSTLS216NM
NESTLE
USA
CONFECTIONS
&
SNACKS
DIV.
MORTON
IL
50
0.003
100%
100%

2033
Total
50
0.003
2034
95380RGRSF151SW
ROGERS
FOODS
INC.
TURLOCK
CA
72
1
83%
83%

2034
95352GNRLF705EW
GILROY
FOODS
MODESTO
CA
74
0.11
16%
99%

2034
97321RGNFR52525
OREGON
FREEZE
DRY
INC.,
PLANT
#
2
ALBANY
OR
75
0.0047
1%
100%

2034
Total
221
1
2035
61821KRFTN1701W
KRAFT
FOODS
N.
A.
INC.
CHAMPAIGN
IL
2,339
0.14
78%
78%

2035
46203RYLFD2322E
ROYAL
FOOD
PRODS.
INC.
INDIANAPOLIS
IN
20
0.035
19%
97%

2035
33126PRTYC1800N
PURITY
PRODS.
INC.
MIAMI
FL
60
0.006
3%
100%

2035
75042KRFTN2340F
KRAFT
FOODS
N.
A.
INC.
GARLAND
TX
­
­
0%
100%

2035
Total
2,418
0.19
2037
31520RCHSK200GL
RICH
SEAPAK
CORP.
BRUNSWICK
GA
32,972
16,057
91%
91%

2037
83318RDFDSHIGHW
MCCAIN
FOODS
USA
INC.
BURLEY
ID
2,032,648
1,237
7%
98%

2037
83336JRSMPHIGHW
J.
R.
SIMPOLOT
CO.
HEYBURN
FOOD
GROUP
HEYBURN
ID
3,742,491
233
1%
99%

2037
04740MCCNFSTATI
MCCAIN
FOODS
USA
INC.
EASTON
ME
1,082,400
68
0%
100%
SIC
Code
Facility
TRI
ID
Facility
Name
Facility
City
Facility
State
Total
lbs
Total
TWPE
Percent
Total
of
SIC
TWPE
Cumulative
Percent
Total
of
SIC
TWPE
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
30
of
33
2037
54467RDFDS1701H
MCCAIN
FOODS
USA
INC.
PLOVER
WI
248,377
19
0%
100%

2037
97818LMBWSCOLU
M
LAMB
WESTON
BOARDMAN
OR
11,759
18
0%
100%

2037
97914RDFDS175NE
H.
J.
HEINZ
CO.
L.
P.
HEINZ
FROZEN
FOOD
DIV.
ONTARIO
OR
96,267
7
0%
100%

2037
58201JRSMP3630G
J.
R.
SIMPLOT
CO.
GRAND
FORKS
ND
33,977
4
0%
100%

2037
34208TRPCN10011
TROPICANA
PRODS.
INC.
BRADENTON
FL
21,486
3
0%
100%

2037
33525LYKSPHWY30
PASCO
BEVERAGE
CO.
DADE
CITY
FL
725
1
0%
100%

2037
04742TLNTC87HIG
ATLANTIC
CUSTOM
PROCESSORS
L.
L.
C.
FORT
FAIRFIELD
ME
357
1
0%
100%

2037
16828HNVRFRTE45
HANOVER
FOODS
CORP.
CENTRE
HALL
PA
255
0.38
0%
100%

2037
99352LMBWS2013S
LAMB
WESTON
RICHLAND
FACILITY
RICHLAND
WA
3,564
0.22
0%
100%

2037
13069GNRLF607PH
AGRILINK
FOODS
INC.
FULTON
NY
102
0.15
0%
100%

2037
16428WLCHSSLAKE
WELCH'S
NORTH
EAST
PA
­
­
0%
100%

2037
Total
7,307,380
17,649
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
31
of
33
Attachment
F
Reported
Pollutant
Loadings
SIC
Pollutant
Name
CAS
Poll't
Group
Code
PCS
TRI
Indirect
TRI
Direct
Facilities
Reportin
g
Pollutant
Pounds
TWPE
Facilities
Reportin
g
Pollutant
Pounds
TWPE
Facilities
Reportin
g
Pollutant
Pounds
TWPE
2033
OIL
AND
GREASE
C035
CP
1
32,872
2033
BOD
5­
DAY
(
CARBONACEOUS)
C003
CP
4
53,392
2033
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
CP
8
158,899
2033
SUM
OF
CONVENTIONAL
POLLUTANTS
245,163
0
0
0
0
0
2033
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
NC
7
5,981
11
2033
TOTAL
SULFIDE
18496258
NC
1
764
2,140
2033
TOTAL
ORGANIC
CARBON
(
TOC)
C012
NC
1
102,312
2033
TOTAL
KJELDAHL
NITROGEN
C021
NC
4
9,719
2033
PHOSPHORUS
7723140
NC
5
5,890
2033
NITROGEN,
NITRITE
TOTAL
(
AS
N)
14797650
NC
1
1,471
2033
NITROGEN,
NITRATE
TOTAL
(
AS
N)
14797558
NC
1
17,655
1
1
50
0.0031
2033
IRON
7439896
NC
1
1,147
6
2033
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
18540299
NC
2
67
34
2033
CHLORINE,
TOTAL
RESIDUAL
7782505
NC
3
15
8
2033
NITROGEN,
TOTAL
(
AS
N)
7727379
NC
5
48,656
2033
SUM
OF
NONCONVENTIONAL
POLLUTANTS
193,678
2,200
0
0
50
0.0031
2033
NICKEL
7440020
PP
2
50
5
2033
LEAD
7439921
PP
2
7
15
2033
SELENIUM
7782492
PP
2
34
38
2033
THALLIUM
7440280
PP
1
7
7
2033
COPPER
7440508
PP
3
119
74
2033
CADMIUM
7440439
PP
2
1
2
2033
ZINC
7440666
PP
3
207
10
2033
ARSENIC
7440382
PP
2
34
117
SIC
Pollutant
Name
CAS
Poll't
Group
Code
PCS
TRI
Indirect
TRI
Direct
Facilities
Reportin
g
Pollutant
Pounds
TWPE
Facilities
Reportin
g
Pollutant
Pounds
TWPE
Facilities
Reportin
g
Pollutant
Pounds
TWPE
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
32
of
33
2033
SUM
OF
PRIORITY
POLLUTANTS
457
267
0
0
0
0
2034
PROPYLENE
OXIDE
75569
NC
1
72
1
2034
NITROGEN,
NITRATE
TOTAL
(
AS
N)
14797558
NC
1
75
0.0047
2034
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
NC
1
74
0.11
2034
SUM
OF
NONCONVENTIONAL
POLLUTANTS
0
0
221
1
0
0
2035
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
CP
2
4,728
2035
BOD
5­
DAY
(
CARBONACEOUS)
C003
CP
2
5,020
2035
SUM
OF
CONVENTIONAL
POLLUTANTS
9,747
0
0
0
0
0
2035
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
NC
2
955
2
2035
TOTAL
PHOSPHORUS
14265442
NC
1
578
2035
TOTAL
KJELDAHL
NITROGEN
C021
NC
1
2,904
2035
PHOSPHORUS
7723140
NC
2
3,299
2035
NITROGEN,
TOTAL
(
AS
N)
7727379
NC
1
12,934
2035
NITROGEN,
NITRATE
TOTAL
(
AS
N)
14797558
NC
1
1,362
0.084
1
2,339
0.14
2035
NITRIC
ACID
7697372
NC
2
0
2035
GLYCOL
ETHERS
N230
NC
1
60
0.0064
2035
DIETHANOLAMINE
111422
NC
1
20
0.035
2035
CHLORIDE
16887006
NC
1
4,137,463
101
2035
NITROGEN,
NITRITE
TOTAL
(
AS
N)
14797650
NC
1
1,156
2035
SUM
OF
NONCONVENTIONAL
POLLUTANTS
4,160,651
103
2,418
0.19
0
0
2037
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
CP
7
776,749
2037
BOD
5­
DAY
(
CARBONACEOUS)
C003
CP
6
283,765
2037
OIL
AND
GREASE
C035
CP
2
10,142
2037
SUM
OF
CONVENTIONAL
POLLUTANTS
1,070,656
0
0
0
0
0
2037
CHLORINE,
TOTAL
RESIDUAL
7782505
NC
3
261
127
1
32,972
16,057
1
2,281
1,111
2037
TOTAL
PHOSPHORUS
14265442
NC
2
420,198
2037
TOTAL
KJELDAHL
NITROGEN
C021
NC
4
60,514
2037
TOTAL
DISSOLVED
SOLIDS
C010
NC
1
7,603,747
2037
PHOSPHORUS
7723140
NC
4
696,510
SIC
Pollutant
Name
CAS
Poll't
Group
Code
PCS
TRI
Indirect
TRI
Direct
Facilities
Reportin
g
Pollutant
Pounds
TWPE
Facilities
Reportin
g
Pollutant
Pounds
TWPE
Facilities
Reportin
g
Pollutant
Pounds
TWPE
FINAL
DRAFT
Fruits
&
Vegetables
August
12,
2004
Page
33
of
33
2037
NITROGEN,
TOTAL
(
AS
N)
7727379
NC
1
9,268
2037
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
NC
6
66,190
121
4
13,583
20
9
7,365
11
2037
NITRIC
ACID
7697372
NC
1
0
2037
NITROGEN,
NITRATE
TOTAL
(
AS
N)
14797558
NC
3
1,403,697
87
1
32,357
2
7
7,218,822
448
2037
SUM
OF
NONCONVENTIONAL
POLLUTANTS
10,260,386
335
78,912
16,079
7,228,468
1,569