[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 72 (Wednesday, April 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18399-18401]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-9556]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5978-3]
Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Best Management Practices for the Bleached Papergrade
Kraft and Soda Subcategory and the Papergrade Sulfite Subcategory of
the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this notice announces that EPA is planning to submit the
following proposed and/or continuing Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Information
Collection Request for Best Management Practices, Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and Standards, Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Manufacturing
Category (40 CFR Part 430). Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review
and approval, EPA is soliciting comment on specific aspects of the
proposed information collection as described below.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before June 15, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Send comments on this notice in triplicate to Mr. Troy
Swackhammer, Office of Water, Engineering and Analysis Division (4303),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC
20460. In addition to submitting hard copies of the comments, the
public may also send comments via e-mail to: troy@epamail.epa.gov. Copies of the draft information collection
request are available at http://www.epa.gov/OST/pulppaper/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Troy Swackhammer by voice on (202)
260-712, by facsimile on 202-260-7185, or by e-mail at troy@epamail.epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated entities
Entities potentially affected by this action are those operations
that chemically pulp wood fiber using kraft or soda methods to produce
bleached papergrade pulp, paperboard, coarse paper, tissue paper, fine
paper, and/or paperboard; and those operations that chemically pulp
wood fiber using papergrade sulfite methods to produce pulp and/or
paper.
Title: Best Management Practices for the Bleached Papergrade Kraft
and Soda Subcategory and the Papergrade Sulfite Subcategory of the
Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category (EPA ICR No.
1829.01).
Abstract: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established
Best Management Practice provisions as part of final amendments to 40
CFR Part 430, the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Point Source Category
published elsewhere in today's Federal Register. See 40 CFR Part
430.03. These provisions, promulgated under the authorities of Sections
304, 307, 308, 402, and 501 of the Clean Water Act, require that owners
or operators of bleached papergrade kraft, soda and sulfite mills
implement site-specific BMPs to prevent or otherwise contain leaks and
spills of spent pulping liquors, soap and turpentine and to control
intentional diversions of these materials.
EPA has determined that these BMPs are necessary because the
materials controlled by these practices, if spilled or otherwise lost,
can interfere with wastewater treatment operations and lead to
increased discharges of toxic, nonconventional, and conventional
pollutants. For further discussion of the need for BMPs, see Section
VI.B.7 of the preamble to the amendments to 40 CFR Part 430 published
elsewhere in today's Federal Register.
The BMP program includes information collection requirements that
are intended to help accomplish the overall purposes of the program by,
for example, training personnel, see 40 CFR 430.03(c)(4), analyzing
spills that occur, see 40 CFR 430.03(c)(5), identifying equipment items
that might need to be upgraded or repaired, see 40 CFR 430.03(c)(2),
and performing monitoring--including the operation of monitoring
systems--to detect leaks, spills and intentional diversion and
generally to evaluate the effectiveness of the BMPs, see 40 CFR
430.03(c)(3), (c)(10), (h), and (i). The regulations also require mills
to develop and, when appropriate, amend plans specifying how the mills
will implement the specified BMPs, and to certify to the permitting or
pretreatment authority that they have done so in accordance with good
engineering practices and the requirements of the regulation. See 40
CFR 430.03(d), (e) and (f). The purpose of those provisions is,
respectively, to facilitate the implementation of BMPs on a site-
specific basis and to help the regulating authorities to ensure
compliance without requiring the submission of actual BMP plans.
Finally, the recordkeeping provisions are intended to facilitate
training, to signal the need for different or more vigorously
implemented BMPs, and to facilitate compliance assessment. See 40 CFR
430.03(g).
EPA has structured the regulation to provide maximum flexibility to
the regulated community and to minimize administrative burdens on
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and
pretreatment control authorities that regulate bleached papergrade
kraft and soda and papergrade sulfite mills. Although EPA does not
anticipate that mills will be required to submit any confidential
business information or trade secrets as part of this ICR, all data
claimed as confidential business information will be handled by EPA
pursuant to 40 CFR Part 2.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.
Solicitation of Comments
EPA solicits comments that would help the Agency to better:
(i) evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
(ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
[[Page 18400]]
(iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
(iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology (e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses).
Burden Statement
The following discussion describes the information collection
requirements of the BMP regulations and estimates the burden associated
with each one.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes time
needed to: review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with previously applicable instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to the collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
The BMP regulations at 40 CFR 430.03 include the following major
components: (1) Development, review and certification of a BMP plan,
which should include programs to identify and repair leaking equipment,
to track equipment repairs, to train personnel, to report and evaluate
spills, to review planned mill modifications, and to establish
wastewater treatment system influent action levels (including an
initial six-month monitoring program) in addition to a detailed
engineering review of the pulping and chemical recovery areas; (2)
amendment and periodic review of the BMP plan; (3) reporting of spills;
(4) additional monitoring and reporting; and (5) additional
recordkeeping. See 40 CFR 430.03 (c) through (h) and the ``Technical
Support Document for Best Management Practices for Spent Pulping Liquor
Management, Spill Prevention, and Control,'' October 1997, DCN 14489,
EPA-821-R-97-015 (also referred to below as the BMP TSD) for more
detailed information on the requirements. The BMP requirements apply to
approximately 95 papergrade kraft, soda, and sulfite mills.
a. Development, Review and Certification of a BMP Plan
Development of a site-specific BMP plan is a one-time initial
burden. Plan preparation costs will vary based upon mill complexity.
EPA anticipates that mills will use outside consultants under direction
of mill personnel to prepare the site-specific BMP plan, including the
detailed engineering review. Costs for preparing the BMP Plan, which
range from $150,000 to $250,000, are included in the compliance cost
estimates developed for the regulation (see Table 9.2 of the BMP TSD,
DCN 14489). EPA anticipates mill labor burden of 40, 60, and 80 hours
(at $30 per hour) for direction and oversight of the consultant effort
for simple, moderately complex, and complex mills, respectively. Review
of the initial plan by the senior technical manager and certification
by the mill manager is expected to take less than one day of effort (at
$40 per hour). These one-time burden estimates associated with the BMP
plan are summarized in Table 1 of this notice.
As part of the BMP plan development, mills must establish a
training program for technical personnel. This training program must
include both an initial training effort and an annual refresher
training. The burden for initial training is included in the compliance
costs referenced above (see Table 9.2 of the BMP TSD, DCN 14489).
Burden for annual refresher training is included in the annual
estimates presented in Table 2 of this notice.
b. Amendment and Periodic Review of a BMP Plan
Owners or operators must amend their BMP Plans whenever there is a
change in mill design, construction, operation or maintenance that
materially affects the potential for leaks or spills of spent pulping
liquor, soap or turpentine from the immediate process areas. See 40 CFR
430.03(e)(1). In addition, owners or operators must complete a review
and evaluation of their BMP plans at least once every five years, and
amend the plan within three months if warranted. See 40 CFR
430.03(e)(2). Any BMP plan amendments also require review by the senior
technical manager and certification by the mill manager. See 40 CFR
430.03(f).
EPA anticipates less than 50 hours of mill labor per amendment, and
based the ICR burden on an assumption that each mill would need to
amend its BMP plan twice every five years, for an annual burden of 20
hours ($620), which is included in the annual estimates presented in
Table 2.
c. Reporting of Spills
Reports of spills of spent pulping liquor, soap or turpentine not
contained in the immediate process area must list the equipment
involved, the circumstances leading to the incident, the effectiveness
of corrective actions taken and plans to implement future changes.
These reports must be maintained by the owner or operator, and they
need only be submitted to the NPDES permit or pretreatment control
authority upon request. EPA anticipates that the burden of preparing a
spill report is approximately four hours and can be conducted by a mill
engineer at $30 per hour. ICR burden is calculated on an annual basis
using an assumption of 1 spill per mill per month and is included in
the annual estimates presented in Table 2.
d. Additional Monitoring and Reporting
Mills are required to operate continuous, automatic monitoring
systems that the mill determine are necessary to detect and control
leaks, spills, and intentional diversions of spent pulping liquor,
soap, and turpentine. See 40 CFR 430.03(c)(3). The burden for
designing, testing, and operating the monitoring system, expressed in
the form of costs, is included in the compliance cost estimates
developed for the regulation (see Table 9.2 of the BMP TSD, DCN 14489).
In addition, all mills with the exception of new sources are
required to perform two six-month monitoring programs in order to
determine the characteristics (or action levels) of their wastewater
treatment system effluent. See 40 CFR 430.03(h). (New sources are
required to perform only one six-month monitoring program for this
purpose. See 40 CFR 430.03(h)(5).) All mills are also required to
perform additional monitoring to revise those action levels after any
change in mill design, construction, operation, or maintenance that
materially affects the potential for leaks or spills or spent pulping
liquor, soap, or turpentine from the immediate process area. See 40 CFR
430.03(h)(6). The effort required to implement the initial monitoring
program and perform the associated statistical analysis to establish
the action levels is included in the compliance cost estimates
developed for the regulation, and the burden to perform monitoring to
revise those action levels is included in the incremental monitoring
burden discussed below.
[[Page 18401]]
The regulation also requires all mills to conduct daily monitoring
of wastewater treatment system influent for the purpose of detecting
leaks and spills, tracking the effectiveness of the BMPs, and detecting
trends in spent pulping liquor losses. See 40 CFR 430.03(i). EPA
estimates the burden associated with this monitoring to be increment of
1 additional hour per day (at $20/hour) as included in annual estimates
shown in Table 2 of this notice. Costs for monitoring equipment were
included in the compliance cost estimates developed for the regulation
(see Table 9.2 of the BMP TSD, DCN 14489).
Mill operators are required to provide their NPDES permit or
pretreatment control authorities reports of the monitoring required by
the BMP regulation. The reports must include a summary of the
monitoring results, the number and dates of exceedances of the
applicable action levels, and brief descriptions of any corrective
actions taken to respond to such exceedances. Submission of such
reports shall be at the frequency established by the NPDES permit or
pretreatment control authority, but in no case less than once per year.
EPA has based the burden estimates on a semi-annual reporting frequency
and estimates that each report will take 16 hours to complete,
including both engineer and senior technical manager effort (also
included in Table 2 estimates).
e. Recordkeeping Requirements
The regulation requires that certain equipment repair records,
records of employee training, reports of spills outside the immediate
process area, and records of monitoring conducted as part of the BMP
program be maintained for three years. See 40 CFR 430.03(g). EPA
expects that the level of effort will depend upon mill complexity.
Burden estimates for recordkeeping are based on an incremental level of
effort to comply with BMP requirements consisting of 2 to 4 hours per
month for the operators/shift supervisors over current shift log
recordkeeping (at $20 per hour), 2 to 4 hours per months for
engineering technicians (at $30 per hour), and two hours per month for
clerical support (at $15 per hour). These burden estimates are also
included in the annual estimates presented in Table 2 below.
f. Total Industry Burden Estimates
Based on the assumptions listed above, EPA estimates the following
one-time burden associated with mill labor for the BMP requirements:
Table 1.--Burden Estimates for Preparing and Certifying the BMP Plan
[One-time burden]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hours Dollars ($)
Process (complexity) Number of (industry- (industry-
mills wide) wide)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kraft (simple)................... 41 1,969 62,320
Kraft (moderately complex)....... 30 2,040 63,600
Kraft (complex).................. 13 1,144 35,360
Sulfite (simple)................. 11 528 16,720
--------------------------------------
Total...................... 95 5,680 178,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: BMP plan development costs that are contracted out are
considered compliance costs and are not included here; they are
presented in Table 9-2 of the BMP TSD, DCN 14489.
Based on the assumptions listed above, EPA estimates the following
recurring burden associated with mill labor for the BMP requirements:
Table 2.--Burden Estimate for Maintaining BMP Plan, Spill Records,
Personnel Training, etc.
[Recurring burden]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual Annual
Number of hours dollars ($)
Process (complexity) mills (industry- (industry-
wide) wide)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kraft (simple)................... 41 22,017 487,080
Kraft (moderately complex)....... 30 16,830 374,400
Kraft (complex).................. 13 7,605 170,040
Sulfite (simple)................. 11 5,907 130,680
--------------------------------------
Total...................... 95 52,359 1,162,200
------------------------------------------------------------------------
g. Government Burden Estimates
EPA estimates the initial burden to state NPDES permitting
authorities and state and local pretreatment control authorities will
be 950 hours based on ten hours per facility for the preparation of new
NPDES permit or pretreatment control mechanism conditions implementing
the BMP regulation. EPA estimates the recurring incremental burden to
these state and local authorities will be 950 hours per year based on
ten hours per year per facility for administrative work associated with
reviewing periodic (e.g., annual or semi-annual) reports of monitoring
and conducting compliance reviews. State and local labor costs are
estimated at $19,000 per year, based on labor rates of $20 per hour.
EPA estimates that its incremental labor burden will be 100 hours
annually for the BMP regulation and will incur costs of $3,000 per
year, based on labor rates of $30 per hour.
Dated: April 3, 1998.
Tudor T. Davies,
Director, Office of Science and Technology.
[FR Doc. 98-9556 Filed 4-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
