C.F.R. » Title 40 » CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY › SUBCHAPTER N—EFFLUENT GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS › PART 423—STEAM ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY

40 C.F.R. § 423.12

Effluent limitations guidelines representing the degree of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the best practicable control technology currently available (BPT)

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In establishing the limitations set forth in this section, EPA took into account all information it was able to collect, develop and solicit with respect to factors (such as age and size of plant, utilization of facilities, raw materials, manufacturing processes, non-water quality environmental impacts, control and treatment technology available, energy requirements and costs) which can affect the industry subcategorization and effluent levels established. It is, however, possible that data which would affect these limitations have not been available and, as a result, these limitations should be adjusted for certain plants in this industry. An individual discharger or other interested person may submit evidence to the Regional Administrator (or to the State, if the State has the authority to issue NPDES permits) that factors relating to the equipment or facilities involved, the process applied, or other such factors related to such discharger are fundamentally different from the factors considered in the establishment of the guidelines. On the basis of such evidence or other available information, the Regional Administrator (or the State) will make a written finding that such factors are or are not fundamentally different for that facility compared to those specified in the Development Document. If such fundamentally different factors are found to exist, the Regional Administrator or the State shall establish for the discharger effluent limitations in the NPDES Permit either more or less stringent than the limitations established herein, to the extent dictated by such fundamentally different factors. Such limitations must be approved by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. The Administrator may approve or disapprove such limitations, specify other limitations, or initiate proceedings to revise these regulations. The phrase “other such factors” appearing above may include significant cost differentials. In no event may a discharger's impact on receiving water quality be considered as a factor under this paragraph.

(b) Any existing point source subject to this subpart must achieve the following effluent limitations representing the degree of effluent reduction by the application of the best practicable control technology currently available (BPT):

(1) The pH of all discharges, except once through cooling water, shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0.

(2) There shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyl compounds such as those commonly used for transformer fluid.

(3) The quantity of pollutants discharged from low volume waste sources shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of low volume waste sources times the concentration lised in the following table:

Pollutant or pollutant propertyBPT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day (mg/l)Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed (mg/l)
TSS100.030.0
Oil and grease20.015.0

(4) The quantity of pollutants discharged in fly ash and bottom ash transport water shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of fly ash and bottom ash transport water times the concentration listed in the following table:

Pollutant or pollutant propertyBPT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day (mg/l)Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed (mg/l)
TSS100.030.0
Oil and grease20.015.0

(5) The quantity of pollutants discharged in metal cleaning wastes shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of metal cleaning wastes times the concentration listed in the following table:

Pollutant or pollutant propertyBPT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day (mg/l)Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed (mg/l)
TSS100.030.0
Oil and grease20.015.0
Copper, total1.01.0
Iron, total1.01.0

(6) The quantity of pollutants discharged in once through cooling water shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of once through cooling water sources times the concentation listed in the following table:

Pollutant or pollutant propertyBPT effluent limitations
Maximum concentration (mg/l)Average concentration (mg/l)
Free available chlorine0.50.2

(7) The quantity of pollutants discharged in cooling tower blowdown shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of cooling tower blowdown sources times the concentration listed in the following table:

Pollutant or pollutant propertyBPT effluent limitations
Maximum concentration (mg/l)Average concentration (mg/l)
Free available chlorine0.50.2

(8) Neither free available chlorine nor total residual chlorine may be discharged from any unit for more than two hours in any one day and not more than one unit in any plant may discharge free available or total residual chlorine at any one time unless the utility can demonstrate to the Regional Administrator or State, if the State has NPDES permit issuing authority, that the units in a particular location cannot operate at or below this level or chlorination.

(9) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (b)(10) of this section, the following effluent limitations shall apply to the point source discharges of coal pile runoff:

Pollutant or pollutant propertyBPT effluent limitations
Maximum concentration for any time (mg/l)
TSS50

(10) Any untreated overflow from facilities designed, constructed, and operated to treat the volume of coal pile runoff which is associated with a 10 year, 24 hour rainfall event shall not be subject to the limitations in paragraph (b)(9) of this section.

(11) The quantity of pollutants discharged in FGD wastewater, flue gas mercury control wastewater, combustion residual leachate, gasification wastewater, or bottom ash purge water shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of the applicable wastewater times the concentration listed in the table 7:

Table 7 to Paragraph (b)(11)

Pollutant or pollutant propertyBPT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day
(mg/L)		Average of
daily values
for 30
consecutive
days shall
not exceed
(mg/L)
TSS100.030.0
Oil and grease20.015.0

(12) At the permitting authority's discretion, the quantity of pollutant allowed to be discharged may be expressed as a concentration limitation instead of the mass-based limitations specified in paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(7), and (b)(11), of this section. Concentration limitations shall be those concentrations specified in this section.

(13) In the event that wastestreams from various sources are combined for treatment or discharge, the quantity of each pollutant or pollutant property controlled in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(12) of this section attributable to each controlled waste source shall not exceed the specified limitations for that waste source.

(The information collection requirements contained in paragraph (a) were approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2000-0194) [47 FR 52304, Nov. 19, 1982, as amended at 48 FR 31404, July 8, 1983; 80 FR 67894, Nov. 3, 2015; 85 FR 64716, Oct. 13, 2020]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1976–1982 · leading case: Appalachian Power Co. v. Russell E. Train, as Adm'r Env't Prot. Agency, Alabama Power Co., Intervenors, 545 F.2d 1351 (4th Cir. 1976).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Appalachian Power Co. v. Russell E. Train, as Adm'r Env't Prot. Agency, Alabama Power Co., Intervenors, 545 F.2d 1351 (4th Cir. 1976). · cites it 10× “21 Based upon the Act taken as a whole, we are of opinion that such a variance clause is unduly restrictive and, accordingly, 40 CFR § 423.12 (a) must be set aside and remanded for further consideration.”
The Cleveland Elec. Illuminating Co. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 603 F.2d 1 (6th Cir. 1979). · cites it 4× “Effluent limitations effective July 1, 1977 to be attained by application of BPT are set forth as *3 guidelines in 40 C.F.R. § 423.12 . Those to be attained no later than July 1, 1983 by application of BAT are established by the guidelines contained in 40 C.”
Am. Petroleum Inst. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 540 F.2d 1023 (10th Cir. 1976). “Train, the Fourth Circuit, with one judge dissenting, set aside the 1977 variance provisions applicable to a subcategory of the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category, 40 C.F.R. § 423.12 (a). It interpreted the clause to mean that “only technical and engineering…”
Wisconsin Elec. Power Co. v. Dep't of Nat. Resources, 287 N.W.2d 113 (Wis. 1980). “The EPA proposed effluent guidelines were later promulgated as 40 C.F.R. 423.12 and 423.13, and Wisconsin Administrative Code sections NR 290.”
Appalachian Power Co. v. Train, 620 F.2d 1040 (4th Cir. 1980). · cites it 3× “Accordingly, being of opinion that EPA’s amendments to 40 CFR §§ 423.12 (a), 423.-22(a), 423.32(a), and 423.”
Appalachian Power Co. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 671 F.2d 801 (4th Cir. 1982). “40 C.F.R. § 423.12 (a) (1974). This variance clause was first challenged in this court by the power companies on the basis that EPA violated the Act by defining too narrowly the “fundamentally different factors” that would activate the clause and be considered in making a BPT…”
Appalachian Power Co. v. Train, 620 F.2d 1040 (4th Cir. 1980). · cites it 2× “EPA amended 40 CFR Parts 423.12(a), 423.22(a), 423.32(a) and 423.”
— 40 C.F.R. § 423.12(a) — 3 cases
Appalachian Power Co. v. Russell E. Train, as Adm'r Env't Prot. Agency, Alabama Power Co., Intervenors, 545 F.2d 1351 (4th Cir. 1976). “21 Based upon the Act taken as a whole, we are of opinion that such a variance clause is unduly restrictive and, accordingly, 40 CFR § 423.12 (a) must be set aside and remanded for further consideration.”
Appalachian Power Co. v. Train, 620 F.2d 1040 (4th Cir. 1980). “Accordingly, being of opinion that EPA’s amendments to 40 CFR §§ 423.12 (a), 423.-22(a), 423.32(a), and 423.”
Appalachian Power Co. v. Train, 620 F.2d 1040 (4th Cir. 1980). “EPA amended 40 CFR Parts 423.12(a), 423.22(a), 423.32(a) and 423.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.