federal register 22o69 i 22069 · and 32 billion cubic feet pf gas at current economic conditions....

Federal Re2ister I Vol. 44, No. 73 I Friday, AprIl 13. 1979 I Rules and Regulations 22069

§ 180.303 Oxamyl; tolerances for residues.

partsper

Comrocy milion

Otals inits 3

[FRL 201-C PP 7Fi190I1[FR Doc. 79-11635 Filed 4-12-7. :45 am)BILUNG CODE 6560-01-U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 435

Effluent Guidelines and Standards, Oiland Gas Extraction Point SourceCategory

AGENCY: Environmental ProtectionAgency.ACTION: Final and Interim Final Rules.

SUMMARY: Final effluent limitationsguidelines establishing "best practicablecontrol technology currently available"(BPT) are hereby promulgated for theoffshore, onshore, coastal andagricultural and wildlife water usesubcategories in the oil and gasextraction industry. These finalregulations combine the near and faroffshore subcategories of the offshoresegment of the industry into a singleoffshore subcategory. The beneficial usesubcategory is renamed the agriculturaland wildlife water use subcategory.Finally, the definition of the strippersubcategory is clarified. However, theAgency does not yet have sufficienttechnical data to promulgate effluentlimitations for this subcategory, and,thus, those sections remain reserved.Additionally, this regulationpromulgates, as interim final, changes inthe descriptions and applicability of thecoastal and agricultural and wildlifewater use subcategories. Comments onthese interim final changes are solicited.The limitations are based upon theapplication of BPT as defined in section304(b) of the Clean Water Act of 1977,(PL 95-217, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et. seq.) (TheAct).DATES: The effective date of theseregulations is April 13,1979. Commentson the interim final regulations must bereceived on or before June 12,1979.ADDRESS: Comments should be directedto: John M. Cunningham, EffluentGuidelines Division (WH-552),Environmental Protection Agency, 401 MStreet, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460,(202) 426-7770.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:John M. Cunningham, (202) 426-7770.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On September 15,1975 (40 Fed. Reg.42543) and October 13, 1976 (41 Fed.Reg. 44942), EPA promulgated interimfinal effluent limitations based on theapplication of "best practicable controltechnology currently available" (BPI'for the offshore and onshore segments ofthe Oil and Gas Extraction point sourcecategory. Concurrently, the Agency alsoproposed effluent limitations based onthe application of "best availabletechnology economically achievable"(BAT), pretreatment standards andstandards of performance for newsources. After promulgation of theseinterim final regulations, members of theoil and gas industry filed Petitions forReview of the interim limitations forboth the onshore segment, AmericanPetroleum Institute, et al., v. EPA (No.76-4497, 5th Cir.) and offshore segment;American Petroleum Institute, eta. v.EPA (No. 75-3588, 9th Cir.). In the courseof negotiations on these cases,stipulations were entered in which theAgency agreed to promulgate certain ofthe regulations contained in this notice.These include, among others, thelimitations on deck drainage in theoffshore subcategory, changes to theAgricultural and Wildlife Water Usesubcategory, and with certainreservations, the description of thecoastal subcategory.

The regulations set forth belowincoiporate comments received afterpublication of the interim finalregulations and the Agency's stipulatedagreements based on those comments.These regulations deal only with BPTlimitations. No changes in the proposedBAT, new source, or pretreatmentregulations issued on those same datesare made by the regulations set forthbelow. Based on comments received todate, the Agency believes that furthprtechnical and economic study isrequired prior to promulgation of thoseregulations.

Legal Authority

These regulations are promulgatedpursuant to sections 301(b) and 304(b) ofthe Act. Section 301(b)(1) requires theattainment of effluent limitations basedupon the application of "best practicablecontrol technology currently available"by July 1, 1977. Section 304(b) providesfor the promulgation of regulationsdefining a technology as "bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable" and specifies the factors tobe taken into account in defining BPT.

Summary and Basis of Regulations

Effluent limitations for oil and greaseare established for all subcategorieswith the exception of the strippersubcategory. The major source of wastewaters generated by facilities in thisindustrial category is produced waters.These produced waters vary from 0 to 99percent of the total volume of fluidsproduced. This extreme fluctuation offlow volumes of produced watersdepend on natural phenomena and isnot subject to process controls.Consequently, the effluent limitationsfor produced water are concentration.based rather than based upon mass perunit of production.

No limitations have been establishedfor several other waste Water pollutantsidentified in field surveys. Thesedecisions were made either becausetechnology is not presently available tocontrol the pollutant discharge oravailable data indicate they are arenormally reduced incidently with theremoval or reduction of anotherpollutant parameter.

Additionally, facilities subject to theseregulations inay be required to prepareand implement spill prevention controland countermeasure (SPCC) plansundersection 311(j) of the Clean WaterAct.These requirements are set forth at 40CFR Part 112.

A report entitled "DevelopmentDocument for Interim Final EffluentLimitations Guidelines and ProposedNew Source Performance Standards forthe Oil and Gas Extraction Point SourceCategory" was prepared in support ofthe initial interim final BPT limitations.this document discussed the oil and gasindustry, available waste treatmenttechnology and the results of thetechnical study which resulted in thelimitations contained in theseregulations. Additionally, asupplementary report on the possibleeconomic impacts of the regulations wasissued at that time.

Since publication of interim finalregulations, interested parties havesubmitted comments and new data forconsideration by the Agency. Thechanges made in this notice are basedon an analysis of those comments anddata. In largest part, these revisionsmerely clarify the interim finalregulations. However, in some casesthese regulations do alter theanticipated impact of the originalregulations. This notice contains adiscussion of those revisions andevaluation of those impacts.

Copies of the development document,supplementing economic analysis andpublic comments are available for

Vol. 44, No. 73 / Friday, April 13, 1979 / Rules and Regulations 22O69Federal Register /

HeinOnline -- 44 Fed. Reg. 22069 1979

22070 Federal Register / Vol. 44. No. 73 / Friday, April 13, 1979 / Rules and Regulations

inspection and copying at the EPAPublic Information Reference Unit,Room 2922 EA Library), WatersideMall, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington,D.C. Copies of the interim finaldocuments were sent to numerouspersons or institutions affected by theregulation or who have placedthemselves on a mailing list for thispurpose (See EPA's Advance Notice ofPublic Review Procedures, 38 Fed. Reg.21202, August 6, 1973). An additionallimited number of copies of theDevelopment Document are availablefrom the Distribution Officer (WH--552),Effluent Guidelines Division,Environmental Protection Agency,Washington, D.C. 20460.

Summary of Public Participation

As a result of comments receivedfollowing publication of the interim finalregulations, the limitations originallyestablished have been reevaluated. Asummary of public participation in this

- rulemaking, public comments, and theAgency's consideration and response iscontained in Appendix B of thispreamble.

Summary of Changes

A number of changes are being madeto the interim final regulations. Adetailed discussion of those changesand their technical basis can be found atAppendix A to this preamble."Offshore Subcategozy-Applicability

and DescriptionBecause the BPT limitations for the

old near offshore subcategory(subcategory A) and the far offshoresubcategory (subcategory B) wereidentical, and because some confusionexisted into which subcategory somefacilities should be placed, the twosubcategories are combined into a singleoffshore subcategory.Coastal Subcategory-Applicability and

Description I,The coastal subcategory is redefined

on a descriptive rather than geographicbasis. This subcategory will includefacilities operating over water orwetlands located landward of the innerboundary of the territorial seal. Thisarea encompasses certain coastal baysand all inland lakes andwetlands.Agricultural and Wildlife Water Use

Subcategozy-Applicabiity andDescriptionThe beneficial use subcategory is

renamed to avoid confusion with theterm in western water rights law.Additionally it is redefined to includefacilities operating west of the 98thmeridian which have produced Water

that is used for agricultural or wildlifewatering purposes.Deck Drainage Limitations-Offshore

and Coastal SubcategoriesThe oil and grease limitations for deck

drainage in the offshore and coastalsubcategories were originallyestablished based on data derived fromthe treatment of deck drainage and-produced water in c6mbination.Although the Agency presently has onlylimited information concerning thetechnological capability for treatingdeck drainage separately, there issubstantial data that sources in thesesubcategories are able to achieve thelimitation established under the oildischarge regulations promulgatedpursuant to section 311 of the CleanWater Act. Consequently, pendingfurther acquisition of data, a linjitationof "no discharge of free oil," comparableto that established undersection 311, isbeing promulgated for this parameter.Agricultural and Wildlife Water Use

Subcategory-Effiuent LimitationsIt has come to the Agency's attention

that-some of the data used-to establishthe oil and grease limitation for thissub'category could not be verified ashaving been analyzed by an EPAapprovedcmethod. Consequently, thosedata had to be removed from the database. Removing those data-pointsresulted in the maximum daily oil andgrease concentration being reduced from45 mg/1 to 35 mg/i.,

Economic Analysis

The Agency has made a study of theeconomic and inflationary impacts ofthese regulations. Since changes madeby'these final regulations should not -increase costs beyond those projectedfor interim final regulations, the impactsare estimated to'be'the s ame as those ofcomplying with the interim finalregulations. It is estimated that thecapital cost of complyin with thelimitations, based on the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable, will be between $112.4 and$206.7"million, and the total annualoperating costs, including amortization,operating and maintenance expense, tobe between $14.1 and $23.6 million. Thecosts and-impacts associated with theregulations are detailed in the economicanalysis documents.

Additionally, data has been receivedwhich suggests that the interim finalrevision of the description of the coastalsubcategory could result.in a reductionof the production from certain affectedwells of up to 7.6 million barrels of oiland 32 billion cubic feet pf gas at currenteconomic conditions. Estimated

continued production of those wellswould be 270 bllion barrels of oil and1,109 billion cubic feet of gas. Theassociated capital and operating costs ofthe wells affected by this revision wouldbe approximately $10 million per yearover the average life of the affectedwells. Expected deregulation ofinterstate natural gas prices couldsignificantly reduce the predictednumber of well closures since the dataupon which closures were estimatedassumed that all gas would be sold atregulated interstate prices.

The economic-and inflationary effectsof these regulations were evaluated inaccordance with Executive Orders 11021,and12044.

Small Business Administration Loans

Section VII of the Act authorizes theSmall Business Administration, throughits economic disaster loan program, tomake loans to assist any small businessconcerns in effecting additions to oralterations in their equipment facilities,or methods of operation so as to meetwater pollution control requirementsunder the Act, if the business Is likely tosuffer a substantial economic Injurywithout such assistance.

For further details concerning thisFederal loan program write to EPA,Office of Analysis and Evaluation, WH-586, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington,D.C. 20460.

Solicitation of Comments'

Comments &bre solicited with respectto the revised statement of descriptionand applicability of the Coastal andAgricultural and Wildlife Water UseSubcategories. Comments must bereceived on or before June 12, 1979.

Dated: April 4,1979.Douglas d. Costle,Adminisitmor.

Appendix A-Discussion of revisions

Offshore Subcategory-Applicabllty.and DescriptionThe inierim final regulations for the

oil and gas extraction industry definedtwo separate subcategories, near and faroffshore, for the offshore segment of theindustry. While this classification wasappropriate at a time when the Agencyplanned to impose different effluentliniitations in these subcategories, theestablishment of identical limitationsbased upon "best practicable technologycurrently available" and the similarityof factors influencing the regulation ofoffshore facilities have led the Agencyto conclude that different subcategoriesfor offshore facilities are unnecessaryConsequently, EPA is now combining

Federal Re dster / VoL 44, No. 73 / Friday, April 13, :1979 /Rules and Regulations22070


Federal Register / Vol. 44. No. 73 / Friday. April 13, 1979 1 Rules and Regulations

the near and far offshore subcategoriesinto a single offshore subcategory.

Additionally, certain ambiguities withrespect to the applicability anddescription of the offshore subcategorieswere raised as issues in a Petition forReview of the interim final regulationsbrought by members of the offshoreindustry in the Court of Appeals for theNinth Circuit. First, there was confusionas to the proper classification offacilities which were located in onesubcategory of the offshore segment butwhich discharged into the othersubcategory. Further, industry litigantsexpressed concern that platforms whichpiped effluent to land-based treatmentfacilities and then discharged thetreated effluent offshore would beclassified in the onshore subcategory.

At the time when the offshoresegment consisted of two subcategories,the Ageficy agreed with litigantschallenging the interim final offshoreregulations to include a preambleprovision explaining that, for theoffshore subcategory only, classificationin a subcategory was to be based onpoint of discharge. This provision stated-'Tor the purpose of the effluentlimitations guidelines for the offshoresegment of the oil and gas extractioncategory, the locations of the dischargeof a point source into the receivingwaters shall determine the subcategoryinto which the point sourcewill beplaced."

However, in the'exercise of itsresponsibility to promulgate appropriateregulations, the Agency has combinedthe two offshore subcategories anddefined the classification of offshoresources based upon their location ofoperation. This action satisfies allobjections raised by the industry andeffectively implements the objectives ofthe parties. Not only does combining thesubcategories eliminate confusion aboutthe classification of facilities within theoffshore segment, but by classifyingfacilities based on their location ofoperations, facilities located offshorebut treating onshore will be placed inthe offshore-subcategory. The Agencybelieves that this is a proper response tothis problem. Facilities piping effluent toonshore treatment facilities could, inmost cases, use less effective on-sitetreatment. To classify those facilities asonshore, with a concomitant zerodischarge requirement, woulddiscourage the use of land-basedtreatment and might, in the long run,produce greater levels of pollutantdischarge. Thus, classification based onlocation of operation was consideredproper.

In litigation challenging the interimfinal regulations for the onshore segmentof the industry, litigants argue that theiroperations should be classified basedupon point of discharge. The Agencystipulation in the offshore litigation wasin no way intended to affect this issue.For the reasons stated above. EPA hasnot adopted the industry'srecommended approach.Coastal Subcategory-Applicability and

DescriptionThe coastal subcategory was

originally established when the interimfinal regulations for the onshore segmentof the industry were promulgated onOctober 13,1976. (41 FR 44943). Thissubcategory was established inrecognition of the fact that oil drillingand production operations existed onplatforms inside the territorial seaswhich would not qualify for inclusion ineither the far offshore or near offshorestibcategories. The coastal subcategorywas defined in the interim finalregulation on a geographic basis whichcontained specific boundaries for thesubcategory identified in terms oflatitude and longitude. Theseboundaries were set to include allplatforms of which the Agency wasaware which were both inside theterritorial seas and which were locatedin the waters of states that permitted thedischarge of produced water.

After analyzing comments and datareceived during the comment period,and after further consideration by theAgency, a number of problems wereevident with respect to this approach.First, industry identified a significantnumber of facilities located in coastalareas which were not included withinthe definition of the subcategorybecause they are located in areas inwhich state laws do not permit thedischarge of produced water. However,since more stringent state requirementsare enforceable regardless of thesubcategory to which a platformbelongs, the Agency believes that theirexclusion on this basis is unnecessary.Second, it was pointed out that certainplatforms in upper Cook Inlet, Alaskawere not included in the subcategoryalthough subject to the same conditionsas other platforms in the coastalsubcategory.

An overall problem identified by thesecomments is that defining thesubcategory on a geographic basisrequires the Agency to reassess theexisting boundaries of the subcategorywhenever industry explores new areasthat might be considered coastal. Sincethis process would be administrativelycumbersome and could lead to

unnecessary delays in explorationactivities, the Agency has concludedthat the coastal subcategory should notbe geographically defined. Instead, theAgency proposed to change thedefinition to include all facilities lbcatedover waters landward of the boundaryof the territorial seas, includingwetlands adjacent to such waters.

An additional problem with theprevious geographic definition was thatit classified in the coastal subcategoryan estimated 1700 wells which operatedon land but which discharged intocoastal waters. Under this reviseddefinition these facilities would bereclassified as either onshore or stripperdepending upon their rate of production.

Industry has submitted dataindicating that approximately 1200wells, previously classed as coastal,would now be classified as onshore.This will require the achievement of alimitation of zero discharge and industrydata indicate that 112 of these wellswould cease production in such case.Additionally, the data projects a loss ofup to 7.6 million barrels of oil and 32billion cubic feet of natural gas over theentire operating lives of the affected

-wells. The continuing production fromthis class of wells is estimated to be 270million barrels of oil and 1,109 billioncubic feet of natural gas. These figuresare based on the current regulatedinterstate price. 1

These figures do not, of course,indicate that a presently indeterminatenumber of wells which would beforehave been classified as onshore willnow be classed as coastal. This wouldinclude facilities operating over lakes,including the Great Lakes, and certainWest Coast bays, including Cook Inlet,Alaska.

The Agency believes that thisreclassification is warranted under thecriteria for technology-based limitationscontained in section 3Q4(b)(1). Noevidence has been presented whichsuggests that the technological capacityof these facilities to meet alimitation ofzero discharge is in anyway differentfrom other onshore wells. While spaceconstraints or reinjection difficultiesmay operate with respect to coastal andoffshore platforms, no such conditionsapply to these wells operiting on land.

Additionally, evaluation of otherrelevant statutory criteria support this

'Since the signature of these regulations by theAdministrator, the President has initiated a phasedderegulation of the price of domestic oil. Thisderegulation should drastically reduce the impact ofthis modification on oil production at affected well&Although the impact of this regulation should nowbe nnimml it is not possible to predict that effectuntil Congress has acted on a proposal to taxportions of the Increased revenues generated by thederegulation.

122071


"on',') -hAa~ -- I. RIter I VnL 44. No. 73/ Friday, April 13, 1979 / Rules and Regulations ~~~* ~ ~ -. -

modification. The Agency gave seriousconsideration to the cost of thisregulation in relation to its effluentreduction benefits and associated non-water quality environmental impacts:Inits assessment of effluent reduction'benefits, the Agency determined thecomposition of existing discharges and'identified a range of significant . -

pollutants including, among others, subhtoxic pollutants as phenols.Determination of the total level ofreduction of these pollutants is difficultfor oil and gas facilities since the flowsand concentrations of pollutants varyamong wells and over the life of anindividual well. However, availabledata indicate that the reclassification ofcertain wells into the onshoresubcategory would result in thereduction of up to 227,000 pounds peryear of phenols alone. These are,reductions of discharges intoenvironmentally sensitive andproductive wetlands. While technology'may not exist which would enableplatform operators to reduce theconcentrations of these pollutants, landbased facilitids have the technologicalcapacity to eliminate their dischargealtogether. This is an obligation whichother onshore facilities are presentlymeeting.

The only non-water quality -

environmental impacts resulting fromthis modification stem from theoperation of reinjection equipment inthose wells reclassified as onshore.These impacts which have been -reviewed by thd appropriate EPAdivisions as part the decision makingprocess, include the energy required tooperate such equipment and associated -

air emissions. Depending upon whethernatural gas or diesel fuel is used,emissions are projected to range from1,387 to 52,500 pounds per year ofhydrocarbons, 1,150 to 1,183 pounds peryear of sulfur oxides, 59,995 to 283,167pounds per year of particulates and69,986 to 1,436,000 pounds per year ofnitrogen oxides. -

The definition promulgated in thisnotice is consistent with the definitionrecommended by the industry in itscomments on the interim finalregulations. The Offshore OperatorsCommittee recommended that thedefinition be modified to read "... thewaters of bays, sounds inlets, and otherwater bodies landward of the territorialseas and affected by the ebb and-flow ofthe tides where State Water QualityCriteria permit the discharge ofproduced water." The AmericanPetroleum Institute recommended thatthe subcategory "should extend to allinland bays, inlets, estuaries, and

coastal lakes which lie landward wheredischarges are allowed or certified bythe States." Similar comments werereceived from many individual oilcompanies. The definition which hasbeen adopted includes all areas coveredby the recommendations of the industryand expands that definition to includewater bodies not affected by the ebband flow of the tide as well as wetlandareas. As stated above, the Agency doesnot believe it necessary to limit thedefinition to those areas where water'quality criteria permit discharge sincewater quality criteria requiring morestringent limitations (including nodischarge) than those found in effluentguidelines must be enforced in any case.

Facilities constructed on man-madeislands which are comparable to oil andgas platforms and located in areasdefined as coastal will be classified inthe coastal subcategory. However, suchclassification will be made on a permit-by-permit basis..Agicultural and Wildlife Water Use

Subcategozy-Applicability andDescriptionThe Agency is changing the name of

subcategory E from the "Beneficial Use"subcategory to the "Agricultural andWildlife Water Use" subcategory. Thischange in name is prompted by theconfusion resulting from the initial

- labeling of the subcategory. The term"beneficial use" has a long history ofuse inWestern United States water lawwhich is unconnected with its meaningin these regulations, and the Agency

* believes that confusion stemmin fromthis prior usage can be avoided bysimply renaming the subcategory.

Additionally, the Agency is clarifyingthe scope of this subcategory byspecifying that only facilities locatedwest of the 98th meridian may qualifyfor inclusion. Subcategory E wasinitially established in response tocomments from certain western statesasking that the Agency allow the use ofproduced water for, agricultural orwildlife purposes. Investigation showedthat in ard portions of the western'United States low salintity producedwaters were often the only, or at least asignificant, source of water used forthose purposes. Although not requiredby the Clean Water Act, the Agency-chose to accommodate this situation bythe creation of Subpart E. It is intended"as a relatively restrictive,subcategorization based on the uniquefactors of prior usage in the'region, ardconditions and the existence of low.salinity, portable water. Thus, allsources subject to regulation under§§ 301 and 304 of the Act which use

produced water for agricultural orwildlife watering purposes at all timesduring their operations may be includedin the subcategory.

The 98th meridian was chosen for usein the definition of the subcategorybecause it approximates the boundaryof relevant geographic and arid or semi-arid climatic conditions which warrantthe creation of this subcategory.Because of the unique combination offactors, and in contrast to the situationexisting in the coastal subcategory, thoAgency does not foresee thegoegraphical makeup of subcategory Ebeing subject to frequent changes, and,therefore, believes that a geographicallimit is not only justified, but is also in

* harmony with the intent of the Act. -Deck Drainage Limitations-Offshore

and Coastal SubcategoriesDeck drainage from coastal and

offshore platforms generally consists ofa composite of substances which collecton platform decks from a variety ofsources including production anddrilling equipment, deck washings andrain. Although specific numericaleffluent limitations on the discharge ofoil and grease were established for thisparameter in the interim finalregulations, inadequacies in the originaldata base require that those limitationsbe withdrawn. An effluent limitation of"no discharge of free oil" Is beingestablished for the discharge of deck.draiage.

The interim final effluent limitationswere based on data collected fromfacilities treating either produced wateror a combination of produced wateranddeck drainage. Since many platformstreat deck drainage separately fromproduced water, and since exploratoryrigs do not treat produced water at all,these limitations did not necessarilyreflect the degree of reductionachievable by these sources. However,most sources in the coastal and offshoresubcategories have been subject to, andhave complied with, limitationsestablished pursuant to the oil dischargoprovisions of section 311 of the CleanWater'Act and its implementingregulations at 40 CFR Part 110. Thislimitation prohibits any discharge whichwould cause a film or sheen on thesurface of the water or cause a sludge oremulsion to be deposited beneath thesurface of the water or on the adjoiningshore. The history achievement of thisrestriction by sources in thesesubcategories indicates that it is bothtechnologically and economicallyachieVable. Consequently, the limitationon deck drainage will be no "dischargeof free oil" which corresponds to the

=oa=..! g, o qt, r I Vn]: 44. No. 73 I Friday, April 13, 1979 / Rules and RegulationsOOn O


Federal Register / VoL 44. No. 73 / Friday. April 13. 1979 / Rules and Regulations

restriction under section 311. Of course,facilities may still be subject to spillprevention regulations at 40 CFR Part112.

EPA has stipulated to inclusion of thislimitatio in litigation challenging theinterim final limitations in the offshoresegment of the industry.

However, Region II of EPA hascollected data from exploratory drillingrigs which suggest that concentrationlimitations on deck drainage are bothtechnologically and economicallyachievable by sources in thesesubcategories. This data is beingreviewed, and additional data may beobtained. Upon completion of thisreview, specific concentration limitsrepresenting BPT may be promulgated.Agricultural and Wldlfe Water Use

Subcategory-Effluent LimitationsEffluent limitations applicable'to this

subcategory are being revised. The Stateof Wyoming and the EPA Region VIIIoffice have provided evidence that theanalytical procedures applied to some ofthe samples used to calculate the oil andgrease limitation for this subcategorywer not documented. As a result wehave noway of knowing whether theEPA approved procedure was used.Because of this, the points wereremoved from the data base, and therevised limitation of 35 mg/1 reflectsthis change.Stnpper Subcategorv

This regulation clarifies the definitionof the stripper subcategory to indicatethat it is the average production perproducing oil well on a field which isrelevant in classifying a source in thissubcategory. The interim finalregulations defined stripper wells, as inpart, as those wells "which produce lessthan 10 barrels per calendar day." Thatdefinition left some uncertainty as towhether some wells on a particularlease would be classed in the strippersubcategory while others might beplaced in the onshore subcategory. Thisdefinition has been revised to reflect thdAgency's intention that it is the averageproduction per oil wells at a field whichserves as the basis for categorization. Inkeeping with this intention, theregulations specifically exclude waterinjection and gas wells from those wellsused to compute the average production.Although no specific effluent limitationsare being promulgated at this time forthe stripper subcategory, properclassification of a source is still

-significant since it may exclude thatsource from other subcategories andauthorize the permit writer to establishapplicable effluent limitations undersection 402(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act.

Monitoring FrequencyIn the offshore and coastal

subcategories the monthly averagelimitations on oil and grease fromproduced water are specified under acolumn headed "Average of daily valuesfor thirty consecutive days," andconcern has been expressed that theappearance of these limitations implieda minimum monitoring schedule. Toavoid this confusion the Agency isdeleting the word "daily" from thecolumn specifying monthly averagelimitations.

The sampling frequencies reflected in.the effluent limitations guidelinesestablished for the offshore and coastalsubcategories are not intended toestablish sampling frequencies forpurposes of compliance monitoring.Compliance monitoring requirementsshould be established in a case-by-casebasis in consideration of such factors asfacility accessibility, the volume andnature of the discharge involved, andthe cost of monitoring. Since the effluentlimitations guidelines contained in theseregulations were established bystatistical analysis of data directlyrelated to sampling frequency, it isessential that permit limitations otherthan the daily maximum for oil andgrease of 72 mg/i, which is based uponfour samples in any twenty-four hourperiod, be consistent with the samplingfrequency used.

To illustrate the effect of samplingfrequencies (other than weekly) on thenonthly average limitation, the followinggraph from the Development Documentis reproduced. (Attached as AppendixC). Thus, if sampling is required only ona monthly basis the monthly averagelimitations would be the same as thedaily maximum (72 mg/i), if twicemonthly sampling is required themonthly average limitation would be 57mg/l, and if weekly sampling is requiredthe monthly average limitation would be48 mg/1 as appears in the regulation.Section IX of the DevelopmentDocument should be consulted forfurther clarification of the graph and theeffect of monitoring frequency onmonthly average limitations. It shouldbe reemphasized that monitoringfrequency does not affect the dailymaximum limitation.

Appendix B-Summary of PublicParticipation

Following promulgation of bothinterim final regulations (OffshoreSegment and Onshore Segment) thepublic was invited to comment on theregulations and the data used in supportof the limitations contained in theregulations.

The following parties responded withcomments: State of Colorado.Department of Natural Resources; DavidK McGowan; Gulf Oil Company; TheState of Louisiana; Gulf Energy andMinerals Co.--U.S.; Phillips PetroleumCompany; Alaska Oil and GasAssociation; Offshore OperatorsCommittee; Atlantic Richfield CompanyMarathon Oil Company, Getty OilCompany; Shell Oil Company Texaco,Inc.; Mid-Continent Oil and GasAssociation-Louisiana Division; ExxonCompany-U.S.A.; ColoradoDepartment of Health: Office of theGovernor, State of Texas; AmericanPetroleum Institute; Petroleum -Association of Wyoming; RockyMountain Oil and Gas Association;Henry Walter, American Society ofMechanical Engineers; Continental OilCompany; Shell Oil Company; TexasMd-Continqnf Oil and Gas Association;Mobil Oil Corporation; Columbia GasSystem Service Company; PennzoilCompany; Sun Oil Company; Union OilCompany; U.S. Department of Health,Education, and Welfare; Chevron OilCompany; State of Alaska; EngineersCouncil of Houston; U.S. Department ofthe Interior, Erie County Department ofHealth.

A copy of all public comments areavailable for inspection and copying atthe EPA Public Information ReferenceUnit, Room 2922 (EPA Library,Waterside Mall, 401 M Street, S.W.,Washington. D.C. A copy of theDevelopment Document, preliminarydraft contractors reports, the economicimpact study, and certainsupplementary materials supporting thestudy of the industry are alsomaintained at this location for publicreview and copying. The EPAinformation regulation. 40 CFR Part 2,provides that a reasonable fee may becharged for copying. -

The more significant issues raisedduring the public comment periods andthe treatment of those issues in thedevelopment of this final regulation areas follows:

(1) Many commentors argued that theguidelines should be modified toauthorize noncompliance with effluentlimitations during periods of "upset" or"bypass". An upset is unintentionalnoncompliance occurring for reasonsbeyond the reasonable control of thepermittee. An upset provision isnecessary, it was argued, because suchupsets will inevitably occur due tolimitations in control technology. TheAgency agrees that some form of upsetprovision should be provided in theNPDES permits and has recentlyproposed a generic upset provision for

22073


Federal Register / Vol. 44,-No. 73 / Friday, April 13, 1979 / Rules and Regulations

inclusion in all permits. 42 Fed. Reg.37094 (August 21,1978).

A bypass is an act of intentional 1noncompliance with permit limitationswhen pollution control equipment is' -circumvented to prevent loss of life, 'injury or severe property damage. It wasargued that a bypass provision shouldalso authorize noncompliance duringperiods of corrective and preventivemaintenance. In many cases, however,"shuttlng-in" of well may constitute botha technologically and economically

- feasible alternative to noncomplianceduring periods of such maintenance.Where shutting-in of wells would ,produce -a permanent and substantialloss of natural resources, a bypasswould be warranted and proposedregulations expand the definitions of"severe property damage" to include -,this situation. 43 Fed. Reg. 37093-94(August 21, 1978). Industry has alsoargued that shutting-in of wells does notconstitute a feasible.alternative tobypassing in a far broader class ofcases. The Agency is currentlyreviewing data which has beensubmitted on this matter. I

However,, the Agency does not believethat issues of upset or bypass areappropriately addressed in nationaleffluent limitations. These are permit

- matters which should-be dealt with inthe context of permit issuance.Consequently, upset and bypassprovisions were included in theproposed regulations dealing withNPDES permits, 43 Fed. Reg. 37078(August 12,1978), These regulations willbe issued shortly in final form.

(2) Many commentors statedIthat thecoastal subcategory (Subcategory D)should not be defined-geographically aswas done in the interim final regulation.After considering the comments and,arguments made during the commentperiod, the Agency agrees and thedefinition of the coastal subcategory. Afurther discussion of this change can befound In Appendix A, "Discussion ofRevisions." ,I - ,

(3) Most commentors argued that theinterim final limitations for deckdrainage in the offshore and coastal.-subcategories should either be , ,eliminated entirely or should lyemodified to require no numericallimitations. The reasons given for

- suggesting such a change included thedifficulty of monitor'.m such discharges,the assumption that they were -already

- controlled by regulations issued under -

section 311.of the Act, the assumption.that such discharges are not harmful,and the charge that EPA's analysis in -

support of the limitations did not meetthe requirements of sections 301-and304

of the Act. While EPA does not agreewith all of the arguments made insupport of the position that deckdrainage limitations should beeliminated, inadequacies in the database supporting interim final limitationsrequire that they be withdrawn at thistime. A discussion of the changes andthe Agency's reasons for making themare discussed in Appendix A,"Discussion of Revisions."

(4) Several commentors believed.thatthe definition of the old beneficia!.usesubcategory was too restrictive and wascontrary to the water rights laws ofmany Western States. The Agency isrenaming and modifying the definitionof this subcategory and a discussion ofthese proposed changes can be found inAppendix A, "Discussion of Revisions."

(5) Many comments were receivedwhich stated that the definition of a"facility" which would be eligible forinclusion in the stripper subcategory(Subcategory.F) was not clear. Thedefinition has been clarified in a fashionconsistent with most of the comments. A'discussion of the Agency's response tothis comment is contained in AppendixA, "Discussion of Revisions."

Additionally, commentors suggestedthat the definition of the strippersubcategory be modified to includemarginal gas wells. However, no datawere presented which indicate that theeconomic impact of exclusion of gas'wells from this subcategory warrantsremedial action. All data indicate thatmarginal gas wells are few in numberand that they produce limited amountsof effluent. Treatment of this effluent isneither technologically infeasible norecohomically unreasonable. No basisexists under the relevant criteria of theAct for separate treatment of thesewells. Should additional data becomeavailable relevant to classification ofthese gas wells, the Agency willreevaluate its position.1 (6) Oil and grease limitations forproduced water in the offshore andcoastal subcategories are expressed astwo limitations-La daily maximumconcentration and a monthly averagelimitation. Many commentors arguedthat the monthly average limitation isnot necessary since it is based upon thesame statistical analysis as is the dailymaximum.

HoWever,°statistical analysis of datafor individual facilities shows that manyfacilities are able to meet the dailymaximum limitations while operating-ata higher long term averageconcentration of oil and grease than thatachieved by best practicable controltechnology currently available. Theaddition of a longer term average than a

daily average decreases the chance thata facility can operate above a long termaverage achievable at BPT and stillconsistently remain below the effluentlimitations. For this reason, the Agencybelieves that, where practicabld, theinclusion of a longer term average, suchas a monthly average, will insure bettorcompliance with the effluent dischargeswhich the Agency believes can be metwith best practicable control technologycurrently available. If monitoringfrequencies are established in individualpermits which are different than theweekly sampling assumed for themonthly average limitation contained Inthe offshore and coastal subcategories,the monthly limitation would also haveto be adjusted to be consistent with thesampling frequency specified In thepermit. In general, if sampling wererequired more frequently than weeklythe monthly average limitation shouldbe lower, while if less frequent samplingwere required than weekly sampling, themonthly average limitation would haveto be higher. A fuller discussion of thispoint Is contained in Appendix A,"Discussion of Revisions."

Additionally, many commentors wereconcerned that the heading of thecolumn specifying the monthly averagelimitation implied on minimummonitoring schedule. This has beendealt with by deleting the word "daily"from that heading. This change Isdiscussed in Appendix A, "Discussion ofRevisions."

II - I |

22074


Federal Register / Vol. 44. No. 73 / Friday, April 13. I979 / Rules and Regulations

APPENIX C

99th Peroentile of Mthly Average Qil and Grease

Qxnentration vs.

rxyey Of S.1 ing Each Mmth

3

(10)

N' iber of Samo Per ?

40 CFR Part 435 is revised to read asfollows:

PART 435-OIL AND GASEXTRACTION POINT SOURCECATEGORY

Subpat A-Offshore Subcategory

.Sec435.10 Applicability;, description of the

offshore subcategory.435.11 Specialized definitions.435.12 Effluent limitations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the application ofthe best practicable control technologycurrently available.

Subpart B-[Reserved]435.20-435.26 [Reserved].

Subpart C-Onshore Subcategory435.30 Applicability;, description of the

onshore subcategory.435.31 Specialized definitions.43b.32 Effluent limitations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the application ofthe best praticable control technologycurrently available.

4

(8) (7)

bath may Beb i suaes

Subpart D-Coastal Subcategory435.40 Applicability; description of the

coastal subcategory.435.41 Specialized defiitions.435.42 Effluent limitations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the application ofthe best practicable control technologycurrently available.

Subpart E-Agricultural and Wildlife WaterUse Subcategory435.50 Applicability; description of the

beneficial use subcategory.435.51 Specialized definitions.435.52 Effluent limitations guidelines

representing the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the application ofthe best practicable control technologycurrently ayallable.

Subpart F-Stripper Subcategory435.60 Applicability; description of the

stripper subcategory.435.61 Specialized definitions.435.62 [Reserved].

Authority: Secs. 301, 304(b) and (c), CleanWater Act of 1977,33 U.S.C. 1251 eL seq.; PL95-21.

* actual

oarzie

0

0D0

Subpart A-Offshore Subcategory

§ 435.10 Applicability; description of theoffshore subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart areapplicable to those facilities engaged inthe production, field exploration.drilling, well production. and welltreatment in the oil and gas extractionindustry which are located seaward ofthe inner boundary of the territorial seasas definedin 40 CFR § 125.1(gg).

§ 435.11 Speclallzed definltons.For the purpose of this subpart-(a) Except as provided below, the

general definitions, abbreviations andmethods of analysis set forth in 40 CFR401 shall apply to this subpart

(b) The term "M10" shall mean thoseoffshore facilities continuously mannedby ten (10) or more persons.

(c) The term "M9IM" shall mean thoseoffshore facilities continuously mannedby nine (9) or fewer persons or onlyintermittently manned by any number ofpersons.(d) The term "no discharge of free oil"

shall mean that a discharge does notcause a film or sheen upon or adiscoloration on the surface of the wateror adjoining shorelines or cause a sludgeor emulsion to be deposited beneath thesurface of the water or upon adjoiningshorelines.

§ 435.12 Effluent limitations guldefinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the application ofthe best practicable control technologycurrently available.

(a) In establishing the limitations setforth in this section, EPA took intoaccount all information it was able tocollect, develop and solicit with respectto factors (such as age and size offacility, raw materials, manufacturingprocesses, products produced, treatmenttechnology available, energyrequirements and costs) which canaffect the industry subcategorizationand effluent levels established. It is,however, possible that data whichwould affect these limitations have notbeen available and, as a result, theselimitations should be adjusted forcertain facilities in this industry. Anindividual discharger or other interestedperson may submit evidence to theRegional Administrator (or to the State,if the State has the authority to issueNPDES permits) that factors relating tothe equipment or facilities involved, theprocess applied, or other such factorsrelated to such discharger arefundamentally different from the factorsconsidered in the establishment of theguidelines. On the basis of suchevidence or other available information,

22075


Federal Register / Vol. 44, No. 73 / Friday, April 13, 1979 / Rules and Regulations

the Regional Administrator (or theState] will make a'written finding thatsuch factors are or are not -fundamentally different for that facilitycompared to those specified in theDevelopment Document. If suchfundamentally different factors arefound to exist, the RegionalAdministrator or the State shallestablish for the discharger effluent"limitations in the NPDES permit eithermore or Idss stringent than thelimitations established herein, to theextent dictated by such fundamentallydifferent factors. Such limitations mustbe approved by the Administrator of theEnvironmental Protectional Ageficy. TheAdministrator may approve ordisapprove such limitations, specifyother limitations, or initiate proceedings,to revise these regulations.

(b) The following limitations establishthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties, controlled by thissection, which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:Effluent limitations-In milligrams per liter--Oil and grease

Average of ResidualPolutant parameter Madnum values for 30 chlorne

waste source for any consecutive minimum1day dayshalnot foranyl

exceed day

Produced water - 72 48 NADock drakiago-. ( ( NADaulmn mu~ds......... (a (0 NA

DrM uttip - a W NAWell treatment M5 to NA

-SartaT:M10._ NA NA 21MgNM MA NA NA

Domostic NA NA NA

'No discharge of free oilMWmu= of img/t and maintained as close to this

concentration as possible.'There shal be no floating solids as a result of the

discharge of these wastes.

Subpart B-[Reserved]

§ 435.20-435.26 [Reserved]

Subpart C-Onshore Subcategory

§ 435.30 Applicabillity descrlptfon of theonshore subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart areapplicable to those facilities engaged inthe production, field exploration,drilling, well completion and welltreatment in the oil and gas extractionindustry which are located landward ofthe inner boundary of the territorial seasas defined in 40 CFR § 125.1(gg) andwhich are not included within subpartsD, E, or F.

§ 435.31 Specialized definitions.

For the purpose of this subpart: (a)The general definitions, abbreviations,andmethods of analysis set forth in 40CFR 401 shall apply to this subpart.

§ 435.32 Effluent limitations guidelinesrepresenting the degree of effluentreduction attainable by the application ofthe best practicable control technologycurrently available.

In establishing the limitations set forthin this section, EPA took into account allinformation it was able to collect,develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and.size of facility,raw materials, production processes,product produced, treatment technologyavailable, energy requirements andcosts) which can affect the industrysubcategorization and effluent levelsestablished. It is,'however, possible thatdata which would affect theselimitations have not been available and,as a result, these limitations should beadjusted for certain plants in thisindustry. An individual discharger orother interested person may submitevidence to the Regional Administrator(or to the State, if the State has theauthority to issue NPDES permits) thatfactors relating to the equipment orfacilities involved, the process applied,or other such factors related to suchdischarger are fundamentally differentfrom the factors considered in theestablishment of the guidelines. On thebasis of such evidence or otheravailable information, the RegionalAdministrator (or the State) will make awritten finding that such factors are or-are not fundamentally different for thatfacility compared to those specified inthe Development Document. If suchfundamentally different factors arefound to exist, the RegionalAdministrator or the State shallestablish for the discharger effluentlimitations in the NPDES permit eithermore or less stringent than the.limitations established herein, to theextent dictated by such fundamentallydifferent factors. Such limitations mustbe approved by the Administrator of theEnvironmental Protection Agency. TheAdministrator may approve ordisapprove such limitations, specifyother limitations, or initiate proceedingsto revise these regulations.

fa) The following.limitations establish.the quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant propertied, controlled by thissection, which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the best"practicable control technology currentlyavailable: there shall be no discharge ofwaste water pollutants into navigable

waters from any source associated withproduction, field exploration, drilling,well completion, or well treatment (ie.,produced water, drilling muds, drillcuttings, and produced sand),

Subpart D-Coastal Subcategory

§ 435.40 Applicability, description of thecoastal subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart areapplicable to facilities engaged In theproduction, field exploration, drilling,well completion and well treatment Inareas defined as coastal. These facilities,are in the oil and gas extractionindustry.

§ 435.41 Specialized definitions.For the purpose of this subpart: (a)

Except as provided below, the generaldefinitions, abbreviations, and methodsof analysis set forth in 40 CFR 401 shallapply to this subpart.

(bM The term "M10" shall mean thosecoastal facilities continuously mannedby ten (10) or more persons.

(c) The term "MgIM" shall mean thosecoastal facilities continuously mannedby nine (9) or fewer persons orintermittently manned by any number ofpersons.

(d) The term "no discharge of free oil"shall mean that a discharge does notcause a film or sheen upon or adiscoloration on the surface of the wateror adjoining shorelines or cause a sludgeor emulsion to be deposited beneath thesurface of the water or upon adjoiningshorelines.

(e) The term "coastal" shall mean: (1)any body of water landward of theterritorial seas as defined in 40 CFR§ 125.1(gg), or (2) any wetlands adjacentto such waters.

(f) The term "wetlands" shall meanthose surface areas which are Inundatedor saturated by surface or ground waterat a frequency and duration sufficient tosupport, and that under normalcircumstances do support, a prevalenceof vegetation typically adapted for lifein saturated soil conditions. Wetlandsgenerally include swamps, marshes,bogs, and similar areas.


In establishing the limitations set forthin this section, EPA took into account allinformation it was able to collect,develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of facility,'raw materials, production processes,product produced, treatment tichnologyavailajole, energy requirements and

I I

22076


Federal Register / Vol. 44, No. 73 / Friday. April 13. 1979 / Rules and Regulations

costs) which can affect the industrysubcategorization and effluent levelsestablished. It is, however, possible thatdata which would affect theselimitations have not been available and,as a result, these limitations should beadjusted for certain plants in thisindustry. An individual discharger orother interested person may submitevidence to the Regional Administrator '

(or to the State, if the State has theauthority to issue NPDES permits) thatfactors relating to.the equipmentorfacilities involved, the process applied,or other such factors related to suchdischarger are fundamentally differentfrom the factors considered in theestablishment of the guidelines. On thebasis of such evidence or otheravailable information, the RegionalAdministrator (or the State) will make awritten finding that such factors are orare not fundamentally different for thatfacility compared to those specified inthe Development Document. If suchfundamentally different factors arefound to exist, the RegionalAdministrator or the State shallestablish for the discharger effluentlimitations in the NPDES permit eithermore or less stringent than thelimitations established herein, to theextent dictated by such fundamentallydifferent factors. Such limitations mustbe approved by the Administrator of theEnvironmental Protection Agency. TheAdministrator may approve ordisapprove such limitations, specifyother limitations, or initiate proceedingsto revise these regulations.

(a) The following limitations establishthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties, controlled by thissection, which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions of"this subpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:Effluent limitations-In milligrams per liter-Oil and grease

Average of ResiduaPolutant parameter Masromi values for 30 chlodne

waste source for any consecutive rrk*in1day- days sad not for any

exceed Iday

Produced water- 72 48 NADeck drainage.-.. _ (. . 0 NAriinguds 0 0 NA

Dril atti_ 5 ( NAWe treatment- (' NA

M10 NA NA 21

MIM.- NA NA NADomestic 3 . NA NA NA

'No dischare of free oil.' 'Minimum of I rngS/ and maintalnedas close to this

concentration as possible.3There shall be no floating solids as a result of the

discharge of these wastes.

Subpart E-Agrcultural and WildlifeWater Use.

§ 435.50 Applicability- description of thebeneficial use subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart areapplicable to those onshore facilitieslocated in the continental United Statesand west of the 98th meridian for whichthe produced water has a use inagriculture or wildlife propagation whendischarged into navigable waters. Thesefacilities are engaged in the production.drilling, well completion, and welltreatment in the oil and gas extractionindustry.

§ 435.51 Specialtzed definitions.For the purpose of this subpart:(a) Except as provided below, the

general definitions, abbreviations, andmethods of analysis set forth in 40 CFR401 shall apply to this subpart.

(b) The term "onshore" shall mean allland areas landward of the territorialseas as defined in 40 CFR 125.1(99).

(c) The term "use in agricultural orwildlife propagation" means that theproduced water is of good enoughquality to be used for wildlife orlivestock watering or other agriculturaluses and that the produced water isabtually put to such use during periodsof discharge. -


In establishing the limitations set forthin this section, EPA took into account allinformation it was able to collect,develop and solicit with respect tofactors (such as age and size of facility,raw materials, production processes,product produced, treatment technologyavailable, energy requirements andcosts) which can affect the industrysubcategorization and effluent levels-established. It is however, possible thatdata which would affect theselimitations have not been available and,as a result, these limitations should beadjusted for certain plants in thisindustry. An individual discharger orother interested person may submitevidence to the Regional Administrator(or to the State, if the State has theauthority to issue NPDES permits) thatfactors relating to the equipment orfacilities involved, the process applied,or other such factors related to suchdischarger are fundamentally differentfrom the factors considered in theestablishment of the guidelines. On thebasis of such evidence or otheravailable information, the RegionalAdministrator (or the State) will makb a

written finding that such factors are orare not fundamentally different for thatfacility compared to those specified inthe Development Document. If suchfundamentally different factors arefound to exist the RegionalAdministrator or the State shallestablish for the discharger effluentlimitations in the NPDES permit eithermore or less stringent than thelimitations established herein, to theextent dictated by such fundamentallydifferent factors. Such limitations mustbe approved by the Administrator of theEnvironmental Protection Agency. TheAdministrator may approve ordisapprove such limitations, specifyother limitations, or initiate proceedingsto revise these regulations.

(a) The following limitations establishthe quantity or quality of pollutants orpollutant properties, controlled by thissection. which may be discharged by apoint source subject to the provisions ofthis subpart after application of the bestpracticable control technology currentlyavailable:

(1) There shall be no discharge ofwaste pollutants into navigable watersfrom any source (other than producedwater) associated with production, fieldexploration, drilling, well completion, orwell treatment (i.e. drilling muds, drillcuttings, and produced sands).

(2) Produced water discharges shallnot exceed the following daily maximumlimitation:

Effluent characteristics: Effluent limitation(mg/).

Oil and Grease: 35.

Subpart F-Stripper Subcategory

§ 435.60 AppllcablIy; description of thestripper subcategory.

The provisions of this subpart areapplicable to those onshore facilitieswhich produce 10 barrels per well percalendar day or less of crude oil andwhich are operating at the maximumfeasible rate of production and inaccordance with recognizedconservation practices. These facilitiesare engaged in production, and welltreatment in the oil and gas extractionindustry.

§ 435.61 Specialized definitions.

For the purpose of this subpart-(a) Except as provided below, the

general definitions, abbreviations, andmethods of analysis set forth in 40 CFR401 shall apply to this subpart.

b} The term "onshore" shall mean allland areas landward of the innerboundary of the territorial seas asdefined in 4O CFR 125.1(gg].

22077


22078 Federal Register / Vol. 44, No. 73 / Friday, April i3, 1979 / Rules and Regulations

(c) The term "well" shall means crudeoil producing wells and shall not includegas wells or wells injecting water for

. disposal or for enchanced recovery ofoil or gas.

(d) The term "gas well" shall meanany well which produces natural gas ina ratio to the petroleum liquids producedgreater than 15,000 cubic feet of gas per1 barrel (42 gallons) of petroleumliquids.

§ 435.62 [Reserved]

[F-L 108941[FR Doc. 79-11101 Filed 4-12-9; &45 am]BILLING CODE 6560-01-M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

41 CFR Part 50-201

Manufacturer or Regular Dealer;,Disqualified'Small Business ConcernProtests

AGENCY: Department of Labor.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Small BusinessAdministration Act, as amended,provides that the Small BusinessAdministration shall review thGovernment procurement officer'sfinding in all cases where theprocurement officer finds that a smallbusiness concern is ineligible to receivea contract subject to the Walsh-HealeyPublic Contracts Act because it does notqualify as a manfacturer or regulaIdealer, The Department of Laborregulations may be interpreted td meanthat the Small Business Administrationwill review such adverse findings by aprocurement officer only when thedisqualified small business concernprotests. The regulations are revised toclarify that the Small BusinessAdministration will review all such,findings involving a small businessconcern, whether or not the smallbusiness concern protests.EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation iseffective on April. 13, 1979.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.Alvin Bramow, Deputy AssociateSolicitor, Division of General LegalServices, Office of the Solicitor, RoomN2464, New Department of LaborBuilding, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,Washington, D.C. 20210, phone 202-523-8293. .

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section501 of Title V, Pub. L. 95-89, approvedAugust 4, 1977, provides in part that if aGovernment procurement officer findsthat an otherwise qualified smallbusiness concern may be ineligible

because that concern is not amanufacturer or regular dealer withinthe provisions of 41 U.S.C. 35a, theprocurement officer shall notify the,Small Business Administration inwriting of such finding. The SmallBusiness Administration shall thenreview and act upon the finding.

The Department of Labor regulationsin 41 CFR 50-201.101(b)(6)(i](CJl2)provide that in the case of a smallbusiness concern the protest and allpertinent evidence will be forwarded tothe Small Business Administration. Thisdocument amends the regulation to "make clear that all findings ofineligibility based in 41 CFR Part 35(a)shall be forwarded to the Small BusinessAdministration for review, whether ornot the small business concern hasprotested.

As this clarifying amendment of ourregulation is made to correctly reflect astatutory provision, neither notice ofproposed rulemaking nor delay in theeffective date is necessary. NoRegulatory Analysis is required.

This document was prepared underthe direction and control of AlvinBramow, Deputy Associate Solicitor,Division of General Legal Services,Office of the Solicitor, Room N2464,New Department of Labor Building, 200Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,D.C. 20210, phone 202-523-8293.

Accordingly § 50-201101(b)(8)(i)(C(2)of Part 50-201 is amended to read asfollows:

§ 50-201.101 Manufacturer or regulardealer.

)* * * *(b)* * *

(C) *

(2) In the case of a small businessconcern, all findings of ineligibility andall pertinent evidence will be forwardedtolthe Administrator of the SmallBusiness Administration, whether or notthe small business concern protests thedetermination, and the bidder or offerorshall be so notified.* * *

Signed at Washington, D.C., on this 9th dayof April 1979.Xavier M. Vela,Administrator, Wage and Hour Division.

[FR Doc. 79-11615 Filed 4-12-79; &45 am]

BILLING CQDE 4510-27-M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONSCOMMISSION

47 CFR Part 0

Delegations of Authority to the Chief,Common Carrier Bureau and to theTelecommunlcations Committee;Correction

AGENCY: Federal CommunicationsCommission.ACTION: Correction (Errata)

SUMMARY: This rule makes a technicalcorrection to FR Doc. 79-9337, whichwas published on March 28,1979. Thefinal order was a delegation of authorityto the Chief, Common Carrier Bureauand to the TelecommunicationsCommittee.EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2,1979.

ADDRESS: Federal CommunicationsCommission, Washington, D.C. 20554.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.Larry A. Blosser, Common CarrierBureau, (202) 632-4890.

In the matter of amendment of Part 0of the Commission's rules with respectto delegatidns of authority to the Chief,Common Carrier Bureau and to theTelecommunications Committee. ErrataReleased; March 30,1979.

The Order in the above-captionedmatter (FCC 79-174, released March 22,1979, and published in the FederalRegister on March 28,1979,44 FR 18500)#is corrected by deleting "510" from,subpardgraph (g) in § 0.291 of theAppendix and inserting in lieu thereof"503(b)."Federal Communicatlons Commisson.

William J. Trcarlco,Secretary. "[FR Doc 79-11440 Filed 4-12-. 8:45 am)BILLING CODE 6712-014"

47 CFR Part 73

FM Broadcast Stations In Anadarko,Okla. and Memphis, Tex.; ChangesMade In Table of Assignments

AGENCY: Federal CommunicationsCommission.ACTION: Report and Order.

SUMMARY: Action taken herein assigns aClass C M chan-iel to Anadarko,Oklahoma, and substitutes one Class Cfor another at Memphis, Texas, inresponse to a petition filed by AnadarkoBroadcasting Company. The proposedstation could render significant first andsecond FM service to rural areas ofCaddo County ifi addition to providingAnadarko with its first full-time auralbroadcast service.

. I

Federal Re zlster / Vol. 44, No. 73 / Friday, April t3, 1979/ Rules and Regulations22078


federal register 22o69 i 22069 · and 32 billion cubic feet pf gas at current economic conditions....

Documents