EPA’s Two-Phase Screening and Review Process Has Identified Few Industrial Categories for New or Revised Effluent Guidelines

EPA uses a two-phase process to review industrial categories potentially  in need of new or revised effluent guidelines; from 2003 through 2010, the  agency identified few such categories. Since 2003, EPA has annually  screened all industrial categories subject to effluent guidelines, as well as  other industrial categories that could be subject to new guidelines; it has  identified 12 categories for further review and selected 3 categories to  update or to receive new effluent guidelines. In ranking industrial categories during the screening phase, EPA  considers the extent to which discharged pollutants threaten human  health and the environment—the first factor identified in EPA’s 2002 draft  strategy. EPA’s Further Review Phase Results in Few Industrial Categories to Consider for Potential New or Revised Effluent Guidelines

In its further review phase, EPA conducts detailed studies of any  industrial categories identified in its screening phase, using the four  factors listed in its November 2002 draft strategy to determine whether  the categories need new or revised effluent guidelines. Focus on Limited Hazard Data to the Exclusion of Technology Information May Have Led EPA to Overlook Industrial Categories for Pollution Reduction

Limitations in the screening phase of EPA’s review process may have  caused the agency to overlook some industrial categories that warrant  new or revised effluent guidelines and thus hinder the effectiveness of the  effluent guidelines program in advancing the goals of the Clean Water  Act. EPA’s Screening Phase Does Not Consider Treatment Technologies, Omitting Some Industrial Categories from Further Review

EPA’s primary focus during its screening phase is the relative hazard  posed by industrial categories, without consideration of available  treatment technologies that could be used as the basis for revised effluent  guidelines to help reduce pollutant discharges. EPA does not conduct a further review for these and other industrial  categories that it has excluded for other reasons, meaning that EPA does  not examine them for the availability of more-effective treatment  technologies. EPA Is Adding Hazard Data Sources but Is Not Fully Using Potential Sources of Information on Treatment Technologies

EPA has begun to take actions to improve the hazard data it uses in its  screening of industrial categories, but it is not fully using potential sources  of information on treatment technologies for consideration in this  screening. According to some experts, consideration of treatment technologies is  especially important for older effluent guidelines because changes in  either the industrial categories or the treatment technologies are more  likely to have occurred, making it possible that new, more advanced and  cost-effective treatment technologies have become available. Most important, without a more thorough and integrated  screening approach that both improves hazard information and considers  treatment technology data, EPA cannot be certain that the effluent  guidelines program is reflecting advances in the treatment technologies  used to reduce pollutants in wastewater. Regarding our second recommendation, that EPA should identify and  evaluate additional sources of information to improve its assessment of  treatment technologies for industrial dischargers, EPA agreed that  treatment technology information is useful to its program. GAO staff who made major contributions to  this report are listed in appendix V.

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

To examine the process the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)  follows to screen and review industrial categories and the results of that  process, we reviewed the Clean Water Act and relevant court decisions  and agency documents, interviewed agency officials and experts, and  documented the steps EPA has taken to screen particular industrial  categories for possible new or revised effluent guidelines. We focused our review on the results of the process EPA used from 2003  through 2010 in order to examine the approach it developed after the  publication in November 2002 of its draft Strategy for National Clean  Water Industrial Regulations: Effluent Limitation Guidelines, Pretreatment  Standards, and New Source Performance Standards. To examine limitations to EPA’s screening and review process, if any,  that could hinder the effectiveness of the effluent guidelines program in  advancing the goals of the Clean Water Act, we pursued three separate  methodologies: we (1) interviewed a cross section of experts on EPA’s  effluent guidelines program, (2) surveyed the water quality permit  directors of the 46 states that are authorized to issue permits for the  National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), and (3)  analyzed information about the hazard data sources EPA uses in its  screening process. For example, in 46 percent of these cases, state officials said  that EPA should revise the effluent guidelines for the corresponding  industry.
Why GAO Did This Study

Under the Clean Water Act, EPA has made significant progress in reducing wastewater pollution from industrial facilities. EPA currently regulates 58 industrial categories, such as petroleum refining, fertilizer manufacturing, and coal mining, with technology-based regulations called effluent guidelines. Such guidelines are applied in permits to limit the pollutants that facilities may discharge. The Clean Water Act also calls for EPA to revise the guidelines when appropriate. EPA has done so, for example, to reflect advances in treatment technology or changes in industries.
GAO was asked to examine (1) the process EPA follows to screen and review industrial categories potentially needing new or revised guidelines and the results of that process from 2003 through 2010; (2) limitations to this process, if any, that could hinder EPAs effectiveness in advancing the goals of the Clean Water Act; and (3) EPAs actions to address any such limitations.
GAO analyzed the results of EPAs screening and review process from 2003 through 2010, surveyed state officials, and interviewed EPA officials and experts to obtain their views on EPAs process and its results.

What GAO Found

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) uses a two-phase process to identify industrial categories potentially needing new or revised effluent guidelines to help reduce their pollutant discharges. EPAs 2002 draft Strategy for National Clean Water Industrial Regulations was the foundation for EPAs process. In the first, or screening, phase, EPA uses data from two EPA databases to rank industrial categories according to the total toxicity of their wastewater. Using this ranking, public comments, and other considerations, EPA has identified relatively few industrial categories posing the highest hazard for the next, or further review, phase. In this further review phase, EPA evaluates the categories to identify those that are appropriate for new or revised guidelines because treatment technologies are available to reduce pollutant discharges. Since 2003, EPA has regularly screened the 58 categories for which it has issued effluent guidelines, as well as some potential new industrial categories, and it has identified 12 categories for its further review phase. Of these 12 categories, EPA selected 3 for updated or new effluent guidelines. EPA chose not to set new guidelines for the others.
Limitations in EPAs screening phase may have led it to overlook some industrial categories that warrant further review for new or revised effluent guidelines. Specifically, EPA has relied on limited hazard data that may have affected its ranking of industrial categories. Further, during its screening phase, EPA has not considered the availability of advanced treatment technologies for most industrial categories. Although its 2002 draft strategy recognized the importance of technology data, EPA has stated that such data were too difficult to obtain during the screening phase and, instead, considers them for the few categories that reach further review. Officials responsible for state water quality programs and experts on industrial discharges, however, identified categories they believe EPA should examine for new or updated guidelines to reflect changes in their industrial processes and treatment technology capabilities. According to some experts, consideration of treatment technologies is especially important for older effluent guidelines because changes are more likely to have occurred in either the industrial categories or the treatment technologies, making it possible that new, more advanced treatment technologies are available.
Recognizing the limitations of its hazard data and overall screening approach, EPA has begun revising its process but has not assessed other possible sources of information it could use to improve the screening phase. In 2012, EPA supplemented the hazard data used in screening with four new data sources. EPA is also developing a regulation that, through electronic reporting, will increase the completeness and accuracy of its hazard data. In 2011, EPA also began to obtain recent treatment technology literature. According to EPA, the agency will expand on this work in 2013. Nonetheless, EPA has not thoroughly examined other usable sources of information on treatment technology, nor has it reassessed the role such information should take in its screening process. Without a more thorough and integrated screening approach that both uses improved hazard data and considers information on treatment technology, EPA cannot be certain that the effluent guidelines program reflects advances in the treatment technologies used to reduce pollutants in wastewater.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making recommendations to improve the effectiveness of EPAs effluent guidelines program by expanding its screening phase to better assess hazards and advances in treatment technology. EPA agreed with two recommendations in principle and said it is making progress on them, but said that one is not workable given current agency resources. GAO believes improvements can be made.