[Federal Register: November 29, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 230)]
[Notices]
[Page 71165-71169]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29no02-80]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-7414-8]
Draft Strategy for National Clean Water Industrial Regulations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of availability of draft Strategy for National Clean
Water Industrial Regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the Clean Water Act, EPA establishes national
technology-based regulations, termed ``effluent guidelines,'' to reduce
pollutant discharges from industrial facilities to surface waters and
publicly owned treatment works. Today, EPA is announcing the
availability of its draft Strategy for National Clean Water Industrial
Regulations. The draft Strategy describes a process to identify
existing effluent guidelines that EPA should consider revising, and to
identify any industrial categories for which the Agency should consider
developing new effluent guidelines. EPA proposes to use this process to
develop future Effluent Guidelines Program Plans, which EPA is required
to publish under section 304(m) of the Clean Water Act every two years.
The Agency welcomes comments on the draft Strategy and recommendations
on industrial categories to be considered. In addition, EPA is
announcing an Industrial Wastewater and Best Available Treatment
Technologies Conference that it is co-sponsoring with Vanderbilt
University.
DATES: Submit comments on the draft Strategy by February 27, 2003. A
public meeting will be held on Wednesday, January 15, 2003. In
addition, the Industrial Wastewater and Best Available Treatment
Technology Conference will be held February 26-28, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Water Docket, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mailcode: 4101T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20460, Attention Docket ID No. OW-2002-0020. Comments may also be
submitted electronically or through hand delivery/courier. Follow the
detailed instruction as provided in B.
An informational meeting for interested stakeholders will be held
in the EPA East Building, Room 1153, 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC.
The Industrial Wastewater and Best Available Treatment Technologies
Conference will be held at the Nashville Marriott at Vanderbilt
University, at 2555 West End Avenue, Nashville, TN, 37203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Harrigan at (202) 566-1666 or
harrigan.patricia@epa.gov, or Jan Matuszko at (202) 566-1035 or
matuszko.jan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?
1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under Docket ID No. OW-2002-0020. The official public docket is
the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the
Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Water
Docket is (202) 566-2426. To schedule an appointment to see docket
materials, please call (202) 566-2426. The EPA public information
regulation (40 CFR part 2) provides that a reasonable fee may be
charged for copying.
2. Electronic Access. An electronic version of the public docket is
available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system,
EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to
submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the
contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents
in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``search,'' then key in docket identification number,
OW-2002-0020.
Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets.
Information claimed as confidential business information (CBI) and
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute, which is
not included in the official public docket, will not be available for
public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that
copyrighted material will not be placed in EPA's electronic public
docket, but will be available only in
[[Page 71166]]
printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access
any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket
facility identified in A.1.
For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is
that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper,
will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public
docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment
contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment
containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that
material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's
electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the
copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket.
Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public
docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the Docket will
be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where
practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph
will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief
description written by the docket staff.
B. How and To Whom Do I Submit Comments?
You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand
delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the
appropriate docket identification number in the subject line on the
first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are
submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after
the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not
required to consider these late comments.
1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as
prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing
address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body
of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside
of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying
the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA
will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information
provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the
comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made
available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to
submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for
receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket
, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Once in the system, select ``search,'' and then key in Docket ID No.
OW-2002-0020. The system is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means
EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
ii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to OW-
docket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. OW-2002-0020. In contrast to
EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail system is not an
``anonymous access'' system. If you send an e-mail comment directly to
the Docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's
e-mail system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail
addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e-mail system are
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.
iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM
that you mail to the mailing address identified in B.2. These
electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file
format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption.
2. By Mail. Send an original and three copes of your comments and
enclosures (including references) to: Water Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode: 4101T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. OW-2002-0020.
3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: EPA
Docket Center, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. OW-2002-0020. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation as
identified in A.1.
C. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
3. Provide any technical information and/or data you used that
support your views.
4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at your estimate.
5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
6. Offer alternatives.
7. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket
identification number in the subject line on the first page of your
response. It would also be helpful if you provided the name, date, and
Federal Register citation related to your comments.
Outline of This Notice
I. Regulated Entities
II. Legal Authority
III. Background of the Effluent Guidelines Program
IV. A Strategy for National Clean Water Industrial Regulations
V. Solicitation of Stakeholder Recommendations
VI. Public Meeting
VII. Industrial Wastewater and Best Available Treatment Technologies
Conference
I. Regulated Entities
Today's draft Strategy for National Clean Water Industrial
Regulations does not contain regulatory requirements. It presents a
proposed process that identifies industrial categories for possible
development or revision of effluent limitations guidelines and
standards (``effluent guidelines''). A list of the 55 currently
regulated industries is provided in the draft Strategy at appendix 1,
which can be found on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/guide/strategy
.
II. Legal Authority
Today's document is published under the authority of section
301(d), 304(b), 304(g), 304(m), 306(b), 307(b) and 307(c) of the Clean
Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1311(d), 1314(b), 1314(g), 1314(m), 1316(b),
1317(b) & 1317(c).
[[Page 71167]]
III. Background of the Effluent Guidelines Program
The CWA directs EPA to promulgate effluent limitations guidelines
and standards for categories or subcategories of industrial point
sources that, for most pollutants, reflect the level of pollutant
control attained by the best available technologies economically
achievable. See CWA sections 301(b)(2), 304(b), 306, 307(b), and
307(c). For point sources that introduce pollutants directly into the
Nation's waters (i.e., direct dischargers), the limitations promulgated
by EPA are implemented through National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits. See CWA sections 301(a), 301(b), and 402. For
sources that discharge to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) (i.e.,
indirect dischargers), EPA promulgates pretreatment standards that
apply directly to those sources and are enforced by POTWs, which are
backed by State and Federal authorities. See CWA sections 307(b) and
(c). EPA has issued effluent guidelines for more than 50 industrial
categories.
Section 304(m) of the CWA requires EPA to publish a plan every two
years that consists of three elements. First, under section
304(m)(1)(A), EPA is required to establish a schedule for the annual
review and revision of existing effluent guidelines in accordance with
section 304(b). Section 304(b) specifies factors EPA must consider when
promulgating effluent limitations guidelines for direct dischargers and
directs EPA to revise such regulations as appropriate. Second, under
section 304(m)(1)(B), EPA must identify categories of sources
discharging toxic or nonconventional pollutants for which EPA has not
published effluent limitations guidelines under section 304(b)(2) or
new source performance standards (NSPS) under section 306. Finally,
under section 304(m)(1)(C), EPA must establish a schedule for the
promulgation of effluent limitations guidelines under section 304(b)(2)
and NSPS for the categories identified under the second element (i.e.
subparagraph (B)) not later than three years after being identified in
the section 304(m) plan. Section 304(m) does not apply to pretreatment
standards for indirect dischargers, which EPA promulgates pursuant to
sections 307(b) and 307(c) of the CWA.
On October 30, 1989, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., and
Public Citizen, Inc., filed an action against EPA in which they
alleged, among other things, that EPA had failed to comply with CWA
section 304(m). The Plaintiffs and EPA agreed to a settlement of that
action in a Consent Decree entered on January 31, 1992. The Consent
Decree, as modified, established a schedule by which EPA would propose
and take final action for eleven point source categories identified by
name in the Decree, and for eight other point source categories
identified only as new or revised rules, numbered 5 through 12. See
Consent Decree pars. 2(a), 4(a), and 5(a). The Decree also established
deadlines for EPA to complete studies of eleven point source
categories. See Consent Decree, par. 3(a). The Consent Decree provides
that the foregoing requirements shall be set forth in EPA's section
304(m) plans. See Consent Decree, pars. 3(a), 4(a), 5(a). The Consent
Decree also provides that section 304(m) plans issued under the Decree
that are consistent with its terms shall satisfy EPA's obligations
under section 304(m) with respect to the publication of such plans. See
Consent Decree, par. 7(b). The last date for EPA action under the
Decree, as modified, is June 2004. EPA is currently on track to meet
this last obligation, which will lead to the termination of the Consent
Decree.
IV. A Strategy for National Clean Water Industrial Regulations
The prospective end of the Consent Decree in 2004 offers EPA and
interested stakeholders an excellent opportunity to evaluate the
effluent guidelines program and to consider how national industrial
regulations can best achieve the Nation's clean water goals and the
requirements of the Clean Water Act in the years ahead. The draft
Strategy outlines a process for developing a biennial plan that is
designed to meet both the statutory requirements in section 304(m) of
the Clean Water Act and the water quality challenges of the 21st
century. The draft Strategy aims to reduce risk to human health and the
environment, using the most effective tools available. It is intended
to ensure that EPA's process for setting priorities in its effluent
guidelines program is transparent. EPA is looking for ways that its
Strategy can help spur the development of innovative technologies,
promote multi-media pollution prevention, and expand the use of market-
based incentives to improve the quality of our nation's waters. The
draft Strategy is posted for review on EPA's web site at http://www.epa.gov/guide/plan.html.
Section V of this notice solicits
stakeholder comment on several key features of the strategy as well as
the role of effluent guidelines in the national clean water program.
The draft Strategy was initially discussed in the notice for the
Effluent Guidelines Program Plan for 2002/2003. See 67 FR 55012, 55013-
14 (Aug. 27, 2002) (final plan); and 67 FR 41418-9, (June 18, 2002)
(proposed plan). Several commenters supported EPA's goal to develop a
strategy for future planning of the effluent guidelines program, and
encouraged EPA to engage a broad range of stakeholders in the planning
process.
V. Solicitation of Stakeholder Recommendations
EPA requests comments about several specific issues discussed in
the Strategy.
Key Factors for Evaluating Existing Effluent Guidelines: EPA
identified four major factors, derived from sections 301(b)(2) and
304(b) of the CWA, that could lead EPA to conclude that a revision of
an existing effluent guideline would be appropriate: (1) The extent to
which the industry category is discharging pollutants that pose a risk
to human health or the environment; (2) the identification of an
applicable and demonstrated technology, process change, or pollution
prevention approach that would substantially reduce the remaining risk;
(3) the cost, performance, and affordability of the technology, process
change, or pollution prevention approach that would substantially
reduce that risk; and (4) implementation and efficiency considerations,
such as whether revising a guideline is the most effective approach for
reducing the risk. In addition, section 304(b) authorizes EPA to
consider other factors as the Administrator deems appropriate. EPA
requests comments on its proposed use of these factors, and invites the
public to suggest additional or different factors.
The Agency is also interested to receive comments on whether each
of the four factors identified above should be ranked, and if so,
whether different weights should be applied to each. EPA also requests
suggestions as to the information the Agency should use to prioritize
industrial categories that pass both the primary and secondary
screening reviews described in the draft Strategy.
Key Factors for Developing New Effluent Guidelines: EPA identified
four major factors that could lead EPA to conclude that new national
effluent guidelines regulations would be necessary and appropriate for
industrial categories. These factors are identical to the factors
discussed above with respect to the revision of existing effluent
guidelines, and are derived from the same statutory bases. (The main
difference is than an industry category with no existing guideline in
place may
[[Page 71168]]
have greater variation in current discharges and pollutant reduction
technologies in place. This depends on what technology-based limits
permit writers have established using best professional judgment and
what limits they have established to protect water quality.) These
factors reflect Congress' expectation that EPA will address
``significant amounts'' of toxic pollutant discharges through national
technology-based regulations. S. Rep. No. 50, 99th Cong., 1st Sess. 24-
25 (1985). EPA requests comments on its proposed use of these factors
and invites the public to identify other or different factors for EPA's
consideration.
The Agency is also interested to receive comments on whether each
of these factors should be ranked, and if so, whether different weights
should be applied to each. EPA also requests suggestions as to the
information the Agency should use to prioritize industrial categories
that pass both the primary and secondary screening reviews described in
the draft Strategy.
Sources of Water Quality Impairments: An impaired water is one that
does not achieve the water quality standards adopted by a State, Tribe,
or EPA under CWA section 303(c). Building on ongoing work by EPA,
States, Tribes, and others, the Agency is working to identify links
between industrial sources of pollutants with pollutants identified as
the causes of impairments in impaired waters. This effort links the
categories of facilities discharging pollutants as identified in
Agency's Permit Compliance System (PCS) database with types of
impairments of water bodies identified using the U.S. Geological
Survey's National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and State and Tribal
reported data from the reports generated under CWA sections 303(d) and
305(b). (Section 303(d) requires States to develop lists of waterbodies
for which technology-based limitations and other requirements are not
sufficient to ensure attainment of water quality standards. Section
305(b) requires States to report to EPA every other year on the quality
of their waters.) EPA requests suggestions on other sources of relevant
information, particularly data relating to facilities that discharge to
publicly owned treatment works (POTWs).
Voluntary Loading Reductions: EPA is considering incentives for
industrial categories to reduce pollutant loadings through voluntary
programs. For example, EPA might determine to not develop new or
revised effluent guidelines for source categories that demonstrate
continual or substantial reduction of pollutants through voluntary
effluent reductions. Voluntary efforts should be encouraged and
rewarded, so EPA is considering whether source categories that have
accomplished voluntary pollutant discharge reductions should be given a
lower priority for new or revised effluent guidelines.
EPA is also considering whether to indicate a quantitative
voluntary reduction goal that source categories seeking a deferral of
consideration for new or revised guidelines should try to achieve. EPA
is considering a goal, suggested by a stakeholder, of a 10 percent
reduction in total load, or in toxic-equivalent load over a five-year
period (the standard permit term). EPA emphasizes that the goal would
not be binding on either the Agency or the industry; EPA would retain
the discretion to decide whether to develop an effluent guideline. EPA
would consider voluntary load reductions on an industry-by-industry
basis in making its planning decisions (and may make decisions
irrespective of the general, non-binding goal). The Agency requests
comment on this entire issue. EPA also invites comment on whether a
different general goal, such as a 25 percent reduction in total or
toxic-equivalent load, would be more appropriate.
EPA proposes to use information in the PCS system to identify
categories for which loadings have decreased over the past 5 years, but
requests suggestions on alternative sources of this information. EPA
also invites comment on how it might assess voluntary pollutant
reductions in industrial categories with increased production over five
years. Finally, EPA invites comment on ways to evaluate claims of
decreases in water loadings of toxicity relative to possible increases
in release of these emissions to other environmental media, for example
volatilization to air or land disposal of sludge.
Technology Innovation, Market-based Incentives, and Multi-media
Pollutant Reduction: In addition to the above discussion of voluntary
loading reductions, EPA seeks comment on others ways the Agency might
structure the effluent guidelines program to encourage and reward
technology innovation. EPA invites stakeholders to suggest industry
categories for which development or revision of an effluent guideline
may provide an opportunity for multi-media pollutant reduction. EPA
also seeks comment on the role of market-based incentives, including
pollutant trading, in the effluent guidelines program.
In addition, EPA encourages comments on the extent to which the
Agency should consider multi-media pollutant reduction opportunities in
deciding which guidelines to develop or revise. For example, should the
Agency assign greater weight to revising a guideline that has the
opportunity to reduce the loading of 100 million pounds of nutrients
into surface waters impaired by nutrient pollution, or one that might
reduce nutrient loading by 80 million pounds but also reduce noxious
odors and emissions of greenhouse gases?
Level of Effort Devoted to Effluent Guidelines: Since Congress
passed the 1972 Clean Water Act, EPA has promulgated effluent
guidelines that address over 50 industry categories. These regulations
apply to between 35,000 and 45,000 facilities that discharge directly
to the nation's waters, as well as another 12,000 facilities that
discharge into publicly owned treatment works. These regulations are
responsible for preventing the discharge of almost 700 billion pounds
of pollutants each year.
In addition to the technology-based effluent guidelines program,
EPA and the States implement a wide range of water-quality based
programs also designed to protect and restore the Nation's waters. For
example, the water quality standards adopted by all States, Territories
and 20 authorized Tribes are the regulatory and scientific foundation
for the Nation's water quality-based programs. Water quality standards
are used to assess impairments in U.S. waters, to establish targets and
load reductions needed in impaired waters through total maximum daily
loads (TMDLs), and to set limits on pollutants through enforceable
NPDES permits where technology-based limits are insufficient to protect
water quality.
Under EPA and State permit programs, industrial discharge
restrictions--in the form of technology-based and water-quality based
effluent limitations--have controlled over 48,000 individual industrial
facilities through the issuance of individual NPDES permits, and
controlled thousands more through general permits. Fish are coming
back, habitats are recovering, and many miles of formerly contaminated
beaches are now safe for swimmers. However, we have not achieved water
quality objectives in many water bodies. Many of the remaining
pollutants come from sources that are not related to industrial
discharges, such as non-point source runoff from agricultural lands,
stormwater flows from cities, seepage into ground water from nonpoint
sources, and loss of critical habitats such as wetlands.
[[Page 71169]]
One facet of EPA's overall approach to resolving the remaining
water quality problems is the continued implementation of the national
effluent guidelines program to address water quality problems
associated with industrial dischargers. As EPA moves forward to address
the remaining water quality problems, EPA invites comment on whether it
should devote the same, less, or greater resources to the effluent
guidelines program as it has in the past.
VI. Public Meeting
An important first step in the planning process is to consult with
authorized States and Tribes, pretreatment control authorities, and
professional associations to obtain their recommendations on revising
existing effluent guidelines and identifying industries for new
guidelines. These stakeholders can help identify water quality concerns
related to industrial categories as well as changes in industries which
affect the administration and effectiveness of existing regulations.
EPA recognizes that there are other stakeholders who also may have
concerns or data indicating the need for new or revised regulations, or
revisions to EPA's draft Strategy.
Therefore, the Agency will hold a public meeting on Wednesday,
January 15 from 9 a.m. to noon, to discuss the goals and the elements
of the draft Strategy. This informational meeting will be held in the
EPA East Building, Room 1153, 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC. No registration is required for this meeting. If you
need special accommodations at this meeting, please contact Pat
Harrigan at (202) 566-1666 or harrigan.patricia@epa.gov at least five
business days before the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can
be made.
For security reasons, we request that you bring photo
identification with you to the meeting. Also, if you let us know in
advance of your plans to attend, it will expedite the process of
signing in. Seating will be provided on a first-come, first-served
basis. Please note that parking is very limited in downtown Washington,
and use of public transit is recommended. The EPA Headquarters complex
is located near the Federal Triangle Metro station. Upon exiting the
Metro station, walk east to 12th Street. On 12th Street, walk south to
Constitution Avenue. At the corner, turn right onto Constitution Avenue
and proceed to the EPA East Building entrance.
During the meeting, EPA will present an overview of the draft
Strategy, including the factors the Agency expects to consider and the
cycle of steps involved in its application. EPA will also allow time
for questions and answers during these sessions. The Agency also
encourages participants to identify and provide supporting data and/or
rationales on existing effluent guidelines that EPA should consider
revising, or on any industrial categories for which the Agency should
consider developing new effluent guidelines. This meeting is not a
public hearing for the purpose of obtaining comment on the draft
Strategy. EPA will not generate a transcript of the meeting. The public
may submit written comments as described in the ``How to Submit
Comments'' section above.
VII. Industrial Wastewater and Best Available Treatment Technologies
Conference
EPA has established effluent limitation guidelines and pretreatment
standards for more than 50 industries. (A list of the currently
regulated industries is provided in the draft Strategy at appendix 1,
which can be found on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/guide/strategy.
) Over the last 30 years, these industries have accumulated
much expertise and experience in wastewater treatment process design
and operation to comply with these regulations. Vanderbilt University
and the U.S. EPA are co-sponsoring a technical conference to provide a
forum to share experiences with process design and regulatory
compliance.
Representatives of academia, government, and industry are invited
to convene to examine and discuss industry trends and technology
advances as they affect regulatory compliance and sustainable growth.
Participants will have the opportunity to both provide and obtain
information on state of the art techniques for addressing their water
pollution control activities. These may include improvements to
traditional wastewater treatment processes as well as process changes
and best management practices that lead to reductions in pollutant
generation.
The BAT conference will be held from February 26 through February
28, 2003 at the Nashville Marriott at Vanderbilt University, located at
2555 West End Avenue, Nashville, Tennessee, 37203. Registration is
required. More information, including registration and specific topics,
is available at http://frontweb.vuse.vanderbilt.edu/bat/, or contact
Jan Matuszko at (202) 566-1035 or e-mail her at matuszko.jan@epa.gov.
Dated: November 22, 2002.
G. Tracy Mehan, III,
Assistant Administrator for Water.
[FR Doc. 02-30262 Filed 11-27-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P