1 / 20

Eric Agnew Environmental Regulations February 15, 2006

Eric Agnew Environmental Regulations February 15, 2006. Layout. Scenario TMDL How have the regulations changed? Will the rules affect National Semiconductors (NS)?. Scenario. National Semiconductors (NS) has two facilities

brock
Download Presentation

Eric Agnew Environmental Regulations February 15, 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Eric Agnew Environmental Regulations February 15, 2006

  2. Layout • Scenario • TMDL • How have the regulations changed? • Will the rules affect National Semiconductors (NS)?

  3. Scenario • National Semiconductors (NS) has two facilities • Each has a CWA heavy metal (mostly Cu and Al) and organic loading discharge permit • no maximum limit in the permits • There are proposed TMDL rules that may affect the NS facilities

  4. What is TMDL? • Total Maximum Daily Load • a scientific model that “determines the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive and still both attain and maintain its water quality standards” • Purpose • to improve water quality in impaired or threatened water bodies • to fulfill Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act *An impaired water body is one in that has been deemed not suitable for fishing, swimming ,or use as a public water supply http://www.tceq.state.tx.us

  5. Lead up to a TMDL • Once a water body is listed as impaired, a state has ten years to implement a TMDL • The TMDL must identify: • the affected water body • the pollutant • water quality standard • pollution budget (how much is allowed) • sources of the pollutant • margin of safety

  6. History of TMDL • Established in 1972 • Initially only focused on point sources • Revised in 1999 to account for a large number of citizen lawsuits (40) and comment letters (>34,000) • Now took into account both point and non-point sources and included a margin of safety allocation • New rules approved in 2000 http://deq.louisiana.gov

  7. Formula * *The margin of safety allocation is used to account for any uncertainties in the scientific methods used (such as modeling and seasonal variations) http://deq.louisiana.gov

  8. Point Sources • Wastewater runoff • Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) • Active oil and mine sites • Runoff from waste disposal sites http://deq.louisiana.gov

  9. Non-point sources • City storm water drains • Agricultural/Pasture land runoff • Lawns and gardens • Fertilizers, leaves, grass clippings, etc. • Forests • Roads and parking lots http://deq.louisiana.gov

  10. Environmental Assessment • In 1972, only 30 to 40% of the nation’s waterways were considered suitable for public use • By 2000, 60 to 70% of the waterways were considered safe

  11. Categories of Water Bodies in Texas • Currently 306 category five water bodies in Texas • - Up from only 142 under the 1996 assessment http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/comm_exec/forms_pubs/pubs/pd/020/03-04/texaswaters.html

  12. Lower Sabine Impairments Impairments Total Number of Impairments Reported: 22 http://oaspub.epa.gov

  13. Lower Sabine • In 2000 and 2001 in Texas, no TMDLs were drafted for the segments containing the Lower Sabine • By 2005, there were two category five water bodies http://oaspub.epa.gov

  14. Sabine River Copper Impairment and Organic Enrichment Old River to Sabine Lake LA110301 Adams Bayou Tidal TX 0508 EPA EnviroMapper for Water http://oaspub.epa.gov

  15. Will new TMDL Regulation Affect NS? • More stringent limits could be imposed than established by EPA • Degree of stringency could depend on whether other facilities contribute to listed pollutants • Costs incurred to facility dependent on degree of limitation

  16. Alternatives to Upgrading • If several discharge points, determine which point is discharging the pollutant of concern • Treat discharge separately instead of entire combined discharge • Negotiate with a publicly owned treatment works (POTW) to receive the plant’s discharge

  17. Alternatives to Upgrading • Some water treatment plants accept industrial waste water in addition to its regular load • Not always convenient • Plants may require industrial user to pretreat its waste water • Land application possible if facility can contract with a land owner

  18. Final Decision • Costs associated with building new plants in Latin America should be weighed against the costs of upgrading current facilities • Proximity to POTW or land application site could add to cost involved

  19. Final Point • The new TMDL Regulation will affect the National Semiconductor’s plants • Will the cost of building new plants be less than the cost associated with upgrading beyond what is required? • Plants would be able to produce more semiconductors (and make more money)

More Related