Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />o <br />0) <br />N <br />~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />h~ <br /> <br />April 24, 1978 <br /> <br />ANALYSIS OF THE MONETARY COSTS OF WASTE WATER DISPOSAL <br /> <br />Introduction <br /> <br />The Section l3(a) assessments being carried out in the Upper Colorado <br /> <br />River Region must ~nclude estimates of the monetary costs associated with <br /> <br />treating the waste waters which may be generated by coal gasification and <br /> <br />oil shale facilities. Particular technologies have not been specified, <br /> <br />so the assessment must contend with the problem of generalizing, to the <br /> <br />extent possible, about various kinds of high and low BTU gasification pro- <br /> <br />cesses and the full range of in-situ, modified in-situ, and surface retort <br /> <br />oil shale technologies. Finally, the assessment is, by its own terms, to <br /> <br />be based upon existing information to the maximum extent possible. A list <br /> <br />of information sources known to us is attached. It relates primarily to <br /> <br />the characterization of waste effluents, although some treatment cost data <br /> <br />is included. <br /> <br />Questions <br /> <br />L Future coal gas and oil shale facilities will have to comply with <br /> <br />the 1983 "best available technology" effluent limitations of PL 92-500. <br /> <br />To date, however, those effluent limitations have yet to be promulgated <br /> <br />by E,P.A. and can only be surmised (see p. IV-14 of U.S. DOE report <br /> <br />referenced in the attachment). <br /> <br />A, Under these circumsta'nces, should a best judgement as to <br /> <br />future BAT guidelines be made (and, if so, on what basis?) <br /> <br />and then the cost of meeting those assumed guidelines <br /> <br />estimated? <br />