||Cost-effectiveness analysis of proposed effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the metal products and machinery industry.
||Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Engineering and Analysis Div.
|| U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Science and Technology, Engineering and Analysis Division,
Effluent quality--Standards--United States. ;
Centralized industrial waste treatment facilities--United States--Cost effectiveness. ;
Factory and trade waste--Economic aspects--United States.
Metal products ;
Water pollution control ;
Economic impact ;
Cost effectiveness ;
Industrial plants ;
Pollution regulation ;
Proposed effluent limitations ;
Indirect discharges ;
||Most EPA libraries have a fiche copy filed under the call number shown. Check with individual libraries about paper copy.
||30 pages : illustrations ; 28 cm
This cost effectiveness analysis supports the proposed effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the Metal Products and Machinery (MP&M) Industry. The report assesses the cost-effectiveness of three regulatory options for indirect dischargers, which discharge effluent to publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs), and direct dischargers, which discharge effluent directly to a surface water. Cost-effectiveness analysis is used in the development of effluent limitations guidelines to evaluate the incremental efficiency of different regulatory options. Cost-effectiveness is traditionally defined as the incremental annual cost (in 1981 constant dollars) per incremental toxic-weighted pound of pollutant removed.
"December 2000"--Cover. "Office of Water"--Cover. "EPA 821-B-00-007"--Cover. Microfiche.