[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 4, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42434-42527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-18866]



[[Page 42433]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





_______________________________________________________________________



40 CFR Parts 9, 122, 123, 124, and 501



National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Application 
Requirements for Publicly Owned Treatment Works and Other Treatment 
Works Treating Domestic Sewage; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 4, 1999 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 42434]]



ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 9, 122, 123, 124, and 501

[FRL-6401-2]
RIN 2040-AB39


National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit 
Application Requirements for Publicly Owned Treatment Works and Other 
Treatment Works Treating Domestic Sewage

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today amends permit 
application requirements and application forms for publicly owned 
treatment works (POTWs) and other treatment works treating domestic 
sewage (TWTDS). TWTDS include facilities that generate sewage sludge, 
provide commercial treatment of sewage sludge, manufacture a product 
derived from sewage sludge, or provide disposal of sewage sludge.
    Today's rule consolidates POTW application requirements, including 
information regarding toxics monitoring, whole effluent toxicity (WET) 
testing, industrial user and hazardous waste contributions, and sewer 
collection system overflows. The most significant revisions require 
toxic monitoring by major POTWs (and other pretreatment POTWs) and 
limited pollutant monitoring by minor POTWs. EPA believes that 
permitting authorities need this information in order to issue permits 
that adequately protect the Nation's water resources.
    Form 2A replaces existing Standard Form A and Short Form A to 
account for changes in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 
System (NPDES) program since the forms were issued in 1973.
    The regulations also clarify the requirements for TWTDS and allow 
the permitting authorities to obtain the information needed to issue 
permits that meet the requirements of the 40 CFR Part 503 sewage sludge 
use or disposal regulations. Form 2S replaces the existing Interim 
Sewage Sludge Form. Form 2S is similar to the Interim Sewage Sludge 
Form but requires less information.
    EPA is revising these regulations to ensure that permitting 
authorities obtain the information necessary to issue permits which 
protect the environment in the most efficient manner. The forms make it 
easier for permit applicants to provide the necessary information with 
their applications and minimize the need for additional follow-up 
requests from permitting authorities. EPA expects the rule to reduce 
current annual reporting and record keeping burdens by 21 percent, by 
standardizing the forms to match information requests with information 
needs.
    This rule also lifts the stay of 40 CFR 501.15(d)(1)(i)(B) in a 
final rule streamlining state sewage sludge regulations published on 
August 24, 1998 (63 FR 45113).

DATES: This rule and 40 CFR 501.15(d)(1)(i)(B) expires on December 2, 
1999. In accordance with 40 CFR 23.2, this rule shall be considered 
final for the purposes of judicial review at 1:00 p.m. (Eastern 
Standard Time) on August 18, 1999.

ADDRESSES: The record for this rulemaking, including all public 
comments on the proposal, will be available for inspection and copying 
at the Office of Water Docket. The docket is located at EPA, East Tower 
Basement, 401 M. St. SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. The docket is open 
Monday-Friday 9:00 am to 4:00 pm, please contact the docket at (202) 
260-3027 to schedule an appointment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on Form 2A and 
municipal wastewater permitting issues in this document, contact Robin 
Danesi, (202) 260-2991, Permits Division (4203), United States 
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street S.W., Washington, D.C., 
20460.
    For information on Form 2S and sewage sludge permitting issues in 
this document, contact Wendy Bell, (202) 260-9534, Permits Division 
(4203), United States Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street 
S.W., Washington, D.C., 20460.
    Copies of this document with the forms are available from the EPA 
home page at www.epa.gov under the Laws and Regulations section. 
Electronic copies of the forms will be available on the Office of 
Wastewater Management home page at www.epa.gov/owm. EPA plans to 
provide a word wizard of the form which should be available shortly 
after the final rule is promulgated.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities

    Entities potentially regulated by this action are governmental 
entities responsible for implementation of the NPDES and sewage sludge 
programs and entities that are regulated by these programs. Regulated 
entities include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Examples of regulated
                 Category                             entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local government..........................  Publicly Owned Treatment
                                             Works, owners and operators
                                             of treatment works treating
                                             domestic sewage.
Private...................................  Privately owned treatment
                                             works or other treatment
                                             works treating domestic
                                             sewage.
State government..........................  Treatment works owned or
                                             operated by States or
                                             Tribes.
Federal government........................  Federally owned treatment
                                             works.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware 
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities 
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether 
your organization is regulated by this action, you should carefully 
examine the applicability criteria in Parts 122 and 503 of Title 40 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations. If you have questions regarding the 
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person 
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Information in the preamble is organized as follows:

I. Background
    A. Overview
    B. Public Consultation in the Rule Development
II. Description of Today's Final Rule and Response to Comments
    A. Scope of Today's Rulemaking
    B. Forms 2A & 2S
      1. Form 2A
      a. Overview
      b. Applicability to Privately Owned and Federally Owned 
Treatment Works
      2. Form 2S
      a. Overview
      b. Clarification of TWTDS
      3. Reasons for Separate Forms 2A and 2S
      4. Electronic Application Forms
    C. Endangered Species and Historic Properties
    D. Definitions
    E. Requirements Concerning the Use of Forms 
(Secs. 122.21(a),(c),(d), and (f))
    F. Application Requirements for POTWs (40 CFR 122.21(j))
      1. Permit as a Shield
      2. Basic Application Information
      3. Additional Application Information for Applicants With 
Flows Greater Than or Equal to 0.1 mgd.
      4. Information on Effluent Discharges
      5. Effluent Monitoring for Specific Parameters
      a. Pollutant Data Requirements for All POTWs
      b. Pollutant Data Requirements for POTWs With Design Flows 
Greater Than or Equal to 0.1 mgd.
      c. Additional Pollutant Data Requirements for Some POTWs

[[Page 42435]]

      6. Effluent Monitoring for Whole Effluent Toxicity
      7. Industrial Discharges
      8. Discharges From RCRA/CERCLA Waste Sources
      9. Combined Sewer Overflows
      10. Contractors
      11. Certification
    G. Application Requirements for TWTDS (40 CFR 122.21(q))
      1. Facility Information
      2. Applicant Information
      3. Permit Information
      4. Indian Country
      5. Topographic Map
      6. Sewage Sludge Handling
      7. Sewage Sludge Quality
      8. Requirements for a Person Who Prepares Sewage Sludge
      9. Land Application of Bulk Sewage Sludge
      10. Surface Disposal
      11. Incineration
      12. Disposal in a Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
      13. Contractors
      14. Other Information
      15. Signature
    H. Permit Conditions for POTWs (40 CFR 122.44(j)
    I. State Program Requirements (40 CFR parts 123 & 501)
III. Regulatory Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866
    B. Executive Order 12875
    C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    D. Paperwork Reduction Act
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    G. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
    H. Executive Order 13045
    I. Executive Order 13084

I. Background

A. Overview

    EPA provided an extensive discussion of the background for today's 
rule in the proposed rule published on December 6, 1995 (60 FR 62546). 
For the sake of brevity, EPA refers the reader to that action for 
information about the background of today's rule.

B. Public Consultation in the Rule Development

    EPA made efforts to consult with interested stakeholders during the 
development of the December 6, 1995, proposed rule. In late 1993 and 
early 1994, EPA sought feedback on draft forms and other elements of 
the proposal from States with approved NPDES programs, local 
governments, the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution 
Control Administrators (ASIWPCA), the Association of Metropolitan 
Sewerage Agencies (AMSA), the California Association of Sanitation 
Agencies (CASA), the Water Environment Federation (WEF), and several 
environmental groups. In response to this outreach effort, EPA received 
written comments from a dozen States, several municipalities, and from 
AMSA. EPA also met with State and municipal representatives and 
participated in a conference call with representatives from ten POTWs 
and two States.
    EPA received 59 comments during the public comment period on the 
proposed rule and made numerous changes to the rule and the forms in 
response to the comments. Specific comments are mentioned throughout 
today's preamble in the applicable sections.

II. Description of Today's Final Rule and Response to Comments

A. Scope of Today's Rulemaking

    Today's document finalizes two sets of application requirements and 
corresponding permit application forms, and provides instructions for 
each. Section 122.21(j) contains application requirements pertaining to 
wastewater treatment and discharge into and from publicly owned 
treatment works (POTWs). The requirements are incorporated into the new 
Form 2A which replaces Standard Form A and Short Form A, both of which 
were developed in 1973. Section 122.21(q) contains application 
requirements pertaining to generation, treatment, and disposal of 
sewage sludge at POTWs and other treatment works treating domestic 
sewage (TWTDS). These requirements are incorporated into the new Form 
2S which replaces the Interim Sewage Sludge Permit Application Form.
    EPA promulgates these application regulations and publishes the new 
forms for several reasons. First, this rulemaking addresses changes to 
the NPDES program since 1973. The NPDES program applicable to POTWs has 
changed significantly since that time, specifically in the areas of 
toxics control, water quality-based permitting and pretreatment 
programs. Second, the rule consolidates application requirements from 
existing regulations into a ``modular'' permit application form, 
thereby streamlining and clarifying the process for permit applicants. 
Third, these revisions provide permit writers with the information 
necessary to develop appropriate NPDES permits consistent with 
requirements of the Clean Water Act and thus, also provide greater 
certainty for permittees that compliance with their permits constitutes 
compliance with the CWA. Fourth, the Agency seeks to reduce redundant 
reporting by allowing NPDES permitting authorities to waive certain 
information requirements where information is already available to the 
permitting authority and, finally, to provide a platform for electronic 
data transmission.
    EPA will use the forms in States where the Agency administers the 
NPDES and/or sewage sludge programs. Authorized States may choose to 
use these forms because the forms will provide the required application 
information. Authorized States can also elect to use forms of their own 
design so long as the information requested includes at least the 
information required by today's final permit application regulations. 
EPA and State authorities may request additional information from 
permit applicants whenever necessary to establish appropriate permit 
limits and conditions. See CWA sec. 308 and 402(b)(2)(B).
    In the December 1995 proposal, EPA asked for comment on whether the 
forms and instructions should be included with the final rulemaking 
package. EPA received numerous comments that said that the forms and 
instructions should be published so they could be available for all to 
review along with the regulation. EPA has changed the forms 
significantly in response to comments and in order to facilitate 
electronic reporting. Therefore, EPA is publishing the forms in the new 
format with the final rule. The final forms and instructions are 
included as an appendix to today's notice, but will not be printed in 
the CFR.

B. Forms 2A and 2S

1. Form 2A
    a. Overview. Prior to today's rule, NPDES permitting authorities 
generally gathered POTW data using Form 1, Standard Form A, and Short 
Form A. While all these forms are approved Federal forms, the NPDES 
regulations did not require use of the forms by POTWs when applying for 
a permit. Standard Form A was intended to be used by all POTWs with a 
design flow equal to or exceeding one million gallons per day (mgd). It 
contains questions about the facility and collection system, discharges 
to and from the facility (including information on some specific 
pollutant parameters), and planned improvements and implementation 
schedules. Short Form A was intended for use by all POTWs with a design 
flow of less than one mgd. It contains only fifteen questions of a 
summary nature, and asks for virtually no information on specific 
pollutants. Many States used one or both of the Federal forms, but a 
number of States

[[Page 42436]]

have developed forms that request information not included on the 
Federal forms.
    The December 1995 proposed application form contained two parts, 
Basic Application Information and Supplemental Application Information. 
The basic application section was to be completed by all POTWs and 
contained facility information and monitoring requirements for 17 
pollutants. The supplemental application information was for applicants 
providing data on toxic pollutants, applicants with significant 
industrial users, and applicants with CSOs.
    During the comment period, EPA collected and scrutinized data on 
the types and quantities of toxic pollutants discharged by minor POTWs. 
EPA completed an evaluation of existing data sources and conducted 
toxic monitoring at selected minor POTWs. The results were published as 
``Evaluation of the Presence of Priority Pollutants in the Discharges 
of Minor POTWs'' in June 1996. Copies of the report were sent to all 
State NPDES coordinators and an electronic version is available on the 
Office of Wastewater Management Home page (www.epa.gov/owm). The Study 
included a query of the Permit Compliance System (PCS), EPA's 
nationwide database for storing NPDES permit information. The June 1996 
Study compiled the information from a PCS query for minor POTW data 
from 1990 to the present, an evaluation of minor POTW data provided by 
State agencies, and on-site monitoring for selected toxics at 86 minor 
POTWs located throughout the country.
    Based on the information from the Minor POTW Study and comments 
received on the proposal, EPA decided to modify the proposed 
application requirement to reduce the information required from 
facilities under 0.1 mgd. The 0.1 mgd cut-off was based on data from 
the EPA Permit Compliance System (PCS). The data showed that facilities 
with design flows greater than 1.0 mgd (major facilities) account for 
94.6% of the total POTW flow nationwide. Facilities with design flows 
between 1.0 mgd and 0.1 mgd account for 5% of the total flow. The 
remaining 0.4% of the nationwide POTW flow is discharged by facilities 
with design flows less than 0.1 mgd. A facility with a design flow of 
less than 0.1 mgd typically serves a population of 1,000 people or 
less. Approximately 40% of all POTWs fall into this less than 0.1 mgd 
category. Because these POTWs serve very small communities that 
contribute a small amount of flow (usually without an industrial 
influent component), EPA determined that requiring less information 
from these POTWs would reduce the costs associated with analytic 
monitoring without significantly affecting the information otherwise 
needed by permit writers.
    Today's Form 2A still contains two parts, but the Basic Application 
Information has been subdivided to reduce the requirements for 
facilities with a design flow under 0.1 mgd. The ``Basic Application 
Information for All Applicants'' part includes information about the 
collection system and the treatment plant, general information 
concerning the types of discharges from the treatment plant, 
identification of outfalls, and effluent monitoring data from the plant 
for 6 parameters. The requirements are expanded to include effluent 
monitoring for 14 parameters and several additional questions for POTWs 
with design flows greater than or equal to 0.1 mgd but less than 1.0 
mgd and without pretreatment programs. Larger POTWs and pretreatment 
POTWs must submit the information requested in the ``Supplemental 
Application Information'' part of Form 2A, which requires effluent 
monitoring data for metals and organic compounds, as well as the 
parameters required for smaller POTWs. This part also requires results 
of whole effluent toxicity tests, information on significant industrial 
users, and information on combined sewer overflows (CSOs) if 
applicable.
    b. Applicability to Privately Owned and Federally Owned Treatment 
Works.
    As in the case of existing Standard Form A and Short Form A, Form 
2A and the application requirements at Sec. 122.21(j) are required only 
for POTWs. EPA believes, however, that NPDES permitting authorities 
have the discretion to use the form on a case-by-case basis for 
treatment works that are not owned by a State or municipality. As 
previously discussed, the NPDES program has evolved considerably since 
EPA promulgated Standard Form A and Short Form A in 1973. The program 
can clearly be applied to facilities that are similar to POTWs but 
which do not meet the regulatory definition of ``publicly owned 
treatment works'' (POTWs). Although not owned by States or 
municipalities, such facilities nevertheless may receive predominantly 
domestic wastewater, provide physical and/or biological treatment, and 
discharge effluent to waters of the United States. Such facilities 
include Federally owned treatment works (FOTWs) and privately owned 
treatment works that treat primarily domestic wastewater.
    EPA received eight comments regarding FOTWs and privately owned 
treatment works. All but one favored expansion of POTW application 
requirements to facilities that operate similarly to POTWs but that may 
be Federally or privately owned. One commenter stated that the current 
system of different forms for treatment works based on ownership 
creates an artificial difference between facilities. Other commenters 
agreed and felt that all facilities that operate similarly should 
complete the same application form. A commenter representing the 
Department of Defense provided comments on the similarities between 
FOTWs and POTWs based on size and scope of activities at military 
installations and compared the installations to small cities. The 
commenter argued that statutory differences prevent EPA from requiring 
the same information from Federal facilities that operate similarly to 
POTWs.
    EPA is aware that Federal and State permitting authorities use a 
number of mechanisms for obtaining NPDES permit application information 
from non-POTW treatment works. These mechanisms include Standard Form 
A, Short Form A, Form 2C (``Existing Manufacturing, Commercial, Mining, 
and Silvicultural Operations''), and Form 2E (``Facilities Which Do Not 
Discharge Process Wastewater''). EPA believes that Form 2A is often the 
most appropriate application form for non-POTW treatment works.
    Nevertheless, EPA is not requiring the Form 2A information from 
non-POTW treatment works. Despite many functional similarities to 
POTWs, such facilities do not share the same regulatory requirements. 
Non-POTW treatment works are not required under the CWA, for example, 
to develop pretreatment programs. The CWA does not require such 
facilities to meet secondary treatment requirements, though permits for 
such facilities often apply secondary treatment based limits after a 
best professional judgement evaluation has been performed by the permit 
writer. NPDES regulations do not require such facilities to report 
results of whole effluent toxicity testing with their permit 
applications. For these facilities, uniformly requiring the same 
information required in Form 2A might be unnecessary. EPA has added 
language to the introductory paragraph of Sec. 122.21(j) of today's 
final rule that allows the Director to require such facilities to 
comply with the POTW application requirements (e.g. through Form 2A) on 
a case-by-case basis. This discretion will provide NPDES permit

[[Page 42437]]

writers with the information necessary to develop permits for 
facilities that may operate similarly to POTWs but that do not meet the 
regulatory definition.
2. Form 2S
    a. Overview. Today, EPA finalizes a new form, Form 2S, to collect 
information on sewage sludge from treatment works treating domestic 
sewage (TWTDS). The term ``treatment works treating domestic sewage'' 
is a broad one, intended to reach facilities that generate sewage 
sludge or effectively change its pollutant characteristics as well as 
facilities that control its disposal. The term includes all POTWs and 
other facilities that treat domestic wastewater. It also includes 
facilities that do not treat domestic wastewater but that treat or 
dispose of sewage sludge, such as sewage sludge incinerators, 
composting facilities, commercial sewage sludge handlers that process 
sludge for distribution, and sites used for sewage sludge disposal. In 
addition, EPA may designate a facility a TWTDS when the facility's 
sludge quality or sludge handling, use, or disposal practices have the 
potential to adversely effect public health and the environment. 
Individual septic tanks or similar devices are not considered TWTDS.
    EPA recognizes that the term ``biosolids'' is now being used by 
professional organizations and other stakeholders in place of ``sewage 
sludge'' to emphasize that it is a resource that can be recycled 
beneficially. EPA intends to work with these stakeholders to define the 
term ``biosolids'' consistent with the definition of ``sewage sludge'' 
in the CWA. Until then, EPA will continue to refer to sewage sludge in 
its regulations.
    Form 2S consists of 2 sections. Part 1 asks for limited background 
information rather than a complete permit application. Only the 
information in Part 1 must be submitted by ``sludge-only'' facilities, 
i.e. facilities that do not discharge wastewater to surface waters, 
unless the permit writer determines that the information in Part 2 must 
also be provided. It is intended to give the permitting authority 
enough information to decide whether or not to issue a permit to that 
facility. The information in Part 2 must be submitted by all TWTDS with 
an NPDES permit and ``sludge-only'' facilities that have been asked by 
the permitting authority to submit a complete permit application.
    b. Clarification of TWTDS. No change was proposed in the definition 
of TWTDS or who is required to provide the information in Form 2S, but 
EPA received several comments with questions or misconceptions on this 
subject. Since EPA did not propose to change nor solicit comments on 
the existing definition, EPA considers those comments on the definition 
to be beyond the scope of the proposal. Nonetheless, EPA provides 
clarifications of how it interprets the existing definition to assist 
in compliance with the existing rules. The first point of clarification 
is how sewage sludge land application sites (i.e., the land) fit into 
the definition of Treatment Works Treating Domestic Sewage (TWTDS). 
While the definition does include ``land dedicated for the disposal of 
sewage sludge,'' i.e., surface disposal sites, the definition does not 
include land application sites. A ``land application site'' is the land 
where sewage sludge is used to condition soil or fertilize crops or 
vegetation. EPA makes a distinction between disposal at a surface 
disposal site and use (also referred to as ``beneficial reuse'') at a 
land application site.
    Commenters also asked questions about who must apply for a permit. 
Industrial treatment works that treat domestic sewage along with 
process wastes are TWTDS unless they generate hazardous sludge. 
However, EPA determined that it did not have enough information about 
these facilities to regulate them under Part 503, and it would be 
difficult to find a technical basis for routine case-by-case 
permitting. Since there are no Part 503 standards for industrial 
treatment works, there are no requirements to put in a permit. 
Therefore, even though these facilities are TWTDS, they are not 
required to apply for a sewage sludge permit at this time. Today's rule 
clarifies this issue by stating that ``all TWTDS whose sewage sludge 
use or disposal practice is regulated by Part 503 must submit a permit 
application * * *''.
    If EPA promulgates technical standards for industrial facilities in 
the future, they would then be required to apply for a permit. The 
permitting authority can, of course, ask for an application and issue a 
permit to an industrial facility if a permit is deemed necessary to 
protect public health and the environment (54 FR 18727, 58 FR 9324 & 
9406). In those rare situations where an industrial facility treats 
domestic sewage and industrial wastewater through totally separate 
treatment trains, the facility would be required to apply for a permit 
for its domestic sludge, but not for its industrial sludge.
    One commenter raised the situation of TWTDS that use a community 
septic tank with the effluent routed to a recirculating sand filter. 
The commenter questioned whether this type of a facility was a TWTDS 
because septic tanks are excluded from the definition of TWTDS. EPA 
intended the septic tank exclusion to refer to individual septic tanks 
because the Agency did not believe it was necessary to ask for 
information from individual homeowners. EPA believes that community 
systems that include septic tanks are TWTDS.
    Because the type of facility identified by this commenter does not 
discharge, it probably would not have an NPDES permit. As a ``sludge-
only'' facility, it is required to submit only limited background 
information (Sec. 122.21 (c)(2)(iii) (A) through (E)) when a sewage 
sludge standard applies to the facility's use or disposal practice. The 
TWTDS is not required to submit any additional application information 
unless the permitting authority requests a full permit application.
    If there is no Part 503 standard for the facility's use or disposal 
practice, the owner/operator of the facility is not automatically 
required to submit a permit application. For example, if the sewage 
sludge from this septic tank is taken to a POTW, the limited background 
information does not have to be submitted because Part 503 does not 
apply to this type of disposal method. If the owner/operator of this 
facility wanted to stop taking its sewage sludge to a POTW and start 
applying it to the land, it would be required to submit the limited 
background information to the permitting authority 180 days before 
changing its use or disposal practice. In addition, because this 
facility is a TWTDS, the permitting authority can require a permit 
application at any time if a permit is deemed necessary to protect 
public health and the environment.
    One commenter stated that his State did not make a distinction 
between NPDES and non-NPDES facilities in setting permitting priorities 
and would require all TWTDS to submit a full permit application. 
Another commenter thought that EPA should not make such a distinction 
in its rules. EPA decided to stagger permit applications and require 
less information from non-discharging facilities in the February 19, 
1993 amendments to Parts 122 and 501 (58 FR 9404). Permitting 
authorities have the option to require complete permit applications 
from all TWTDS at any time.
    EPA received a comment that asked whether a POTW with a non-
discharging lagoon system must apply for a permit. If the lagoon is 
part of the

[[Page 42438]]

waste treatment system and there is no sewage sludge being removed, 
there is no use or disposal practice to trigger an application 
requirement. Before sewage sludge is removed from the lagoon and used 
or disposed in a manner regulated by Part 503, however, the TWTDS must 
provide limited background information to the permitting authority.
    As with any TWTDS, the permitting authority can require a permit 
application at any time if a permit is deemed necessary to protect 
public health and the environment. Such circumstances may arise where 
the permitting authority may ask for an application even after the 
sewage sludge has been sitting in the lagoon for several years. The 
permitting authority will decide, for example, whether the sewage 
sludge lagoon is truly part of the treatment process or a storage 
lagoon, or whether the lagoon should be regulated as a surface disposal 
site.
    The regulatory situation is similar for a discharging lagoon, where 
the NPDES permitting authority should already have information about 
the treatment process. When the sewage sludge permitting authority is 
also the NPDES permitting authority, EPA expects that they would 
already know how the TWTDS's sewage sludge should be regulated.
3. Reasons for Separate Form 2A and Form 2S
    EPA today publishes two separate forms for municipal wastewater 
discharges and for sewage sludge for several reasons. First, the 
requirements represented by the two forms differ in their 
applicability. The NPDES permit application requirements collected in 
Form 2A apply only to POTWs; the sewage sludge information requirements 
collected in Form 2S apply to all TWTDS, not just POTWs. Most 
facilities that generate, treat, or dispose of sewage sludge are POTWs, 
and will be required to submit both application forms. Several thousand 
TWTDS, however, do not discharge to surface waters and therefore are 
not required to have NPDES permits. Thus, such TWTDS are subject to 
sewage sludge requirements (Form 2S) but not to NPDES requirements 
(Form 2A).
    Second, separate application forms are also appropriate because 
wastewater and sewage sludge may be regulated by different permitting 
authorities. In 43 States and territories, the NPDES program is 
administered at the State level through an EPA-approved NPDES program. 
There are currently only 3 States that administer an EPA-approved 
sewage sludge program. Therefore, until more States are authorized to 
administer the federal sewage sludge program, POTWs in most NPDES 
States will obtain NPDES permits from the State permitting authority 
(by submitting Form 2A or a similar State form to the State) and sewage 
sludge permits from EPA (by submitting Form 2S to the EPA Regional 
Office). Separate application forms will facilitate this bifurcated 
permitting process. In addition, even when a State sludge permitting 
program is approved, the program will not necessarily be administered 
by the State's NPDES permitting authority. For example, a POTW in a 
State with both NPDES and sewage sludge permitting authority could 
receive its NPDES permit from the water pollution control agency and 
its sewage sludge permit from a solid waste management agency. Separate 
Forms 2A and 2S will also facilitate permitting in this situation.
    EPA received three comments supporting the use of separate forms. 
One of these commenters emphasized that applicants should be able to 
cross reference information submitted on the other form. As discussed 
in more detail in section II.G of today's preamble, applicants are 
allowed to photocopy other forms, or reference information that they 
know was previously submitted to the same permitting authority.
    EPA also received several comments that suggested either combining 
parts of 2A and 2S or further separating them into segments applicable 
to different types of facilities. EPA considered many different types 
of form structures before proposing 2A and 2S and reconsidered the 
forms based on suggestions from commenters. While no form is ideal for 
all situations, EPA believes that the forms accompanying today's rule 
represent the best division of information for most applicants. 
Authorized States are free to create their own State forms as long as 
the forms request the same minimum information.
4. Electronic Application Forms
    Consistent with recent amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 
the Agency is developing electronic data submission as an alternative 
format for permit application. The use of electronic media should help 
to streamline the application process and to reduce the amount of 
repetition associated with completing application forms that are 
currently available only in hard copy. As previously noted, the 
elimination of redundant reporting is one of the goals of today's 
rulemaking.
    EPA's first step in the submission of electronic data is the 
development of an electronic version of the application form. The 
Agency has developed such an electronic version, which is available by 
contacting the persons listed in the For Further Information Section of 
this preamble or on the Internet from the EPA Home Page (www.epa.gov). 
The application forms will be made available in Word and Windows Wizard 
formats and include instructions that guide the applicant through the 
form. Some authorized States are also considering electronic reporting. 
EPA believes that providing the forms in an easily manipulated software 
will also assist States that want to use electronic permit 
applications.
    EPA received 21 comments on the issue of electronic reporting. Most 
of the commenters agreed with the concept of electronic reporting for 
application forms but were concerned about implementation. A few 
commenters thought it was not a feasible option for small facilities. 
The major implementation issues from the comments include: signature; 
hardware; and software needs. Electronic permit application reporting 
options range from transmitting data electronically, submitting disk 
copies, or submitting hard copy permit applications provided to the 
applicant in an electronic format. The most feasible option currently 
available involves electronic forms that can be distributed and 
completed electronically, and subsequently printed, signed, and 
submitted. EPA continues to explore options for electronic permit 
application transmission.

C. Endangered Species and Historic Properties

    In the December 1995 proposed rule, EPA invited comments related to 
information about endangered species and historic properties. 
Specifically, if EPA established permit application questions about 
endangered and threatened species (listed species) or historic 
properties, what kind of information could or should the permit 
applicant provide? Would it be appropriate to request that the permit 
applicant identify whether there are listed species or historic 
properties in the area of the POTW discharge or sewage sludge use or 
disposal site? How could or should EPA provide applicants with 
flexibility to assist regulatory officials in the consideration of 
potential impacts of activities on listed species or historic 
properties?
    Most commenters stated that EPA should not require any information 
in the permit application. The commenters felt strongly that they did 
not want applicants to determine what listed species or historic 
properties would be affected by their discharge. The

[[Page 42439]]

commenters felt this was information that is more easily obtained by 
the permitting authority.
    EPA is not requiring information about listed species or historic 
properties in today's rule. In many permitting situations, this 
information may already reside with the permitting authority and 
therefore EPA believes it would be of little use to require all 
applicants to submit this information. However, some permit applicants 
may already have information regarding listed species and historic 
properties or may be better able than the permitting authority to 
obtain such information. In such cases, permitting authorities may 
require such information from applicants on a case-by-case basis.
    EPA is also working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) 
and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to develop procedures 
to more closely coordinate efforts to protect water quality and listed 
species including the use of Endangered Species Act Section 7 
consultations for EPA-issued permits and other Federal actions where 
appropriate.

D. Definitions

    In the proposed rule, EPA proposed to revise the definition of the 
term ``POTW,'' as defined in 40 CFR Part 122 to conform more exactly 
with the definition of the term at 40 CFR Part 403. The proposed 
change, however, appeared to create confusion. EPA received 12 comments 
on this issue. Several commenters agreed that the definitions should be 
consistent. Most of the commenters raised various issues that they 
thought might be affected by the changed definition. One commenter 
thought that the Part 403 definition was too confusing and should not 
be used. Another thought EPA should consider that other federal 
regulatory programs, such as hazardous waste management programs, 
include references to ``POTWs'' and could be affected by a change in 
the NPDES definition. After considering the comments, EPA has decided 
that it is not necessary to change the definition because the existing 
definitions are not inconsistent (even though the Part 403 definition 
contains more detail related to Pretreatment Program requirements). 
Therefore, today's rule does not change the definition of the term 
``POTW'' in Part 122.

E. Requirements Concerning the Use of Forms (Secs. 122.21(a), (c), (d) 
and (f))

    EPA today finalizes revisions to the existing general application 
requirements for all NPDES permittees, which can be satisfied by the 
use of Forms 2A and 2S by applicants for EPA-issued permits. Today's 
rule does not require applicants using these forms to use Form 1, 
because the same information is requested on Forms 2A and 2S. The final 
rule substantially incorporates the requirements of Sec. 122.21(f) for 
Form 1 into the requirements of Secs. 122.21(j) for Form 2A and 
122.21(q) for Form 2S.
    On December 11, 1996 (61 FR 65268), EPA proposed a rule to 
streamline various parts of the NPDES regulations (NPDES streamlining 
proposal). One of the changes proposed would consolidate the 
requirements of Secs. 122.1(d)(1) and 122.21(d)(3) and move them to a 
new paragraph, Sec. 122.21(a)(2). Both of these sections dealt with 
application requirements and were duplicative. EPA believed 
Sec. 122.21(a) would be a more appropriate location because that 
subsection pertains to all permit applicants, whereas Sec. 122.21(d) 
applies to permit reapplications. Section 122.1 is also not a 
particularly suitable location because it concerns the scope of the 
NPDES program and not application requirements. EPA proposed to retain 
the current Sec. 122.21(a) regulation in new Sec. 122.21(a)(1). The 
Agency proposed to remove Sec. 122.21(d)(3) and reserve the section for 
future use.
    In the proposal for today's rule, EPA proposed changes in the 
application requirements (paragraph (d)(3)) to reference the new 
application requirements for POTWs and TWTDS (Secs. 122.21(j) and (q)) 
and Forms 2A and 2S. To avoid confusion and to simplify the changes, 
EPA decided to make all the changes to Secs. 122.21(a) through (d) in 
today's final rule. Other changes in the NPDES streamlining proposal 
will be finalized in a later notice. EPA received only favorable 
comments on these changes in both proposals. Therefore, today's rule 
deletes Sec. 122.21(d)(3). The requirements in existing Sec. 122.21(a) 
have been moved to a new Sec. 122.21(a)(1) and modified to clarify that 
a sludge-only facility must submit a permit for its use or disposal 
practice only if the practice is regulated by Part 503.
    New Sec. 122.21(a)(2) contains the requirements previously included 
in Secs. 122.1(d)(1) and 122.21(d)(3). One commenter on the NPDES 
streamlining proposal thought that the wording for the storm water-
related application forms needed clarification. This language was 
simply moved from Sec. 122.26(c)(1) and was not changed in the 
proposal. However, EPA agrees that some of the commenter's suggestions 
provide clarification and the language of Sec. 122.21(a)(2)(i)(G) has 
been modified accordingly. This section is finalized as proposed in the 
NPDES streamlining proposal, with a few minor changes that clarify who 
is required to submit each form.
    As mentioned above in section II.B.4, EPA received numerous 
comments that support the concept of electronically submitted forms. 
Section 122.21(a)(2)(ii) explains that electronic forms can be used if 
approved by EPA or an NPDES authorized State.
    Both the municipal/sewage permit applications proposal and the 
NPDES streamlining proposal contained revisions to Sec. 122.21(c)(2) to 
reflect the changed location of the application requirements. Section 
122.21(c)(2) of today's rule reflects the changes mentioned above to 
Secs. 122.21(a) and (d). EPA is also deleting existing 
Sec. 122.21(c)(2)(i) and renumbering the remaining paragraphs of 
Sec. 122.21(c)(2). This provision was intended to allow the permitting 
authority to obtain applications for sewage sludge incinerators and 
others who requested site-specific pollutant limits before 
authorization for other sewage sludge use or disposal practices because 
these permits would take the most time to issue and EPA believed that 
incinerators pose the greatest risk to public health. However, there 
have been few requests for site-specific permits. In addition, changes 
to Part 503 (60 FR 54771) make the incineration standard totally self-
implementing along with the rest of the rule, i.e., the standard must 
be met whether or not a permit is issued. Therefore, this paragraph is 
no longer necessary. As described in Sec. 122.21(c)(2)(iii), the 
Director may require permit applications from any TWTDS at any time if 
necessary to protect public health and the environment.
    EPA received a comment on Sec. 122.21(q)(8) that refers to existing 
Sec. 122.21(c)(2)(iii)(C), now renumbered as Sec. 122.21(c)(2)(ii)(C). 
Paragraph (c)(2)(ii) lists the limited background information requested 
of non-NPDES TWTDS. In Sec. 122.21(q)(8), if sewage sludge meets the 
``exceptional quality'' (EQ) requirements, no additional information is 
required about land application sites or facilities that further treat 
the sewage sludge. As pointed out by the commenter, 
Sec. 122.21(c)(2)(ii)(C) should also be modified to require less 
information for ``EQ'' sewage sludge to provide consistency with the 
full permit application requirements. Therefore, today's rule modifies 
Sec. 122.21(c)(2)(ii)(C) and does not require the applicant to provide 
the name and address of facilities where sewage sludge is sent for 
treatment or disposal

[[Page 42440]]

and the location of land application sites if the sewage sludge meets 
the ``EQ'' requirements.

F. Application Requirements for POTWs (40 CFR 122.21(j))

    The regulations in Sec. 122.21 (j) provide the application 
requirements for POTWs. Submittal of a complete Form 2A satisfies the 
application requirements of this section. POTWs may also satisfy the 
requirements of this section by completing a State-issued version of 
the form which has been approved by the State Director.
    In the proposal for today's rule, EPA acknowledged concerns 
relating to redundant reporting raised by State and municipal 
commenters during consultation. EPA proposed the introductory paragraph 
of Sec. 122.21(j) to allow the Director to waive any requirement in 
paragraph (j) if the Director has access to substantially identical 
information. EPA solicited comment on this approach and other ways to 
provide the permitting authority with discretion to waive particular 
information requirements where he or she determines that such 
information is not necessary for the application.
    EPA received numerous responses to the waiver question. Most of the 
commenters agreed that the Director should be allowed to waive any 
requirement in paragraph (j) if he or she already has access to the 
information. Several commenters also stated that applicants should be 
able to reference previously submitted information that is still 
accurate rather than resubmit the data. For example, commenters 
mentioned that much of the information required in the permit 
application has already been submitted to the same permitting authority 
in the permittee's reports.
    In response, EPA has modified today's final rule to allow 
applicants to provide information by referencing (in their application) 
how and when the applicant previously submitted the information. 
Applicants should be very specific when referencing information so the 
permitting authority has no difficulty in locating the previous 
submission. Permitting authorities should recognize the need to keep 
information available for future action and to ensure the availability 
of information submitted to various departments. All referenced 
information should also be incorporated into the administrative record 
for the permit application.
    Many of the commenters also felt that EPA should go further than 
the proposal and allow a waiver for any requirement that an authorized 
NPDES State feels is not necessary for the application. EPA has 
considered this option, and has modified Sec. 122.21(j) of today's rule 
to provide States with the ability to waive any requirement of 
Sec. 122.21(j) that the State believes is not of material concern for a 
specific permit, if approved by the Regional Administrator.
    In developing this change from the proposal, EPA attempted to 
anticipate and avoid confusion in implementation. The primary actors 
involved in the process for request and approval of waivers are 
authorized NPDES States and EPA Regions. The permit applicant would be 
most significantly impacted by this process. EPA intends that, if the 
authorized NPDES State complies with (and the permit applicant is 
mindful of) the waiver approval process, then the permit applicant will 
avoid any adverse legal consequences related to the permit application 
phase. The two areas of concern are administrative continuation of 
expired permits (and ``completeness'' of re-applications), and the 
scope of the authorization to discharge, also referred to as the 
``permit shield.''
    The goal of the application requirements is to provide the permit 
writer with the information necessary to develop appropriate NPDES 
permits consistent with requirements of the CWA. The ``permit shield'' 
provided by Clean Water Act section 402(k) is predicated on the permit 
writer's presumed knowledge of the discharge. If a permit application 
contains information about specific pollutants, waste streams, or 
processes, then the permit writer is legally presumed to have knowledge 
about them. The ``permit shield'' applies whether or not the permit 
writer imposes regulatory controls in the permit based on that presumed 
knowledge. The Agency believes that the application information 
required under today's rule is necessary for the permit writer to 
consider in developing a permit, so a case-specific waiver may affect 
the scope of knowledge that EPA presumes of the permit writer. If the 
waiver approval processes are not followed and the permit applicant 
does not submit required information, then the scope of the permit 
shield is questionable. If the waiver approval processes are followed, 
the scope of the permit shield will not be affected.
    When the permitting authority wishes to waive the submission of 
information, the Director must request approval for the waiver from the 
Regional Administrator. This request must include documentation that 
provides justification for the waiver. Section 123.43(b) has been 
amended to include provisions for this waiver of information. If a 
waiver is approved by EPA, the justification for the waiver must appear 
in the permit fact sheet for each facility receiving the waiver. A new 
paragraph (9) has been added to Sec. 124.8(b) to include this fact 
sheet requirement.
    As with the scope of the permit shield, the waiver opportunity may 
affect the validity of authorization to discharge under an expired 
permit. In order to discharge under an expired permit, a permittee must 
submit a timely and complete application for renewal prior to 
expiration. The waiver opportunities under today's rule may affect the 
determination of whether an application is ``complete.'' EPA has added 
a new paragraph (e)(2) to Sec. 122.21(e) to clarify the completeness 
requirements. If a State submits its waiver request within 210 days of 
permit expiration and EPA either approves the waiver or does not act on 
the waiver within 30 days, the permit application is considered 
``complete.'' If EPA disapproves the waiver, the permit application 
based on the waiver is not ``complete.''
    EPA plans to develop guidance, in consultation with States and 
other interested stakeholders, to assist the Regions in making 
determinations for waivers. EPA expects to have this guidance finalized 
within approximately two years. Until this guidance is completed, EPA 
and the States must work together to decide on appropriate waivers. The 
performance partnership agreement process is one forum for determining 
such appropriateness.
1. Permit-as-a-Shield
    Section 402(k) of the CWA, also known as the ``permit shield'' 
provision, provides that compliance with an NPDES permit shall be 
deemed compliance, for purposes of Section 309 and 505 enforcement, 
with Section 301, 302, 306, 307, and 403 of the CWA (except for any 
standard imposed under Section 307 for toxic pollutants injurious to 
human health). In response to questions raised regarding EPA's 
interpretation of the scope of the ``shield'' associated with NPDES 
permits under the CWA, EPA issued a policy statement on July 1, 1994, 
to describe the Agency's policy on the scope of the authorization by 
EPA to discharge under an NPDES permit and the ``shield'' thus 
associated with permit authorization.
    As part of an application for an individual NPDES permit, EPA 
requires that an applicant provide certain information on its facility. 
Previous application requirements for municipal

[[Page 42441]]

discharges focused primarily on the operation and treatment processes 
at the municipal treatment works, although some quantitative 
information is also required.
    Historically, EPA has viewed the permit, together with material 
submitted during the application process and information in the public 
record accompanying the permit, as important bases for an authorization 
to discharge under CWA section 402. The availability of the section 
402(k) shield is predicated upon the issuance of an NPDES permit and a 
permittee's full compliance with all applicable application 
requirements, any additional information requests made by the permit 
authority and any applicable notification requirements under 40 CFR 
Secs. 122.41(l) and 122.42, as well as any additional requirements 
specified in the permit.
    On April 11, 1995, EPA reissued the memorandum to clarify that a 
discharger must provide all information in writing for the permit 
record in order to obtain the authorization to discharge and the 
``shield'' provided by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 
System permit. EPA explained that a permit provides authorization and 
therefore a shield for the following pollutants resulting from facility 
processes, waste streams and operations that have been clearly 
identified in writing in the permit application process when discharged 
from specified outfalls:
    (1) Pollutants specifically limited in the permit or pollutants 
which the permit, fact sheet, or administrative record explicitly 
identify as controlled through indicator parameters (of course, 
authorization is only provided to discharge such pollutants within the 
limits and subject to the conditions set forth in the permit);
    (2) Pollutants for which the permit authority has not established 
limits or other permit conditions, but which are specifically 
identified in writing as present in facility discharges during the 
permit application process and contained in the administrative record 
which is available to the public; and
    (3) Pollutants not identified as present but which are constituents 
of waste streams, operations or processes that were clearly identified 
in writing during the permit application process (the permit, of 
course, may explicitly prohibit or limit the scope of such discharges) 
and contained in the administrative record which is available to the 
public.
    With respect to subparts 2 and 3 of the permit authorization 
described above, EPA recognizes that a discharger may make changes to 
its permitted facility (which contribute pollutants to the effluent at 
a permitted outfall) during the effective period of the NPDES permit. 
Pollutants associated with these changes (provided they are within the 
scope of the operations identified in the permit application) are also 
authorized provided the discharger has complied in a timely manner with 
all applicable notification requirements, assuming the permit does not 
otherwise limit or prohibit such discharges. See 40 CFR 122.41(l) and 
122.42(a)&(b). Section 122.42(b) requires that POTWs must provide 
adequate notice, including information on the quality and quantity of 
discharges to the POTW and anticipated impacts on the quantity or 
quality of effluent discharged by the POTW, of new introductions of 
pollutants by indirect dischargers into the POTW and any substantial 
change in the volume or character of pollutants being introduced by 
sources introducing pollutants into the POTW at the time of permit 
issuance.
    Notwithstanding any pollutants that may be authorized pursuant to 
subparts 1 and 2 above, an NPDES permit does not authorize the 
discharge of any pollutants associated with waste streams, operations, 
or processes which existed at the time of the permit application and 
which were not clearly identified during the application process.
    In the policy statement, EPA committed to revise the NPDES permit 
application regulations for both municipal and industrial discharges, 
so as to ensure that applicants would have the responsibility to 
characterize more fully the nature of their effluents and the 
contributions of their effluents to receiving waters. EPA stated that, 
in addressing this issue, it would review its position on the scope of 
the permit shield provided by section 402(k).
    Generally, the discharger is in the best position to know the 
nature of its discharge and potential sources of pollutants. 
Consequently, requiring as full a disclosure as technically possible in 
the permit application is one option EPA considered in light of the 
protection afforded the discharger by the permit shield. In the case of 
POTWs, however, providing a permit shield only for pollutant discharges 
fully and completely characterized in the permit application could 
represent a significant burden on POTWs if they were required to 
identify every pollutant discharged due to the wide variation in 
potential pollutant contributions into POTW sewer systems from 
industrial users and residential dischargers, both in terms of 
pollutant parameters and volumes. Narrowing the scope of the shield and 
consequent expansion of potential liability would likely raise the cost 
associated with the failure to anticipate, detect, and provide 
information on these discharges.
    EPA was concerned that, using the 1973 application form, permitting 
authorities would not always receive the necessary information about an 
applicant's discharge to develop adequate permits consistent with the 
requirements of the CWA. In practice, permitting authorities have been 
requiring supplemental information in order to write credible permits. 
Today's rule updates the POTW discharge application requirements and 
Sec. 122.21(j), to provide necessary information to permit writers and 
to streamline the permitting process by ensuring that the information 
needed from most applicants is consolidated onto a single form.
    Fourteen commenters responded on the issue of the permit 
application requirements and the permittee's responsibility to fully 
characterize its waste stream for permit shield protection under the 
1995 policy. All but two of the commenters thought that the 
requirements did not need to be expanded to include more information 
than the Sec. 122.21(j) requirements of today's rule. Several 
commenters thought that permitting authorities already have access to a 
great deal of discharge data and have the authority to ask for 
additional data when necessary. In the commenters' view, these 
information sources, such as pretreatment program POTW annual reports, 
provide enough information for a permit writer to determine what 
pollutants can be expected in a POTW's influent from industrial 
sources, and this information falls within the boundaries of the 
permit-as-a-shield policy. EPA agrees that some required information 
that may be found in reports previously submitted to the permitting 
agency falls within the permit-as-a-shield policy. Today's rule allows 
reports to be referenced by the permittee in the application form 
provided they are incorporated into the administrative record for the 
application.
    The proposal for this rule requested comment on whether EPA should 
ask for information on beach closings, fish kills, or citizens' 
complaints. Commenters did not believe that asking for any of this 
information would provide any additional benefit to the permit writer. 
Two of the commenters thought that a general question such as ``Does 
the permittee have any other information on pollutants not otherwise 
requested on the forms?'' might be

[[Page 42442]]

useful. EPA does not at this time believe additional generic questions 
are necessary on the permit application because the permitting 
authority already has access to much of this information.
    EPA has concluded that the application requirements in 
Sec. 122.21(j) of today's rule are sufficient to provide the permitting 
authority with a reasonable characterization of a permittee's discharge 
for protection under the permit-as-a-shield policy. Accordingly, the 
application requirements have not been expanded to include any further 
questions on beach closings, fish kills, or citizen complaints nor have 
the requirements been expanded to include a general question on other 
pollutants.
    Since the initial proposal, questions have arisen regarding 
interpretation of one aspect of the Agency's permit-as-a-shield policy, 
specifically, applicability of the permit shield to discharges from 
outfalls identified in the permit application, but not identified or 
discussed in the permit. Because today's rule requires in the 
application specific identification of outfalls, including outfalls 
within the collection system (upstream from the POTW treatment plant), 
the Agency provides clarification and explicit notice to affected 
parties of its interpretation of the permit shield, as explained below. 
This interpretation further clarifies the Agency's April 11, 1995, 
policy memorandum addressing the shield.
    EPA believes that the protection afforded by the permit-as-a-shield 
provision does not apply to discharges from outfalls or other locations 
not identified in the permit. EPA believes this interpretation best 
effectuates the requirements of CWA section 301, which specifies 
pollutant control standards applicable to discharges. EPA believes that 
a permit applicant may reasonably expect a permit ``shield'' when the 
permitting authority applies its technical expertise to derive permit 
conditions and effluent limitations based on a permit application that 
fully discloses the nature of the effluent to be discharged. Permittees 
cannot, however, reasonably expect a permit ``shield'' for discharges 
from outfalls identified in a permit application, but not specifically 
authorized in a permit. There needs to be some explicit acknowledgment 
by the permitting authority that discharge from that specific outfall 
is permissible. Such a discharge would be subject to the technology-
based and water quality-based requirements of the CWA. This is 
distinguished from the Agency's approach for pollutants identified in 
the application but not limited in the permit because here it is clear 
that the permitting authority, by choosing at least one pollutant to 
measure or limit, chose not to establish limits for other pollutants.
    This aspect of the Agency's permit-as-a-shield policy is 
particularly relevant for ``emergency'' or ``accidental'' discharges 
from locations within municipal sewage collection systems not 
identified in the permit which would not automatically receive the 
protection of the permit-as-a-shield provision. Rather, the legal 
status of these discharges is specifically related to the permit 
language and the circumstances under which the discharge occurs. The 
Agency notes that NPDES permit regulations do provide limited relief 
under the bypass and upset provisions of 40 CFR 122.44(m) and (n), 
respectively, for such discharges. The Agency is currently developing 
guidance that would clarify the applicability of the bypass and upset 
provisions to such discharges.
2. Basic Application Information
    The December 1995 proposal would have required all POTW applicants 
to provide the information requested in Sec. 122.21(j)(1) and the 18 
questions in the Basic Application Information part of Form 2A. Many 
commenters suggested that the requirements were not appropriate for 
smaller facilities and would require these smaller facilities to 
collect data that might not be utilized in the permitting process. 
Based on these comments, EPA has restructured the application 
requirements and Form 2A questions to request less information from 
smaller facilities. EPA believes the requirements that remain in 
today's rule will result in the collection of the minimum information a 
permitting authority needs to issue a permit meeting CWA requirements.
    In today's final rule, the basic application requirements in 
proposed Sec. 122.21(j)(1) have been divided into two sections. Section 
122.21(j)(1) contains the requirements for all applicants and requests 
very limited facility and process information, and 122.21(j)(2) 
contains additional questions and limited monitoring information. EPA 
carefully examined the proposed requirements for all facilities and, in 
conjunction with the comments received, determined the final rule 
requirements found in Sec. 122.21(j)(1) for very small facilities. Many 
commenters stated that very small facilities would be able to provide 
basic information, such as location, discharge methods, and type of 
treatment. Additional information, such as inflow and infiltration, 
topographic maps, and process flow diagrams may be more difficult to 
provide because these facilities lack the resources to provide this 
information. EPA evaluated each application requirement to determine 
the impact on the application and permitting process. As discussed 
earlier in this rulemaking, EPA determined that facilities discharging 
less than 0.1 mgd account for only 0.4% of the total flow from all 
POTWs. Additionally, these small facilities are often ``package'' 
systems receiving mainly residential sewage discharges. The basic 
nature of these facilities and their small impact in terms of flow on 
receiving waters, supported the decision to reduce the application 
requirements. The information requested in Sec. 122.21(j)(1) is the 
minimum information a permit writer needs to write a permit that 
complies with the CWA.
    Many paragraphs from proposed Sec. 122.21(j)(1) have been 
renumbered in today's final rule. The addition of Sec. 122.21(j)(2) to 
the proposed rule also causes the other paragraphs of Sec. 122.21(j) to 
be renumbered, e.g., proposed Sec. 122.21(j)(2) is Sec. 122.21(j)(3) in 
today's final rule.
    Section 122.21(j)(1)(i) requests treatment plant identification 
information. Section 122.21(j)(1)(ii) requests information about the 
permit applicant which may describe the owner or operator of the 
facility and not the facility itself. No comments were received on 
either of these sections, and they are unchanged from the proposed 
rule.
    Section 122.21(j)(1)(iii) asks the applicant to provide permit 
numbers of any existing environmental permits that have been issued to 
the facility. One commenter requested clarification of the scope of 
this requirement because it was unclear in the proposal whether the 
applicant should provide information on all permits at the facility. 
The purpose of the requirement is to obtain information on permits 
related to the treatment plant operation and maintenance. EPA intended 
to include only environmental permits related to the permittee's 
treatment plant or collection system operations, e.g., under RCRA, UIC, 
CAA, etc. EPA does not seek information regarding permits under OSHA, 
general construction, or other permits that do not implement federal 
environmental laws. The requirement remains in the final rule.
    Section 122.21(j)(1)(iv) requires the applicant to list the 
municipalities and populations served by the POTW. The POTW may serve 
several areas in addition to the municipal jurisdiction in which the 
POTW is located. Systems which discharge into a larger POTW are also 
known as satellite collection

[[Page 42443]]

systems. This section asks the POTW to provide information on the 
satellite collection systems served. If known, the POTW would indicate 
the type of collection system used by the satellite municipalities and 
whether the municipality owns or maintains any part of the collection 
system.
    The permit writer needs to know what areas are served and the 
actual population served in order to calculate the potential domestic 
sewage loading to the treatment plant. The information on the community 
served by the NPDES permittee is also useful for providing notice and 
public comment for permit reissuance and for public education. One 
commenter requested clarification of the term ``population served.'' By 
this term, EPA means the number of users of the system. EPA has 
expanded this requirement from the proposal in order to obtain a more 
complete picture of the area served by the POTW. The additional 
information on the satellite systems will be used by the permit writer 
to identify areas where there is a potential for unpermitted discharges 
in the collection system prior to the treatment plant. The identified 
areas may necessitate further investigation.
    Section 122.21(j)(1)(v) requires the applicant to report whether 
the POTW is located in Indian country or discharges to a receiving 
water that flows through Indian country. This information enables the 
permit writer to identify the proper permitting authority and 
applicable requirements, including applicable water quality standards. 
Today's action also incorporates the definition of ``Indian country'' 
found at 18 U.S.C. section 1151. The term ``Indian country'' 
encompasses more area than the term ``Federal Indian Reservation,'' 
which was the term originally proposed. For the purposes of determining 
the proper permitting authority, the term ``Indian country'' is more 
appropriate because, even in States authorized to administer the NPDES 
program, EPA is generally the proper permitting authority in ``Indian 
country'' unless a Tribe is authorized to administer the program.
    EPA received one comment on the information requirement regarding 
location relative to Federal Indian Reservations. The commenter felt 
that it might be difficult for new permittees to obtain information on 
discharges that might eventually flow through a Federal Indian 
Reservation. Readily available maps such as topographic and road maps 
often identify Federal Indian Reservations and other areas of Indian 
country, so in many cases a permittee should be able to easily obtain 
this information. Remaining questions should be directed to EPA 
Regional offices. The requirement is renumbered from proposed 
Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(xii) to Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(v).
    Section 122.21(j)(1)(vi) requires the applicant to report the 
facility's design flow rate, annual average daily flow rate, and 
maximum daily inflow rate for each of the past three years. This 
information enables the permitting authority to calculate limits 
appropriate to the POTW, to alert the permitting authority to the need 
for special permit conditions or facility expansion, and to compare 
design and actual flows. Two commenters suggested this information is 
available from the facility's discharge monitoring reports (DMRs). EPA 
disagrees that this information is universally reported in all POTW 
DMRs but, as discussed previously, the permitting authority may waive 
submission of information already available to it or the applicant can 
reference the DMR if it contains the required information. This 
requirement remains unchanged from the proposal but it is renumbered 
from proposed Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(v) to Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(vi).
    Section 122.21(j)(1)(vii) requires information on the type of sewer 
collection system used by the facility. The applicant must identify 
whether the collection system is a separate sanitary sewer system or a 
combined sewer system (conveying both storm water and sanitary wastes). 
The applicant must also estimate the percent of sewer line that each 
type comprises. Knowledge of the type of collection system enables the 
permit writer to determine whether the permit should include 
requirements based on the provisions of the 1994 CSO Control Policy (59 
FR 18688). The current application form, Standard Form A, requests that 
the applicant provide the length of the collection system. Today's rule 
does not include this requirement because EPA does not believe that 
such information is useful to the permit writer. As noted previously, 
however, the application requirements do require identification of 
known outfalls and information about flow contributions from satellite 
municipalities. The latter information will be useful to identify areas 
within the collection system that would be particularly vulnerable to 
excessive flows. No comments were received on this section, and it is 
unchanged from the proposal but is renumbered from proposed 
Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(vi) to Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(vii).
    Section 122.21(j)(1)(viii) requires general information regarding 
the disposition of treated wastes, whether discharged to waters of the 
United States, as well as to other destinations. This information 
enables the permit writer to account for all wastewater that enters the 
POTW plant, regardless of whether or not it is discharged directly to 
waters of the United States. From a watershed permitting standpoint, 
permitting authorities may use this information to identify: flows to 
surface impoundments; land application sites; underground injection; 
and flows that individually or collectively may have an impact on the 
watershed, whether or not they are discharged directly into waters of 
the U.S.
    Section 122.21(j)(1)(viii)(A) of today's final rule has been 
modified slightly to clarify that information must be submitted about 
all types of outfalls throughout the sewer collection system as well as 
the POTW plant, including treated effluent, bypasses, CSOs, and 
constructed ``emergency'' outfalls within a separate sanitary sewer 
system.
    If any effluent is discharged to a surface impoundment that is 
designed to avoid discharges to waters of the U.S., the applicant must 
report the location of each such surface impoundment, the annual 
average daily volume discharged to such surface impoundment(s), and 
whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent. If effluent is 
applied to the land, the applicant must provide the site location, the 
site size, and the average daily volume of effluent applied. The 
applicant must also state whether land application is continuous or 
intermittent. This information alerts the permit writer to the 
potential for point source discharges to arise from land application 
sites under exceptional circumstances, such as cold weather or high 
volume discharges, or from overflowing surface impoundments.
    Section 122.21(j)(1)(viii)(D) requires the applicant to report 
whether wastewater is discharged to another treatment plant, the means 
by which the wastewater is transported, the average daily flow rate to 
that other facility, and information identifying the receiving 
facility. The applicant must also identify the person (owner or 
operator) transporting the discharge, if other than the applicant. The 
permit writer needs this information in order to track the wastewater 
and verify the transfer. One commenter questioned the need for this 
requirement due to the infrequent transfer of discharges among 
treatment works. Informal stakeholder comments indicate that this is a 
common practice at many POTWs, and EPA retains this requirement in 
today's rule.
    Section 122.21(j)(1)(viii) also requires information on other types 
of disposal, such as underground percolation or injection, in paragraph 
(E). These types of disposal practices may result in the

[[Page 42444]]

transfer of pollutants to waters of the United States through 
underground flows and thus are of interest both to the permit writer in 
writing a watershed-based permit and to the permitting authority in 
designing watershed protection strategies. Section 122.21(j)(1)(viii) 
remains unchanged from the proposal but is renumbered from proposed 
Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(xi) to Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(viii).
3. Additional Information for Applicants With a Design Flow Greater 
Than or Equal to 0.1 mgd
    Section 122.21(j)(2) contains additional requirements for 
applicants with a design flow greater than or equal to 0.1 mgd. EPA 
believes these requirements are necessary to account for the more 
complex nature of these more sophisticated facilities.
    Section 122.21(j)(2)(i) requires information on estimated amount of 
inflow and infiltration (I&I) and steps taken and proposed to minimize 
it. Inflow is water other than sewage water that enters a sewerage 
system from sources such as roof leaders, cellar drains, yard drains, 
area drains, foundation drains, drains from springs and swampy areas, 
manhole covers, cross connections between storm sewers and sanitary 
sewers, catch basins, cooling towers, surface runoff, street wash 
waters, or drainage. Infiltration is water other than waste water that 
enters a sewerage system (including sewer service connections) from the 
ground through such means as defective pipes, pipe joints, connections, 
or manholes. These definitions are found at 40 CFR 35.2005.
    Sixteen comments were received on this requirement, with most 
commenters wishing to have the requirement deleted. The commenters felt 
this information is difficult to quantify and could be overly 
burdensome for the permittee to obtain. This requirement has been 
eliminated for facilities under 0.1 mgd. However, for larger facilities 
EPA disagrees with this position. EPA does not expect facilities to 
complete extensive studies to provide the amount of I&I but rather to 
provide a best estimate based on average wet and dry weather flows. 
This estimate is used by the permit writer to determine if special 
conditions, such as I&I control programs, are necessary to reduce the 
unintended flow beyond the design capacity of the collection system or 
treatment capacity of the POTW plant. The information also helps 
identify portions of the collection system with potential for overflow 
or unplanned, untreated discharges. EPA understands that most 
facilities will have some amount of I&I entering their collection 
system and thus treatment plants. The Agency does not envision that 
every POTW will need special permit conditions to control I&I, for 
example, in cases where I&I is not excessive. The requirement applies 
only to facilities with a design flow equal to or greater than 0.1 mgd 
and has been renumbered from Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(vii) to 
Sec. 122.21(j)(2)(i).
    Section 122.21(j)(2)(ii) requires the applicant to provide a 
topographic map (or other map if topographic map is unavailable) 
extending at least one mile from the boundaries of the plant, and 
including information on the layout of the treatment plant and all unit 
processes; intake and discharge structures; wells, springs, and other 
surface water bodies in the vicinity; sewage sludge management 
facilities; and the location(s) at which hazardous waste enters the 
treatment plant by truck, rail, or dedicated pipe.
    Several commenters questioned the elements of the topographic map 
requirement stating that a topographic map containing this much 
information may be difficult to read. The contents of the map are 
necessary for the permit writer to understand the geography of the 
collection system and treatment facility and the potential for various 
water quality impacts due to the location of the treatment plant, the 
outfalls, and other structures and pipes. A topographic map helps the 
permitting authority identify nearby discharge sources or sensitive 
areas which may be necessary for a watershed-based approach to 
permitting. The map must include the major process units and primary 
structures that carry the wastewater to and from the plant. The 
permittee may provide another map if the topographic map is 
unavailable. Permittees may also provide a copy of an original 
topographic map. The requirement applies only to facilities with a 
design flow equal to or greater than 0.1 mgd and has been renumbered 
from Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(viii) to Sec. 122.21(j)(2)(ii).
    This requirement is similar to section Sec. 122.21(q)(5) of this 
rule that requires a topographic map for TWTDS. A facility required to 
comply with both sets of application requirements can use the same map 
if the map if the maps cover the same basic area.
    Section 122.21(j)(2)(iii) requires the applicant to submit a 
process flow diagram or schematic, together with a narrative 
description. The permit writer uses this information to identify bypass 
and other ``emergency'' outfall structures and develop applicable 
permit conditions. Of the commenters on this requirement, half wished 
to keep it and half wanted it deleted. One commenter who wished to 
delete the requirement believed a more simplified schematic drawing 
should suffice. EPA does not intend this requirement to be complex. 
Instead, this drawing is meant to be a simple drawing of the basic unit 
processes with intake and discharge points labeled, as well as the 
design water flow identified for each component process.
    This diagram requirement has been slightly modified to ask for 
information about backup power and identification of redundancy in the 
applicant's system in order to consolidate information and reduce the 
number of questions on the application form. Information on backup 
generators was included in the bypass section of proposed Form 2A but 
inadvertently left out of the proposed rule language. EPA has added 
information on backup generators to this part of the final rule because 
the separate bypass section (from the proposed rule) has been 
eliminated.
    Facilities under 0.1 mgd are not required to submit a process flow 
diagram. The requirement applies only to facilities with a design flow 
greater than or equal to 0.1 mgd and has been renumbered from 
Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(ix) to Sec. 122.21(j)(2)(iii).
    Proposed Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(x) would have required information about 
bypasses, which are intentional diversions of waste streams from any 
portion of the treatment facility. The proposed rule would have 
required information about frequency, duration, and volume of bypass 
incidents. The Agency removed this from the final rule because it is 
already required by the bypass regulations at Sec. 122.41(m). The 
bypass regulations set forth clear reporting and notification 
guidelines for each bypass incident.
    Section 122.21(j)(2)(iv) requires the applicant to provide 
information about scheduled facility improvements. Improvements to the 
facility may change its flow or removal efficiency, necessitating a 
permit modification. The permit writer may modify the permit when the 
improvement is complete, or may include alternate limits in the permit 
that would take effect upon completion of the improvement. Comments 
favored keeping the information on facility improvements. One commenter 
suggested that submitting this type of information would help keep 
different groups in the same permitting agency informed of anticipated 
treatment plant upgrades. The requirement applies only to facilities 
with a design flow equal to or greater than 0.1 mgd and has been

[[Page 42445]]

renumbered from Sec. 122.21(j)(1)(xii) to Sec. 122.21(j)(2)(iv).
    The existing application form, Standard Form A, requested certain 
information about required improvements including information on dates 
for completion of the preliminary plan, completion of the final plan, 
awarding of a contract, and site acquisition. Standard Form A also 
required the applicant to identify the authority imposing the 
improvement and the general and specific action codes. The Agency has 
deleted this requirement because permit writers have indicated that 
this information is unnecessary for writing the permit. Several 
commenters specifically endorsed removing this extra information from 
the final application requirements.
4. Information on Effluent Discharges
    Proposed Sec. 122.21(j)(2) has been renumbered in today's rule as 
Sec. 122.21(j)(3). This section requires all POTWs that discharge 
effluent to waters of the United States to provide specific information 
for each outfall through which effluent is discharged to surface 
waters, excluding CSO outfalls and constructed ``emergency'' outfalls. 
This information will be reported in questions 9, 10, and 11 of the 
Basic Application Information part of Form 2A. The applicant is 
required to submit specific information for each outfall.
    Section 122.21(j)(3)(i) requires general information about each 
outfall. The applicant must specify the outfall number, location, 
latitude and longitude, distance from shore and below surface, average 
daily flow, information about seasonal or periodic discharges, and 
information about diffusers at the outfall. EPA enters the latitude and 
longitude points into the water quality data base STORET and into the 
Permit Compliance System. Maps of the location of water discharges are 
developed to examine the relationship between NPDES outfalls and other 
areas of concern, such as drinking water intake points or sensitive 
ecosystems. This information is also used to establish water quality-
based effluent limits appropriate for the particular receiving water. 
The locational data requested by this question also supports the 
watershed protection approach because it provides State and Federal 
environmental managers with information they need to geographically 
locate discharge points.
    Latitude and longitude must be reported to the nearest second. This 
is consistent with EPA's Locational Data Policy, see ``Locational Data 
Policy Implementation Guidance, Guide to the Policy (March 1992).'' In 
accordance with this Policy, all latitude/longitude measurements in 
Agency data collection should have accuracies of better than 25 meters 
(i.e., roughly one second). One commenter disagreed with this 
requirement, stating that many facilities simply ``guess'' on this 
information so it is not accurate. However, EPA believes this 
information is vital to the permit writer's locating each discharge 
point. All of Sec. 122.21(j)(3)(i) remains unchanged from the proposal.
    Section 122.21(j)(3)(ii) solicits information that describes and 
identifies the receiving waters into which each outfall discharges. 
Information about the type of receiving water is useful to the permit 
writer because mixing zones and wasteload allocations may be calculated 
differently for different types of receiving waters.
    This provision also requests the name of the watershed, the Soil 
Conservation Service watershed code, the name of the State management 
basin (if applicable), and the United States Geological Survey 
hydrologic code. This locational information supports the Watershed 
Protection Approach by providing Federal and State environmental 
managers with a means of locating dischargers within the U.S. Soil 
Conservation Service watershed categorization system, a State's river 
basin categorization system, and the U.S. Geological Survey cataloging 
scheme. Some States, as well as EPA Regions, are implementing basin 
management approaches to watershed protection and will use the 
information requested by this question to issue permits on a watershed 
basis.
    Several commenters disagreed with this request for information, 
stating that many facilities will not be able to provide it with their 
applications. In response, though EPA believes this is important 
information for State and regional authorities, this information 
request is no longer mandatory. The permit applicant needs to provide 
this information only if known.
    Section 122.21(j)(3)(iii)(A) requires information on the level of 
treatment expected for discharges from each outfall. The CWA requires 
POTWs, with some exceptions, to achieve pollutant reductions to a level 
based upon secondary treatment prior to discharge. Secondary treatment 
is defined at 40 CFR 133.102 in terms of five-day biochemical oxygen 
demand (BOD5), total suspended solids (TSS), and pH. Part 
133 allows adjustments to the secondary treatment requirements for 
POTWs that meet certain criteria. In addition, some POTWs are subject 
to requirements for ``treatment equivalent to secondary treatment,'' as 
described in Section 133.105. Finally, some POTWs may need more 
advanced levels of treatment to meet water quality-based effluent 
limits for certain pollutants, such as nitrogen and phosphorous.
    This provision requires data on design removal efficiencies for 
BOD5 and TSS. Information on these parameters is necessary 
for the permit writer to set pollutant limits that accurately reflect 
the pollutant removal that the POTW can achieve. It may also alert the 
permitting authority to the need for improvements to the treatment 
facility. The only comment on this section stated that this information 
may not be appropriate for lagoon systems because design removal 
efficiencies for BOD5 and TSS are not readily available or 
pertinent to these systems. EPA disagrees with this commenter's 
statement that basic design information is not pertinent to lagoon 
systems. All POTWs should have a design BOD5 and TSS removal 
efficiency. The requirement is not changed from the proposal.
    Section 122.21(j)(3)(iii)(B) requires information on disinfection, 
which commonly occurs through chlorination. Many POTWs also 
dechlorinate their effluent prior to discharge because excessive free 
chlorine in a wastewater discharge can cause aquatic toxicity in the 
receiving water. No comments were received on this section and it 
remains as proposed.
5. Effluent Monitoring for Specific Parameters
    The purpose of Sec. 122.21(j) and Form 2A is to provide the permit 
writer with the minimum information necessary to issue an NPDES permit 
that contains effluent limitations and conditions consistent with the 
requirements of the CWA. EPA recognizes that the quality of a POTW's 
effluent depends on several factors, such as the number and type of 
industrial users of the POTW, and that not all POTWs need to report the 
same information to ensure that NPDES permits satisfy CWA requirements. 
Hence, EPA proposed a tiered approach to collect needed effluent 
monitoring information.
    In the December 1995 proposal, EPA proposed to require all POTWs to 
report effluent monitoring information for the 17 parameters listed at 
proposed 40 CFR Part 122, Appendix J, Table 1 (``Effluent Parameters 
For All POTWs''). EPA thought these parameters had a high likelihood of 
occurrence in most POTW effluents. EPA also proposed to require 
additional reporting of pollutant-specific data for POTWs with design 
flows greater than or equal to 1.0 mgd,

[[Page 42446]]

POTWs that have or are required to have pretreatment programs, and 
other POTWs required to provide this information to the permitting 
authority. In general, the pollutants for which additional data was 
proposed to be required are those for which States have established 
water quality standards (other than dioxin, asbestos, and ``priority 
pollutant'' pesticides). The preamble to the December proposal 
explained how EPA chose the pollutants to be sampled.
    One commenter disagreed with EPA's approach of using data from a 
survey of six States as a basis for nationwide requirements. The 
commenter felt EPA should be required to prove the necessity of the 
rule based on valid scientific research associated with risk 
assessments that represent the majority of POTWs as opposed to a 
limited regional survey. EPA examined many pollutant data options 
through the rule development period. The Agency considered numerous 
stakeholder comments along with other information and the pollutant 
scans to determine the requirements in this final rule. EPA determined 
what pollutant data was necessary in the final rule to maintain a 
balance between satisfactory environmental protection and burden on 
applicants. The pollutant requirements in today's rule maintain that 
balance by setting the minimum data collection requirements necessary 
to write environmentally valid permits.
    Many commenters felt that the requirement for minor POTWs, i.e., 
facilities with design flows less than 1.0 mgd, to provide the basic 
application information in proposed Appendix J, Table 1, was overly 
burdensome. Most of the State commenters felt that it would be more 
appropriate to request information from minor facilities on a case-by-
case basis as determined by the permitting authority. EPA understands 
the limited resource issue for minor POTWs and in response has reduced 
the application requirements for facilities with a design flow of less 
than 0.1 mgd.
    Section 122.21(j)(4) requires that data be separately provided for 
each outfall through which treated sanitary effluent is discharged to 
waters of the United States. EPA recognizes that a POTW's effluent may 
have similar qualities at more than one of its outfalls. EPA proposed 
to allow applicants to provide the effluent data from only one outfall 
as representative of all such outfalls, where there are two or more 
outfalls with substantially identical effluents, and with the specific 
approval of the permitting authority. For outfalls to be considered 
substantially identical, the outfalls should, at a minimum, be located 
at the same plant with flows subject to the same level of treatment and 
having passed through the same types of treatment processes. Six 
commenters supported allowing information on substantially identical 
outfalls to be submitted once at the discretion of the Director. One 
commenter wanted EPA to expand this requirement to allow POTWs to 
composite samples from outfalls in close proximity that enter the same 
receiving water but may not be substantially identical. The commenter 
stated that in such cases it is the combined effect of the various 
effluents that is important as far as the toxicity of the receiving 
stream is concerned. The commenter also believes that expanding this 
requirement in the final rule could substantially reduce the cost of 
sampling and analysis for the POTW. EPA agrees and Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(i) 
of today's final rule has been amended to allow POTWs to combine 
effluent discharges from one or more outfalls that discharge into the 
same mixing zone of a stream segment, upon approval of the permitting 
authority.
    In the proposal, EPA set forth conditions for data acceptability 
that all monitoring data submitted to the permitting authority must 
meet. While commenters agreed with the basis for the conditions, 
several commenters disagreed with individual requirements. EPA had 
proposed all data submitted on the application should be from three 
scans collected within a 3-year period preceding the permit application 
date. Some commenters felt that the three year constraint on the data 
would require facilities to collect data specifically for the 
application by excluding data collected in the first two years of the 
permit cycle. Several commenters also disagreed with the seasonal 
constraints placed on the data in the proposed rule. EPA proposed the 
three samples should span three different calendar seasons. Three 
commenters felt the seasonal constraints might require a facility to 
resample because available data was not obtained during the required 
seasonal variation.
    In response to these comments, EPA has modified the proposed 
sampling requirements to allow applicants to use more of their existing 
monitoring data. Today's rule extends the window for sampling data to 
encompass the period from permit issuance to the time of subsequent 
application submittal in the final rule, which is normally four and 
one-half years, provided the data represents the current facility 
operations. In addition, EPA has eliminated the requirement for sample 
data to be a minimum of 4 months and a maximum of 8 months apart. 
Instead, EPA is requiring that the samples represent typical daily 
discharges occurring during the permit term and be representative of 
seasonal variation in the discharges. These requirements are listed in 
Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(vi) of today's rule. Because applicants are allowed 
to submit samples from a four and one-half year period, 
Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(vii) has also been modified to require summarization 
of all data from the previous four and one-half years instead of the 
proposed three years. As in the proposal, when a pollutant is sampled 
on a monthly or more frequent basis, only the most recent year's worth 
of data need be summarized for that pollutant.
    One commenter felt three data scans may be excessive, especially 
for smaller facilities. The smallest facilities are only required to 
monitor for six pollutant parameters which many POTWs sample on a 
regular basis. Because facilities can use existing data, EPA believes 
three samples over four and one-half years is easily obtainable for all 
POTWs.
    A few commenters were concerned with the requirements in proposed 
Sec. 122.21(j)(3)(vii) and the accompanying preamble language that 
required including all data in the submitted data summaries. They 
believed that data collected during pilot studies or for system process 
control should not be required to be included in data summaries. EPA 
understands that facility operators may wish to collect samples in the 
influent or throughout the system in order to determine if they are 
operating properly or returning to proper operations after correcting 
problems. The introductory language of Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(i) states that 
the information required is ``effluent monitoring information for 
samples taken from each outfall * * *'' Therefore, this does not 
include information from samples collected in process (prior to 
discharge). EPA does not intend to require ``check samples'' or samples 
collected during pilot studies to be included with other routine 
samples.
    One commenter asked for clarification as to whether applicants were 
required to submit all sample data or just summaries. The rule language 
in Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(vii) has been modified to clarify that only the 
data summaries need be included. NPDES permitting authorities that want 
to review all the individual data reports are free to request them, 
either from all applicants or on a case-by-case basis.
    Proposed Sec. 122.21(j)(3)(viii) contained sample testing 
requirements. Commenters stated that time-proportional composite 
samples should

[[Page 42447]]

be allowed as an alternative to flow-weighted composite samples because 
flow proportional samples are not feasible in every situation. They 
also questioned a preamble statement that suggested that 4 grab samples 
be summarized for each day of sample collection because they felt 4 
samples per day per parameter could be overly burdensome. EPA agrees 
with these comments and has modified the language of 
Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(viii) to allow time-proportional sampling. Because 
the grab sample language is provided as guidance, and not part of the 
proposed rule, no rule language change was necessary.
    One of the requirements of proposed Sec. 122.21(j)(3)(ix) was to 
report the designated method endpoint for the analytical method used. 
This section also required applicants to submit pollutant data based 
upon actual sample values. The proposal explained that even where test 
values are below the detection or quantification level of the method 
used, the actual data value should be reported, rather than reporting 
``non-detect'' or zero. EPA would require the endpoint of the method to 
be reported along with the actual sample results so that the permitting 
authority could determine if the data is in the ``non-detect'' range or 
merely in the ``below quantification'' range.
    Most of the comments received on this issue disagreed with the 
requirement to submit actual data values when results are below the 
detection level. These commenters believe that data that is below the 
sampling method's level of detection is not valid or meaningful data. 
Two State commenters supported reporting data even if it is below 
detection level. EPA believes that the maximum measured data value 
required by Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(ix)(A) should be reported if it is above 
the method detection limit. Data values that fall below the 
quantification level of a test method should be reported as the actual 
sample value. If the maximum value reported for a pollutant is below a 
detection limit for the sampling method, the permittee should report 
non-detect. Reporting the method end point will notify the permit 
writer to look more closely at maximum values that are below the 
quantification level of the test performed.
    EPA agrees with commenters that actual sample values below the 
method detection level or non-detect values should not necessarily be 
used in computing the averages required by Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(ix)(B). 
There are many different ways of averaging numbers that are below 
detection or quantification limits. In today's final rule, which is 
about permit application requirements, not permit limit development 
requirements, EPA does not require a specific averaging method. 
Applicants can use any statistically credible approach as long as the 
method is explained with the results and the permitting authority 
agrees. Permitting authorities may require a specific method to be 
used.
    EPA has provided guidance to the applicant in the Form 2A 
instructions in order to minimize the conditions that lead to 
inaccurate sampling data. EPA believes that the permit applicant 
should: (1) alert its laboratory to the analytical and detection limit 
requirements and the expectations for documentation; and (2) report the 
necessary documentation to ensure that the permit writer is fully 
informed as to the methods used and the results obtained. For more 
detailed information concerning analytical issues (acceptable methods, 
effluent-specific detection limits, and documentation of data and 
analytical problems), applicants should refer to the ``Guidance on 
Evaluation, Resolution, and Documentation of Analytical Problems 
Associated with Compliance Monitoring'', EPA 821-B-93-001, June 1993.
    a. Pollutant Data Requirements for All POTWs. As mentioned earlier, 
EPA has modified the proposed rule to limit the reporting burden for 
very small (<0.1 mgd) POTWs without significant industrial 
contributions. These facilities are required to submit effluent 
monitoring data for only 6 parameters: biochemical oxygen demand 
(BOD5 or CBOD5), total suspended solids (TSS), 
fecal coliform, pH, temperature, and flow. These parameters are listed 
in Appendix J, Table 1A. EPA selected them based on the secondary 
treatment regulations at 40 CFR Part 133, which describe the minimum 
level of effluent quality that POTWs must attain in terms of 
BOD5, TSS, and pH. Control of BOD5 or 
CBOD5 is necessary to ensure sufficient dissolved oxygen in 
the receiving water to protect aquatic life. High TSS levels in the 
effluent block light in the receiving water and inhibit photosynthesis. 
TSS limits also help prevent solids accumulations that can lead to 
sediment oxygen demand and other sediment related problems. Permit 
writers use information on all of the parameters listed above to set 
appropriate water quality-based limits for permit applicants. When 
POTWs have been allowed to substitute chemical oxygen demand (COD) or 
total organic carbon (TOC) for BOD5, in accordance with 40 
CFR 133.104, applicants must report the substituted parameter.
    b. Pollutant Data Requirements for POTWs with Design Flows Greater 
Than or Equal to 0.1 mgd. Facilities that have a design flow greater 
than or equal to 0.1 mgd are required by Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(iii) to 
provide additional data on the parameters listed at Appendix J, Table 
1. These parameters are oil and grease, total residual chlorine (TRC), 
Kjeldahl nitrogen (total organic as N), total dissolved solids, total 
phosphorus, dissolved oxygen, ammonia (as N), and nitrate/nitrite (as 
N).
    EPA originally proposed a pollutant scan list that would have 
included E. coli, enterococci and hardness. Many commenters felt that 
EPA was premature in proposing requirements for E. coli and enterococci 
to be used as bacterial indicators because EPA had not approved methods 
to measure for these parameters in POTW effluent. The Agency has, 
however, developed and recommended water quality criteria for these 
pollutants. Today's rule does not require analysis for these two 
pollutants. The Agency notes, however, that pending legislation may 
direct the Agency to re-evaluate this decision through future 
rulemaking.
    The Beaches Environmental Awareness, Cleanup, and Health Act of 
1999, H.R. 999, 106th Cong., 1st Sess. (1999), recently passed in the 
House of Representatives, is designed to protect coastal recreation 
waters and beach users from pathogens and beach debris. The legislation 
would apply to coastal recreational waters, defined as the Great Lakes 
and marine coastal waters, including estuaries, used by the public for 
swimming, bathing, surfing, or other similar water contact activities. 
Section 2 of the legislation would require States to develop revised 
recommended water quality criteria for E. coli and enterococcus for 
coastal recreation waters. Section 3 would also require EPA to develop 
new water quality criteria guidance for other pathogen indicators, 
which States would be required to adopt thereafter. Regardless of 
whether the legislation is ultimately enacted, EPA intends to propose 
methods soon to measure for both E. coli and enterococci in POTW 
effluent. Until the Agency approves and promulgates new methods and 
modifications to the permit application requirements, however, today's 
permit application rule will continue to use fecal coliform as the 
pathogen indicator for wastewater.
    Three commenters felt that hardness data should be deleted from the 
general POTW requirements because hardness data are typically used to 
establish

[[Page 42448]]

metals limitations in the effluent. If the POTW is not required to test 
for metals, the hardness data is of limited value on the application. 
Based on these comments, EPA has moved the hardness requirement to 
Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(iv) which requires reporting of additional 
pollutants, including metals, by some POTWs.
    In the proposal, EPA also solicited comment on the need to require 
chlorine data from POTWs that do not use chlorination for disinfection 
and do not otherwise use chlorine in their treatment process. Most 
commenters felt that chlorine data should not be required from such 
facilities because facilities would have no reasonable potential to 
discharge chlorine. EPA agrees with the commenters and has created an 
exemption from the chlorine testing requirement at 
Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(iii) for facilities that do not use chlorine for 
disinfection, do not use chlorine elsewhere in the treatment process, 
and have no reasonable potential to discharge chlorine in their 
effluent.
    EPA received various other comments on all the remaining 
parameters. Some commenters questioned the testing requirement for oil 
and grease because facilities employing secondary treatment do not 
discharge significant quantities of the kinds of materials which would 
be measured with this parameter. EPA disagrees, and believes that many 
POTWS have the potential to discharge oil and grease, which may be 
significant even in very low quantities. Concentrations of oil and 
grease sufficient to create a sheen on the receiving water not only 
affect aesthetic qualities of these waters, but may also reduce the re-
aeration rate of the receiving waters, potentially contributing to the 
dissolved oxygen sag problem. Oil and grease may also indicate the 
presence of other high molecular weight organic pollutants of concern 
because oil and grease are often discharged with or as a sink for such 
pollutants. For these reasons EPA is maintaining the oil and grease 
requirement for facilities with a design flow greater than or equal to 
0.1 mgd.
    EPA received comments to delete each of the following parameters: 
ammonia; total nitrate plus nitrite; Kjeldahl nitrogen; and total 
phosphate. Ammonia, which is common in nearly all sanitary sewage, is 
highly toxic to aquatic life and studies indicate frequent adverse 
effects from this compound in receiving waters. The commenter 
questioning ammonia testing suggested that testing should only be 
required at facilities which have ammonia limits in their permits. EPA 
disagrees. Without testing for ammonia in effluents, permit writers may 
lack the information to determine whether ammonia limits are necessary 
in the first place. In addition, many State water quality standards 
regulate ammonia due to its toxicity, thus making testing necessary to 
assure compliance with such standards.
    EPA proposed three additional parameters, nitrate plus nitrite, 
Kjeldahl nitrogen and phosphorus, because they are prevalent in most 
POTW effluents and because of their potential for adverse impacts on 
receiving waters. Nitrogen and phosphorus are often ``limiting'' 
nutrients, which cause oxygen depletion in marine and fresh water 
systems, respectively. Excessive loadings of nitrogen (discharged as 
ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, and organic nitrogen) and phosphorus 
(discharged as phosphate) can stimulate algae growth, interfering with 
shoreline aesthetics and recreational uses. In addition, decaying algae 
can reduce dissolved oxygen concentrations, thus impairing the aquatic 
environment. One commenter felt the phosphorus testing should only be 
required for discharges into impounded lakes or reservoirs where 
phosphorus build up could result in a serious algal bloom. EPA 
disagrees with any such limitation because phosphorus is likely to be 
found in most POTW discharges and causes demonstrated problems in other 
types of water bodies, including estuaries (e.g. Chesapeake Bay) and in 
large rivers (e.g. Mississippi River). Therefore, testing for 
phosphorus and nitrate/nitrite and Kjeldahl nitrogen remain in the 
final rule.
    EPA received no comments on the remaining two parameters, total 
dissolved solids and dissolved oxygen, and those parameters remain in 
Appendix J, Table 1 of today's rule.
    In the proposal, EPA requested comment on the deletion of six 
parameters on Standard Form A. Commenters agreed that the six 
parameters, chemical oxygen demand, fecal streptococci, settleable 
matter, total coliform bacteria, total organic carbon, and total solids 
were no longer relevant or useful parameters for evaluation of POTW 
discharges. These parameters do not appear in the Sec. 122.21(j) 
requirements.
    In addition to the six parameters discussed above, Standard Form A 
required that POTWs indicate the presence of (but not provide 
quantitative data for) certain pollutants. These pollutants included 
metals, as well as other toxics and non-conventional pollutants. As 
proposed, certain POTWs would need to monitor and indicate the presence 
of the ``priority pollutants'' from that list. The requirements for 
these pollutants are discussed in the following section of this 
preamble.
    Several commenters supported the proposed deletion of the other 
remaining parameters, which are not included in today's final rule. In 
the proposal, EPA asked for comment on requiring testing for sulfide, 
sulfate, aluminum, barium, and fluoride. All of the comments on these 
parameters supported EPA's proposal to not require testing for these 
parameters. Therefore, the final rule does not require such testing.
    c. Additional Pollutant Data Requirements for Some POTWs. Section 
122.21(j)(4)(iv) requires the testing of the additional parameters 
listed in Appendix J, Table 2, by certain POTWs specified below. EPA 
believes the specified POTWs are most likely to discharge such 
pollutants to receiving waters. The Table 2 pollutants are toxic and 
may interfere with POTW performance or pass through the POTW to 
receiving waters without treatment, thus causing adverse water quality 
impacts. As stated earlier, the Agency added hardness to the Table 2 
list because permit writers use hardness data in conjunction with 
metals data to determine the need for and to derive water quality based 
effluent limits for metals.
    Certain POTWs discharge toxic organic and inorganic pollutants 
primarily as a result of contributions from non-domestic sources. 
Section 122.21(j)(4)(iv) of today's rule requires the applicant to 
submit monitoring data for the pollutants listed in Appendix J, Table 
2, if the POTW meets any one of the following criteria: (1) the POTW 
has a design flow rate equal to or greater than 1.0 mgd; (2) the POTW 
has a pretreatment program or is required to have one under 40 CFR Part 
403; or (3) the POTW is otherwise required to submit this data by the 
permitting authority.
    Two commenters felt that the designation of all facilities required 
to have pretreatment programs is overly burdensome for smaller 
facilities that are required to have pretreatment programs. The 
pretreatment regulations at 40 CFR 403.8 set forth the criteria for 
which POTWs must establish pretreatment programs. EPA believes that all 
POTWs with pretreatment programs have the potential to discharge Table 
2 pollutants, regardless of size.
    In addition to POTWs with design flows greater than or equal to 1.0 
mgd and POTWs with pretreatment programs, the rule preserves the 
discretion of the permitting authority to

[[Page 42449]]

require any other POTW to submit monitoring data for some or all of the 
pollutants listed in Appendix J, Table 2. EPA recommends that the 
permitting authority require an applicant to perform a complete or 
partial pollutant scan if toxicity is known or suspected in a POTW's 
effluent. In addition, if the POTW's effluent causes adverse water 
quality impacts or if the POTW discharges to an already impaired 
receiving water, the permit writer has the discretion to require the 
applicant to provide analytical results from a complete pollutant scan. 
The permit writer should also consider whether to require the applicant 
to test for individual parameters depending on the numbers or kinds of 
industrial users discharging to the POTW.
    Numerous commenters provided input on EPA's decision to require 
testing of the pollutants listed on the Appendix J, Table 2 list. Many 
commenters provided individual preferences on which parameters they 
felt should be required. EPA has reviewed the comments carefully and 
feels that testing for the complete list is necessary for the 
development of environmentally protective permits. A few commenters 
noted cost as a factor for deleting various organic parameters. Upon 
review, EPA anticipates that most laboratories will run the entire 
volatile organics scan, acid-extractable scan or base-neutral scan at 
one price with one sample. Thus, deleting one or two individual 
parameters will not reduce cost to the permittee. In fact, the Agency 
developed EPA Methods 624 and 625 (published at 40 CFR 136) so that 
these two tests would cover most organic priority pollutants.
    In the December 1995 preamble, EPA asked for comment on various 
other approaches to collecting pollutant data. The comments received 
did not support the use of any of these other approaches.
6. Effluent Monitoring For Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)
    Existing regulations require certain POTWs to provide the results 
of whole effluent biological toxicity testing as part of their NPDES 
permit applications. The proposal moved these requirements to proposed 
Sec. 122.21(j)(4) to require the same POTWs to conduct WET tests and to 
identify any biological tests the applicant believed to have been 
conducted within three years of the date of application.
    EPA received several comments on the issue of POTWs providing data 
from the last three years of the permitting cycle. States tended to 
disagree with the three year limitation because many States require 
more frequent testing during the first one or two years in the 
permitting cycle, and a reduced amount for the remaining years. Other 
commenters disagreed with the three year limitation because they have 
already undergone several cycles of WET testing and they are now on a 
routine testing cycle such as annual testing. These permittees do not 
wish to perform testing for application purposes only. EPA proposed the 
three year limitation because some of the available WET testing 
information was not conducted in accordance with the nationally-
approved test procedures in 40 CFR Part 136 that became effective on 
November 15, 1995 (60 FR 53529). EPA agrees that facilities who perform 
routine WET testing, and have historically shown compliance, should not 
be required to perform testing for the permit reapplication.
    EPA studied several possible scenarios for testing and has 
determined that it is important for facilities to provide the current 
WET data available in order for permit writers to set appropriate 
permit conditions. The most useful data is quarterly data collected 
within the year prior to the application form. This data provides the 
most useful and relevant characterization of the applicant's discharge 
at the time of the application. The Agency does understand that many 
facilities currently perform WET testing on a routine basis and may 
have a history of no toxicity. For these facilities, the Agency 
understands that collecting quarterly data for one year prior to the 
application may be unnecessary. Today's rule allows facilities who have 
performed WET analyses at least annually in the five year period prior 
to the application to submit that data on the application in lieu of 
collecting new data for the application. EPA presumes the validity of 
such data provided it shows no appreciable toxicity using a safety 
factor determined by the permitting authority. The data must also have 
been conducted in accordance with approved Part 136 methods.
    EPA solicited comment on whether the requirement to conduct WET 
testing should be extended to other POTWs. EPA received several 
responses all recommending that the requirement should not be expanded. 
The commenters felt the permitting authority was in the best position 
to require WET testing from additional facilities on a case-by-case 
basis. EPA agrees; therefore, today's rule does not expand the WET 
requirement to other facilities.
    Section 122.21(j)(5)(iii) allows the POTW applicant to provide the 
results of WET testing from only one outfall as representative of all 
outfalls where the POTW has two or more outfalls with substantially 
identical effluents discharging to the same receiving stream and where 
the permitting authority provides specific approval. For outfalls to be 
considered substantially identical, the outfalls should, at a minimum, 
be located at the same treatment plant with flows subject to the same 
level of treatment and having passed through the same types of 
treatment processes. This section has been modified in the same manner 
as Sec. 122.21(j)(4)(i) to include a provision to allow an applicant to 
submit a composite sample in lieu of individual samples for discharges 
from one or more outfalls that discharge into the same mixing zone if 
approved by the permitting authority.
    Existing WET testing requirements did not specify the number or 
frequency of tests required, the number of species to be used, or 
whether to provide the results of acute or chronic toxicity tests. 
Therefore the December 1995 proposal set minimum reporting requirements 
of four quarterly tests for a year, required multiple species (no less 
than two taxonomic groups, e.g., fish, invertebrate, plant), and 
specified testing for acute or chronic toxicity depending on the range 
of receiving water dilution.
    Many commenters stated that permitting authorities often establish 
a permit reporting frequency that may change throughout the permit life 
based on the results. In setting a minimum permit application frequency 
of quarterly testing for a year, EPA indicated the frequency interval 
was necessary to adequately assess the effluent variability of toxicity 
observed over the course of the year. EPA understands that many 
permitting authorities commonly only require one cycle of quarterly 
testing at some time during the permit cycle. Most of the commenters 
agreed that four quarterly samples was an appropriate test size; they 
disagreed on the three year limitation of the data. One commenter, a 
permitting authority, stated that EPA should define the minimum data 
set size and let the NPDES permitting authority define acceptability of 
data based on when the data was generated. EPA agrees with this 
recommendation and has expanded the three year requirement for data to 
the most current permitting cycle in this final rule. EPA did not, 
however, change the requirement for four quarterly tests.
    The existing whole effluent toxicity testing requirements do not 
specify whether applicants should test for acute or chronic toxicity. 
An acute toxicity

[[Page 42450]]

test typically measures the lethality of the test sample to test 
organisms over a period of 96 hours or less. A chronic toxicity test 
measures effects over longer time periods and measures sublethal 
effects, such as fertilization, growth, and reproduction, in addition 
to lethality. See Technical Support Document for Water Quality-Based 
Toxics Control (1991) (TSD) p. 4.
    In the December 1995 proposal, EPA recommended that testing for 
acute or chronic toxicity be based upon the ratio of receiving water to 
effluent at the edge of the mixing zone as recommended in the TSD. Many 
commenters felt this determination should be left to the permitting 
authority because permit writers are more qualified than permit 
applicants to assess the discharge and its impacts on the receiving 
stream. In the final rule, EPA has not specified whether permit 
applicants must measure for either acute or chronic toxicity based on 
the ratio of receiving water to effluent though the Agency still 
maintains that the recommendation is reasonable based on the discussion 
in the TSD. Permit applicants should consult with the permitting 
authority to determine applicable testing requirements. Permitting 
authorities retain discretion to require testing for either acute or 
chronic toxicity. In jurisdictions where EPA administers the NPDES 
program, the Agency expects EPA Regions to follow the guidance in the 
TSD.
    Section 122.21(j)(5)(ix) now requires that an applicant provide any 
information it may have on the cause of any toxicity. Further, 
applicants must provide written details of any toxicity reduction 
evaluation conducted. Toxicity reduction evaluations (TREs) are used to 
investigate the causes and sources of toxicity and identify the 
effectiveness of corrective actions to reduce it. The permitting 
authority may require a permittee to conduct a TRE in those cases where 
the discharger is unable to adequately explain and immediately correct 
non-compliance with a whole effluent toxicity permit limit or otherwise 
reduce the toxicity to a level below a ``trigger'' for the TRE.
7. Industrial Discharges
    Today's rule requires certain applicants to provide certain 
information about industrial users. The proposed rule would have 
required the applicant to list the total number of categorical 
industrial users (CIUs) and other significant industrial users (SIUs) 
discharging to the POTW, to estimate the average daily flow from these 
users and from all industrial users, and to estimate the percent of 
total influent contributed by each class of users. Today's rule reduces 
the scope of required information from the proposal.
    A categorical industrial user is any discharger subject to 
categorical pretreatment standards under 40 CFR 403.6 and 40 CFR 
Chapter I, Subchapter N. ``Significant industrial user'' is defined at 
40 CFR 403.3(t) as any categorical industrial user and any other 
industrial user that: (1) Discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per 
day or more of process wastewater to the POTW (excluding sanitary, non-
contact cooling and boiler blowdown wastewater); (2) contributes a 
process wastestream which makes up 5 percent or more of the average dry 
weather hydraulic or organic capacity of the POTW; or (3) is designated 
as such by the Control Authority (40 CFR 403.12(a)) because of a 
reasonable potential to adversely affect the POTW's operation or 
violate pretreatment requirements.
    Several commenters stated that these requirements would be overly 
burdensome given the fact the term ``industrial user'' (IU) includes 
any non-domestic source regulated under Section 307(b), (c), or (d) of 
the CWA. The commenters also questioned the usefulness of the 
requirement to report average daily flow from all IUs and to estimate 
the percent of total influent contributed by each class.
    Section 122.21(j)(6)(i) of the final rule has been modified from 
the proposal. It does not require reporting of the total SIU, CIU, and 
IU average daily flow and the estimated percent of total influent 
because this information can be difficult to obtain and the permit 
writer may be able to estimate this information from other sources. 
Today's final rule now only asks the applicant to list the total number 
of CIUs and other SIUs discharging to the POTW. EPA has not modified 
the definition of ``industrial users'' as some commenters suggested. 
The definition includes commercial sources of non-domestic wastewater 
because these facilities have the potential to adversely impact the 
POTW's discharge in the same way as other industrial discharge sources. 
This comment is beyond the scope of the proposal.
    EPA proposed to require POTWs with approved pretreatment programs 
to describe any substantial modifications to the POTW's pretreatment 
program that had been submitted, but not yet approved by the approval 
authority in accordance with 40 CFR 403.18. EPA has determined this 
requirement is not necessary and the Agency has not included it in the 
final rule. The permitting authority should already be aware of program 
modifications submitted but not yet approved by the approval authority 
so it is not necessary for the applicant to resubmit this information.
    EPA proposed to require information on individual SIUs discharging 
to POTWs. Several commenters suggested various deletions of the 
information required on SIUs. EPA believes that permit writers need 
this information to determine if a facility should be required to have 
a pretreatment program and to evaluate the SIUs and determine if any 
are more appropriately characterized as CIUs. Therefore, today's rule 
retains these requirements but renumbers them as Sec. 122.21(j)(6)(ii).
    EPA received several comments questioning the difference between 
the Standard Form A and proposed Form 2A requirements on principal 
products and raw materials, and the need for such information. Standard 
Form A required the applicant to identify the quantities of products 
and raw materials while proposed Form 2A would only have required a 
narrative description of these products and raw materials. EPA believes 
that the permit writer only needs this narrative information if the 
products or raw materials are present in the SIU's discharge. 
Therefore, today's final rule further modifies this provision to 
require only information on products or raw materials that may affect 
or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
    Today's rule deletes a requirement on Standard Form A to 
characterize each SIU's industrial discharge. In many cases, the permit 
writer is able to determine parameters of concern from the principal 
products and raw materials for that SIU. If necessary, the permit 
writer may request this information on a case-by-case basis. Commenters 
supported this deletion.
    In an attempt to reduce duplication of effort, the proposal 
requested comment on whether a POTW should be allowed to reference 
substantially similar information about SIUs previously submitted to 
the permitting authority or to waive SIU information reporting for a 
POTW who operates an approved pretreatment program and has submitted an 
annual report containing the required information within the year 
preceding the application. All of the comments received on this 
question supported this provision for facilities with approved 
pretreatment programs who have filed annual reports.
    Today's rule contains a new Sec. 122.21(j)(6)(iii) that allows the 
Director to waive requirements for reporting SIU information for POTWs 
that submit substantially similar information in an annual report or 
with a pretreatment

[[Page 42451]]

program submittal. All referenced information should also be 
incorporated into the administrative record for the permit application. 
This new provision responds to comments that POTWs provide much of this 
information on previously submitted pretreatment program reports.
8. Discharges From RCRA and CERCLA Waste Sources
    EPA proposed to require applicants to provide general information 
concerning discharges to POTWs of wastes that would be considered 
``hazardous wastes'' under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
(RCRA) as well as discharges to POTWs from hazardous waste cleanup or 
remediation sites. This information would alert the permit writer to 
potential concerns regarding the constituents of such discharges.
    Therefore, section 122.21(j)(7)(i) requests information on RCRA 
hazardous wastes received by truck, rail, or dedicated pipe. Generator 
information does not have to be reported on RCRA hazardous wastes 
discharged to a sewer system that mix with domestic sewage before 
reaching the POTW because the Domestic Sewage Exclusion (under RCRA 
section 1004(27)) provides that ``solid or dissolved material in 
domestic sewage is not solid waste'' and therefore is not a hazardous 
waste. Such materials, however, remain subject to the prohibited 
discharge standards of 40 CFR 403.5.
    As noted by one commenter, the information requested in this 
section is already a POTW requirement under RCRA permit-by-rule (40 CFR 
270.60(c)). The RCRA rule, however, does not require the POTW to report 
this information to the NPDES permitting authority. Today's rule 
ensures that the permitting authority is aware of any hazardous 
materials that may enter the POTW.
    In many cases, POTWs will also already have the information 
required by Sec. 122.21(j)(7)(ii) because similar information on 
hazardous constituents is required by the pretreatment requirements at 
Sec. 403.12(p). This section of today's rule requires the POTW to 
report information on wastewaters from remedial activities that are 
accepted at the POTW. Two commenters were concerned that the 
requirement to identify all hazardous constituents of the wastewater 
did not have a de minimis exclusion. One of these commenters also 
questioned the meaning of ``hazardous constituent'' because it is not 
defined in the rule. The language has been modified to address these 
concerns in today's final rule. Section 122.21(j)(7)(ii)(B) clarifies 
that the hazardous constituents to be identified are those listed in 
Appendix VIII of 40 CFR part 261. Section 122.21(j)(7)(iii) provides a 
small quantity exemption for POTWs that receive less than fifteen 
kilograms of hazardous wastes per month from all discharges into the 
collection system, unless the wastes are acutely hazardous wastes. This 
exemption is the same as the exemption for IUs that must report 
hazardous wastes to POTWs under Sec. 403.12(p) of the pretreatment 
requirements.
    In today's rule language, hazardous constituents in remedial waste 
need only be reported if known. If a POTW has not required the remedial 
site to report all the hazardous constituents, the POTW is not required 
to sample the waste. If the hazardous constituents are not known, the 
permit writer may require such sampling on a case-by-case basis when he 
or she believes it is necessary to write a complete permit.
    The proposed language requested the same information three separate 
times, for CERCLA wastes, RCRA corrective action wastes, and other 
remedial wastes. One commenter suggested that these three questions 
should be combined. EPA agrees and has done so in today's rule. 
Commenters also stated that POTWs do not know all the potential sources 
of hazardous wastes at the time of permit application so they should 
not be asked about wastes that they expect to receive. One of these 
commenters was concerned that the proposed language meant that POTWs 
could not accept remedial waste unless it was identified in the permit 
application. In response, EPA has changed the language of today's rule 
to require information on hazardous constituents in wastes that the 
POTW has received or has agreed or expects to receive. This rule does 
not preclude POTWs from accepting additional such wastes during the 
permit, though such wastes do remain subject to the prohibited 
discharge standards of 40 CFR 403.5.
9. Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs)
    Section 122.21(j)(8)(i) requires information about the combined 
sewer system (CSS), including a system map and system diagram that 
describe the relevant features of the system. EPA deleted other 
information from the proposed rule, such as a system evaluation, 
because the Agency agrees with commenters that such additional 
information is unnecessary or is requested elsewhere.
    Today's rule at section 122.21(j)(8)(ii) requires that applicants 
provide information on each CSO outfall specifically covered by the 
application. This includes locational information similar to the 
information required for outfalls discharging treated effluent. As 
discussed previously, this sort of locational data is consistent with 
Agency policy concerning the reporting of such information and it 
provides permitting authorities with a means of locating dischargers.
    This provision also requires reporting of any parameter monitoring 
conducted on discharges from CSO outfalls and requests information 
about any CSO events that occurred in the year previous to the permit 
application.
    Section 122.21(j)(8)(ii)(E) requires the permittee to describe any 
known water quality impacts, such as beach or shellfish bed closings 
and fish kills. EPA considers this to be the minimum amount of 
information needed by the permit writer to specifically authorize 
discharges at each of the identified CSO outfalls. Originally, EPA 
proposed to require identification of any significant industrial users 
that introduce pollutants to the collection system upstream from a CSO 
outfall. No such requirement exists in the final rule because the 
information is provided in Sec. 122.21(j)(6)(i) with other information 
on SIUs.
10. Contractors
    Section 122.21(j)(9) requires the applicant to identify all 
contractors responsible for any operation or maintenance aspects of the 
POTW and to specify such contractors' responsibilities. This 
information enables the permit writer to determine who has primary 
responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the POTW and thus 
determine whether a contractor should be included on the permit as a 
co-permittee.
    The Agency received conflicting comments on this requirement. One 
commenter agreed, one disagreed on the basis that POTWs cannot contract 
out their liability in a permit, and one wanted more clarification. EPA 
believes that POTWs cannot contract away their liability for compliance 
with NPDES permit requirements rather, they can contract operational 
tasks. EPA believes it is important, however, for the permitting 
authorities to know all parties involved in the operation and 
maintenance of each POTW in order to determine the appropriate 
responsible party. This section remains as proposed.

[[Page 42452]]

11. Certification
    Section 122.21(j)(10) requires the certification and signature of 
an authorized official in compliance with 40 CFR 122.22. The 
certification applies to all attachments identified on the application 
form, as well as any others included by the applicant. No comments were 
received on this section, and it is unchanged from the proposal.

G. Application Requirements for TWTDS (40 CFR 122.21(q))

    Today EPA finalizes regulatory language at Sec. 122.21(q) to update 
the information that treatment works treating domestic sewage (TWTDS) 
must submit with their permit applications. EPA also finalizes a new 
form, Form 2S, for collection of this information. Section (q) requires 
all TWTDS, except ``sludge-only'' facilities, to report information 
regarding sewage sludge generation, treatment, use, and disposal. The 
permitting authority may also require a ``sludge-only'' facility to 
submit a permit application containing this information. Today's 
requirements are intended to clarify the previous sewage sludge 
application requirements that are necessary to implement EPA's Part 503 
standards for sewage sludge use or disposal. These requirements were 
originally provided at Sec. 501.15(a)(2) and were moved to 
Sec. 501.15(a)(4) with the modifications to Parts 123 and 501 published 
on August 24, 1998 (63 FR 45114). As of today's rule, these 
requirements are replaced by Sec. 122.21(q). See section II.I of 
today's preamble for additional discussion.
    As with the POTW application requirements, EPA does not wish to 
require redundant reporting by TWTDS. Thus, the amended regulations 
authorize EPA to waive submission of certain information required to be 
reported under Sec. 122.21(q) in circumstances similar to that provided 
in Sec. 122.21(j). The Director may waive any requirements in paragraph 
(q) if he or she has access to substantially identical information. EPA 
received numerous favorable comments on this approach. In addition, an 
applicant may reference previously submitted information that is still 
accurate if the applicant is certain that the permitting authority 
already has all the necessary information.
    As with the Sec. 122.21(j) waiver, applicants should be very 
specific when referencing information so the permitting authority has 
no difficulty in locating the previous submission. Permitting 
authorities should recognize the need to keep information available for 
future action and to ensure the availability of information submitted 
to various departments. All referenced information should also be 
incorporated into the administrative record for the permit application.
    EPA also solicited comments on ways to allow the permit writer or 
permitting authority discretion in waiving submission of particular 
information where the permitting authority determines that such 
information is not necessary for the application. EPA received several 
comments that suggested allowing the permitting authority to waive any 
requirements it deemed unnecessary. In response, EPA has revised 
Sec. 122.21(q) of today's rule similarly to Sec. 122.21(j) to provide 
authorized NPDES States with the ability to waive any requirement of 
Sec. 122.21(q) that the State believes is not of material concern for a 
specific permit, if approved by the Regional Administrator. See section 
II.F.for additional waiver discussion.
1. Facility Information
    Section 122.21(q)(1) requires summary information on the identity, 
size, location, and status of the facility as a Federal, State, 
private, public, or other entity. Proposed paragraph (ii) of this 
section required that the facility location be described by latitude 
and longitude to the nearest second. EPA received one comment on this 
issue. The commenter stated that this requirement is not contained in 
POTW permit application requirements and should not be in TWTDS 
application requirements. Section 122.21(j) does require location by 
latitude and longitude, but only for location of outfalls. For sewage 
sludge, the location of land application sites is in significance 
equivalent to outfall locations for POTWs. Therefore, EPA agrees that 
it does not need the location of a facility described by latitude and 
longitude. In today's final rule, information on location by latitude 
and longitude pursuant to EPA's Locational Data Policy is only 
requested in Secs. 122.21(q)(9)-(11) as part of the specific 
information for land application sites, surface disposal sites, and 
incinerators.
2. Applicant Information
    Section 122.21(q)(2) requires information concerning the identity 
of the applicant. The only change from the proposal is that proposed 
Sec. 122.21(q)(2)(iii) is moved to become Sec. 122.21(q)(1)(vi). The 
proposed question asked whether the applicant was a Federal, private, 
public, or other entity. This question should be asked about the 
facility, not the applicant. Therefore, it has been moved from the 
applicant information section to the facility information section.
3. Permit Information
    Section 122.21(q)(3) restates the Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(v) requirement 
that the applicant list the facility's NPDES permit number and any 
other permit numbers or construction approvals received or applied for 
under various authorities. EPA received no comments on this section and 
it is unchanged from the proposal.
4. Indian Country
    Section 122.21(q)(4) asks whether any generation, treatment, 
storage, land application, or disposal of sewage sludge occurs in 
Indian country. This section clarifies existing Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(iv), 
which previously asked only ``whether the facility is located on Indian 
Lands.''

    Note: Safe Drinking Water Act regulations for the administration 
of the Underground Injection Control program define ``Indian Lands'' 
to mean ``Indian country.'' See 40 CFR 144.3.

    For further discussion of the substitution of the term ``Indian 
country,'' see the discussion earlier in today's preamble. A sewage 
sludge use or disposal permit, however, may cover activities occurring 
beyond the boundaries of the ``facility.''
5. Topographic Map
    Proposed Sec. 122.21(q)(5) required the applicant to submit the 
following information on a topographic map (or maps) depicting the area 
one mile beyond the property boundaries of the TWTDS: all sewage sludge 
management facilities, all water bodies, and all wells used for 
drinking water listed in public records or otherwise known to the 
applicant within \1/4\ mile of the property boundaries. This proposed 
requirement is different from the existing topographic map requirement 
at Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(vi) in that the proposed requirement asked for 
information on use and disposal sites rather than just disposal sites.
    EPA received 16 comments on this issue of topographic maps. The 
comments were quite diverse and ranged from support for requiring 
topographic maps from all use or disposal sites to requiring them only 
of the facility. EPA has decided that the topographic map requirement 
for TWTDS should be similar to the requirement for POTWs. Therefore, 
the final language of Sec. 122.21(q)(5) requires a topographic map that 
shows on-site treatment, storage, and disposal sites. This does not 
include land application

[[Page 42453]]

sites as these are use sites, not disposal sites. This section of the 
rule also requires the same identification of wells and water bodies as 
required for POTWs. Section 122.21(j)(1)(viii) requires a topographic 
map of each POTW that extends one mile beyond the facility. Therefore, 
all TWTDS that must meet this requirement can use the same topographic 
map to meet the requirements of Sec. 122.21(q)(5). ``Sludge-only'' 
TWTDS are only required to submit limited background information. 
Therefore, they do not need to prepare a topographic map unless the 
permitting authority requires a full permit application.
    EPA believes that it is important to get information on land 
application sites but recognizes that many applicants cannot identify 
all their land application sites at the time of permit application. 
This is the purpose of the land application plan. EPA believes that 
topographic maps should be submitted for all sites known to the 
applicant at the time of permit application unless they receive only 
exceptional quality (EQ) sewage sludge. EPA is modifying the proposed 
language in Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii) to add a requirement for a 
topographic map. Several commenters stated that topographic maps should 
not be required for sites that used only ``EQ'' sewage sludge. EPA 
agrees and has placed the map requirement in Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii), 
thereby excluding sites that accept only ``EQ'' sewage sludge.
    The land application plan asks for general information on sites 
that are not known at the time of permit application. The permitting 
authority will need to decide exactly what information it needs about 
these sites as they are put into use.
6. Sewage Sludge Handling
    The December 6, 1995, proposal required a flow diagram, and/or a 
narrative description that identifies all sewage sludge management 
practices (including on-site storage) to be employed during the life of 
the permit. EPA believes that this information is necessary because the 
applicant may employ sewage sludge management practices not covered 
under the more specific questions proposed in today's rule. Three 
comments were received on this requirement. One commenter thought that 
this description would normally not be necessary; the other two thought 
that it was appropriate.
    EPA also requested comments on whether more specific information 
about on-site and off-site storage of sewage sludge should be required 
of permit applicants. All five commenters on this issue thought that 
some information should be obtained about storage, but there were no 
suggestions of specific questions. Because storage is not regulated by 
Part 503, EPA believes that asking for information on storage as part 
of a flow diagram or narrative description is the best way to obtain 
this information. Therefore, EPA is today promulgating 
Sec. 122.21(q)(6) as proposed.
7. Sewage Sludge Quality
    In the December 6, 1995, notice, EPA proposed a two-tier approach 
for collection of pollutant specific data based on whether the 
treatment works had an industrial pretreatment program. As proposed, 
Class I sludge management facilities would be required to submit the 
results of at least one toxicity characteristic leaching procedure 
(TCLP) conducted during the last five years to determine whether the 
sewage sludge is a hazardous waste. They would also be required to 
submit sewage sludge data for all the priority pollutants except 
asbestos, for the Part 503 pollutants, and for total kjeldahl nitrogen 
(TKN), ammonia, nitrate, and total phosphorus. Other TWTDS would be 
required to submit data for the pollutants regulated in Part 503 and 
for TKN, ammonia, nitrate, and total phosphorus.
    EPA requested comments on adding several other requirements. These 
included requiring Class I sludge management facilities to submit data 
on 20 pollutants from the tentative list for the Part 503 Round Two 
regulation; requiring all TWTDS that land apply or place sewage sludge 
in a surface disposal site to submit data on fecal coliform, Salmonella 
sp. bacteria, enteric viruses, and viable helminth ova; and requiring 
non-Class 1 TWTDS to submit results of a TCLP and data on dioxin/
dibenzofurans and co-planar polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). EPA also 
solicited comments on whether an applicant should be required to submit 
data only for the pollutants regulated for the TWTDS' use or disposal 
practice.
    EPA received numerous comments on all the above issues. The vast 
majority of the comments questioned the need for data other than the 
parameters regulated in Part 503. Several commenters mentioned the Part 
503 risk assessment and felt that if a pollutant was not regulated in 
Part 503, there was no need for monitoring or basis for setting a 
limit.
    After considering the comments, EPA has concluded that the permit 
application should only include monitoring data for pollutants that 
have Part 503 limits for the applicant's use or disposal method at the 
time of permit application. At the time of this final rule, for land 
application these are arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, 
molybdenum, nickel, selenium, and zinc. For surface disposal they are 
arsenic, chromium, and nickel, and for incineration they are arsenic, 
cadmium, chromium, lead, and nickel. If an applicant thinks that it may 
change use or disposal practices during the permit period, it should 
submit data for all potentially regulated pollutants. Today's notice 
amends proposed Sec. 122.21(q)(7) to require all applicants to submit 
data for pollutants for which Part 503 limits have been established for 
their use or disposal practices.
    Two additional issues were raised in the comments received on this 
section. Three commenters suggested that data from the past three years 
should be allowed rather than two years for consistency with POTW 
permit applications. EPA agrees that consistency between the forms 
makes sense for this issue. The data period for POTW permit application 
requirements has been extended to four and one-half years in today's 
final rule. This allows applicants to submit data obtained at any time 
during the previous permit cycle. For consistency, EPA is making the 
same change for TWTDS application requirements in Sec. 122.21(q)(7) 
(and on Form 2S).
    The proposed rule asked for the analytical methods used but did not 
require use of specific methods, to allow for the submittal of existing 
data. Part 503 requires the use of test methods in SW-846 for 
monitoring pollutants. Three commenters suggested that SW-846 methods 
should be used for application data as well. Because all facilities 
have had to monitor according to Part 503 for several years, there is 
no longer any reason to accept data that is not analyzed according to 
SW-846 methods. Therefore, EPA is today modifying Sec. 122.21(q)(7) to 
require application monitoring data to be analyzed according to methods 
in SW-846.
8. Requirements for a Person Who Prepares Sewage Sludge
    In the December 6, 1995 proposal, Sec. 122.21(q)(8) identified the 
permit application information that a person who prepares sewage sludge 
for use or disposal would be required to submit. A ``person who 
prepares,'' as defined at 40 CFR 503.9(r), is ``either the person who 
generates sewage sludge during the treatment of domestic sewage in a 
treatment works or the person who derives a material from sewage 
sludge.'' This section thus pertains to any POTW

[[Page 42454]]

or other treatment works that generates sewage sludge. It also includes 
facilities (such as composting operations) that receive sewage sludge 
from another facility and then produce a material derived from that 
sewage sludge.
    Paragraphs (i) and (ii) requested information on the amount of 
sewage sludge generated (paragraph (i)) plus any other amount that is 
received from off-site (paragraph (ii)). Paragraph (ii) also solicited 
information on sewage sludge treatment practices at any off-site 
facility from which sewage sludge is received. Paragraph (iii) 
requested information on sewage sludge treatment processes at the 
applicant's facility, including pathogen or vector attraction reduction 
processes. Paragraph (iv) asked for the amount of ``EQ'' sewage sludge 
that is applied to the land. Paragraph (v) sought information on sewage 
sludge that is not ``EQ,'' but is nevertheless placed in a bag or other 
container for sale or give-away for application to the land. Paragraph 
(vi) sought information about any other ``person who prepares'' who 
receives sewage sludge from the applicant's facility.
    EPA received eight comments on these proposed information requests. 
Most of the commenters believed that some or all of the information in 
Sec. 122.21(q)(8)(vi) was unnecessary and duplicative because it would 
also be reported on the receiving TWTDS'' permit application. One 
commenter believed that the information in Sec. 122.21(q)(8)(ii) was 
also unnecessary and duplicative because it would be reported on the 
sending TWTDS'' permit application. EPA anticipated these concerns and 
requested comments on ways to avoid this duplication, such as allowing 
the applicant to reference substantially similar information previously 
submitted to a permitting authority rather than resubmitting the 
information.
    If all permit applications went to the same permitting authority at 
the same time, information on other TWTDS that handle sewage sludge 
from the applicant would not be necessary. Due to the tiered permitting 
scheme (58 FR 9404), however, the limited information requested from 
non-discharging TWTDS, and the possibility of inter-state transport, 
this is not always the case.
    If the applicant is certain that the permitting authority has 
received an application from all other TWTDS that handle its sewage 
sludge, today's final rule allows it to reference the appropriate 
permit applications or include copies of the relevant sections. In 
addition, the Director's waiver authority could be used to eliminate 
duplication. A State that requires all TWTDS to submit full permit 
applications and believes it has access to all the necessary 
information could waive submittal of the requested information in 
Secs. 122.21(q)(8)(ii) and (vi) for all its TWTDS once the State sewage 
sludge management program has been approved by EPA. EPA believes that 
the information requested in this section should be provided and the 
rule provides adequate ways of avoiding unnecessary duplication.
    The previous requirement at Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(viii) asks for the 
``name of any distributors when the sludge will be disposed of through 
distribution and marketing.'' This requires the names of any facilities 
that sell or give away EQ sewage sludge. EPA believes that EQ sewage 
sludge should be treated similarly to other fertilizers. Thus, EPA 
proposed deleting the names of distributors in the December 1995 
proposal. The five comments received on this issue all supported the 
proposal. For the reasons mentioned above, Sec. 122.21(q)(8), as 
promulgated, is unchanged from the proposal.
9. Land Application of Bulk Sewage Sludge
    Proposed Sec. 122.21(q)(9) requested information on sewage sludge 
that is land applied in bulk form. This section applies only where the 
applicant's permit must contain all applicable Part 503 requirements 
for land application. This section does not apply if the applicant 
generates EQ sewage sludge subject to Sec. 122.21(q)(8)(iv) or if the 
applicant places sewage sludge in a bag or other container for sale or 
give-away for application to the land subject to Sec. 122.21(q)(8)(v). 
In neither of these cases is it necessary to control the ultimate land 
application through a permit. Thus the applicant does not need to 
provide the information requested in Sec. 122.21(q)(9) as part of the 
application. The section also does not apply if the applicant provides 
sewage sludge to another ``person who prepares'' subject to 
Sec. 122.21(q)(8)(vi). In this case, the ultimate land application 
would be controlled by the subsequent ``person who prepares.''
    EPA received numerous comments on different aspects of 
Sec. 122.21(q)(9). Most of the commenters suggested different ways to 
obtain the information requested in this section. Some commenters 
believe that this information should not be requested in a permit 
application but rather during the life of the permit as new sites are 
added. Other commenters stated that information on land application 
sites would be available through annual reports. This issue of how to 
obtain adequate information without duplication or overloading the 
permitting authority with unnecessary information was addressed during 
the original development of Part 501 and Part 503.
    After reviewing the comments, EPA believes that its current 
approach is well grounded. If information is known about land 
application sites at the time of permit application, it should be 
submitted to the permitting authority. If information is not known, a 
land application plan must be submitted. Reports are only required from 
Class I sludge management facilities unless required on a case-by-case 
basis in a permit. Some States may have more extensive requirements, 
but this rule only provides the Federal requirements. As mentioned 
previously, if the required information is already available, the 
permitting authority may waive the requirement or the permit 
application may simply reference the information provided elsewhere. 
Several commenters thought that it would be more appropriate to require 
information from appliers. However, appliers who do not change the 
sewage sludge quality are not TWTDS and are therefore not required to 
apply for a permit. Generators should be aware of where and how their 
sewage sludge is land applied. EPA believes it is feasible for 
generators to obtain information from appliers and submit it with their 
permit application. As mentioned earlier, this section is not 
applicable if a TWTDS produces all EQ sewage sludge. The land 
application plan serves as the vehicle to allow TWTDS to add sites 
during the life of the permit without requiring a major permit 
modification. The following paragraphs describe the individual 
requirements in this section. The final rule is the same as the 
proposal unless otherwise mentioned.
    Paragraph (i) of Sec. 122.21(q)(9) clarifies the existing 
requirement at Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(x) which tells the applicant to report 
annual sludge production volume. Paragraph (ii) asks how the applicant 
will satisfy the Sec. 503.12(i) notification requirement for land 
application sites in a State other than the State where the sewage 
sludge is prepared.
    Paragraphs (A)-(C) of Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii) ask the applicant to 
identify the land application site. These questions request locational 
information which meets the specifications of EPA's Locational Data 
Policy and supports the Watershed Protection Approach by providing 
permit writers and other

[[Page 42455]]

Federal and State environmental managers with a means of geographically 
locating land application sites.
    Paragraphs (D) and (E) of Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii) ask the applicant 
to identify the land application site owner and applier, if different 
from the applicant. EPA believes that this information is necessary in 
order to ensure that the permit is issued to the correct party. These 
proposed paragraphs clarify and expand on existing requirements at 
Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(viii).
    One of the land application management practices in Sec. 503.14 
mandates that bulk sewage sludge shall not be applied to land at 
greater than the agronomic rate. Therefore, paragraphs (F) and (G) of 
Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii) ask the applicant to identify the type of land 
application site, the type of vegetation grown on that site, if known 
at the time of permit application, and the vegetation's nitrogen 
requirement. This information enables the permit writer to calculate an 
appropriate permit management practice regarding agronomic rate. EPA 
recognizes that different crops may be grown on a site during the life 
of a permit. If the crop for a site is not known or likely to change, 
the applicant should submit whatever information is available.
    Paragraph (H) of Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii) requests information on 
vector attraction reduction measures undertaken at the land application 
site. Before sewage sludge is applied to the land, it must meet the 
requirements for vector attraction reduction in Sec. 503.33. These 
measures may be undertaken either by the ``person who prepares'' sewage 
sludge or by the operator of the land application site.
    Proposed paragraph (G) of Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii) asked the 
applicant to submit any existing ground-water monitoring data for the 
land application site. This was intended to give the permitting 
authorities ground-water monitoring data for land application sites in 
order to ensure that sewage sludge application rates are appropriately 
protective of ground water. Five commenters responded to this 
requirement. Since ground-water monitoring at land application sites is 
not required by Part 503, some commenters thought that this requirement 
could cause facilities that voluntarily monitor to discontinue their 
monitoring program rather than submit all their data to the permitting 
authority. Another commenter mentioned that many sites have commercial 
fertilizers applied along with sewage sludge so that it is difficult to 
relate the results of ground-water testing to sewage sludge. After 
considering the comments, EPA agrees that available ground-water data 
should not be required on a permit application, and has not promulgated 
proposed Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii)(G). If States require ground-water 
monitoring, they may request this information. EPA will only ask for 
data on ground-water monitoring if it is a specific permit condition.
    Section 501.15(a)(2)(ix) asks for information necessary to 
determine if the site is appropriate for land application and a 
description of how the site will be managed. This requirement could be 
interpreted in different ways. Today's rule clearly specifies site 
management requirements in paragraphs (F)-(H) of Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii) 
by asking for the type of site, the vegetation grown, the nitrogen 
requirements, and any on-site vector attraction reduction activities.
    Permitting authorities need to be assured that sewage sludge is 
being used in accordance with Part 503. Detailed information on site 
management is often obtained through operating plans, annual reports, 
and inspections. In some situations, permitting authorities may choose 
to get this information before issuing a permit. Paragraph (I) has been 
added to Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii) to emphasize that the permitting 
authority can request other site management information if it is needed 
to identify appropriate permit conditions.
    Section 122.21(q)(9)(iv) requests information that the permitting 
authority needs in order to verify whether the Sec. 503.12(e)(2)(i) 
requirement for appliers of bulk sewage sludge subject to cumulative 
pollutant loading rates (CPLRs) has been met. A cumulative pollutant 
loading rate, as defined in Sec. 503.11(f) is ``the maximum amount of 
an inorganic pollutant that can be applied to an area of land.'' This 
information enables EPA to ensure that the CPLRs are not exceeded when 
more than one facility is sending sewage sludge subject to CPLRs to the 
same site.
    Section 122.21(q)(9)(v) restates the requirement in existing 
Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(ix) for information on land application sites not 
identified at the time of permit application. EPA received numerous 
comments on paragraph (E) of this section. Many commenters discussed 
the difficulties involved in providing notice to ``landowners and 
occupants adjacent to or abutting the proposed land application site.'' 
Numerous questions have been raised about exactly what this language 
means.
    EPA agrees that States should provide public notice as required by 
State and local law, when such laws exist. However, some States and 
municipalities have no provisions for public notice of land application 
sites. Section 122.21(q)(9)(v)(E) of today's rule requires that land 
application plans include provisions for public notice of new land 
application sites. If State or local law includes public notice 
provisions, these must be followed. Where State or local law does not 
require advance public notice, the land application plan must include 
specific provisions stating how the general public will be apprized of 
new sites.
10. Surface Disposal
    Section 122.21(q)(10) requests information on sewage sludge that is 
placed on a surface disposal site. By definition, a sewage sludge 
surface disposal site is a TWTDS. Many surface disposal site owner/
operators, however, do not have to complete this section, but instead 
submit the limited background information required by 
Sec. 122.21(c)(2)(iii). The applicant is required to provide the 
information requested by Sec. 122.21(q)(10) only if the surface 
disposal site is already covered by an NPDES permit; if the owner/
operator is requesting site-specific pollutant limits; or if the 
permitting authority is requiring a full application.
    Paragraph (i) of Sec. 122.21(q)(10) clarifies the existing 
requirement at Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(x) which tells the applicant to report 
annual sludge production volume. Paragraph (ii) of Sec. 122.21(q)(10) 
requires that the applicant provide the name or number, address, 
telephone number, and amount of sewage sludge placed on each surface 
disposal site that the applicant does not own or operate. This 
paragraph clarifies and expands on existing requirements at 
Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(viii). EPA believes that this information is 
necessary in order to ensure that the permit is issued to the correct 
party.
    Paragraph (iii) of Sec. 122.21(q)(10) requests detailed information 
on each active sewage sludge unit at each surface disposal site that 
the applicant owns or operates. A ``sewage sludge unit'' is defined in 
Sec. 503.21(n) as ``land on which only sewage sludge is placed for 
final disposal.'' A ``surface disposal site'' is ``an area of land that 
contains one or more sewage sludge units.'' Information on each active 
sewage sludge unit is necessary because Part 503 provides for different 
pollutant limits, monitoring requirements, and management practices for 
each unit. This information enables the permitting authority to 
establish proper permit conditions.

[[Page 42456]]

    Paragraphs (A)-(C) of Sec. 122.21(q)(10)(iii) ask the applicant to 
identify the surface disposal site by submitting the same information 
requested in Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(iii). This information may have already 
been provided if the surface disposal site is located at a POTW. The 
information is requested in this section in order to adequately locate 
``sludge-only'' surface disposal sites that have been asked to submit a 
full permit application.
    Paragraph (K) of Sec. 122.21(q)(10)(iii) requests information on 
sewage sludge sent to the active sewage sludge unit by any facility 
other than the applicant's. This information helps the permit writer to 
determine which requirements apply to the surface disposal site owner/
operator and which apply to the facility which sends sewage sludge to 
the surface disposal site. As previously mentioned, the applicant may 
reference substantially similar information already submitted to the 
permitting authority.
    Paragraph (L) of Sec. 122.21(q)(10)(iii) requests information on 
vector attraction reduction measures undertaken at the active sewage 
sludge unit. Before sewage sludge is placed on an active sewage sludge 
unit, it must meet the requirements for vector attraction reduction in 
Sec. 503.33. Since vector attraction reduction measures may be 
performed either by the facility preparing sewage sludge or by the 
surface disposal site owner/operator, EPA believes that both should be 
required to supply information on their practices.
    Section 503.24(n)(2) requires surface disposal sites to demonstrate 
by way of a ground water monitoring program or certification that 
sludge placed on an active sewage sludge unit does not contaminate the 
underlying aquifer. In order to ensure that this requirement is 
implemented, paragraph (M) of Sec. 122.21(q)(10)(iii) requests 
information on ground water monitoring programs or certifications. 
Because many communities rely on ground water as a source of drinking 
water, EPA believes that this information is necessary to protect 
public health and the environment.
    After August 18, 1993, only surface disposal sites showing good 
cause may apply for site-specific pollutant limits. Paragraph (N) of 
Sec. 122.21(q)(10)(iii) requests the information necessary for the 
permit writer to determine whether such site-specific limits are 
warranted. This information must include a demonstration that the 
values for site parameters at the applicant's site differ from those 
used to develop the surface disposal pollutant limits in Part 503.
11. Incineration
    Section 122.21(q)(11) requests information on sewage sludge that is 
fired in a sewage sludge incinerator. According to Sec. 503.41(k), a 
sewage sludge incinerator is ``an enclosed device in which only sewage 
sludge and auxiliary fuel are fired.'' A sewage sludge incinerator is a 
TWTDS and is required to submit a full permit application.
    Paragraph (i) of Sec. 122.21(q)(11) clarifies the existing 
requirement at Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(x) which tells the applicant to report 
annual sludge production volume. Paragraph (ii) of Sec. 122.21(q)(11) 
requires that the applicant provide the name or identifying number, 
address, telephone number, and amount of sewage sludge fired in each 
sewage sludge incinerator that the applicant does not own or operate. 
This paragraph clarifies existing requirements at 
Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(viii). EPA believes that this information is 
necessary in order to ensure that the permit is issued to the correct 
party.
    Paragraph (iii) of Sec. 122.21(q)(11) requests detailed information 
on each sewage sludge incinerator that the applicant owns or operates. 
Paragraph (B) of Sec. 122.21(q)(11)(iii) asks the applicant to identify 
the sewage sludge incinerator by latitude and longitude. There is no 
requirement to submit a topographic map because EPA believes all sewage 
sludge incinerators are located at treatment works that generate sewage 
sludge. Therefore, they are already required to submit a topographic 
map under the requirements of Sec. 122.21(q)(5).
    Paragraph (C) of paragraph (iii) requests the total amount of 
sewage sludge fired annually in each incinerator. This information is 
necessary because the monitoring requirements for sewage sludge 
incinerators are based on the total amount fired.
    Paragraphs (D) and (E) of Sec. 122.21(q)(11)(iii) request 
information on compliance with the beryllium and mercury National 
Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs). Section 
503.43 paragraphs (a) and (b) require compliance with these standards 
through a cross-reference to 40 CFR Part 61 subparts C and E. If the 
incinerator is required to perform stack testing, these paragraphs 
would require the applicant to submit a report of that testing.
    Under Sec. 503.43, the pollutant limits applicable to each sewage 
sludge incinerator are calculated based on factors unique to each 
incinerator. Paragraphs (F), (G), and (H) of Sec. 122.21(q)(11)(iii) 
require each applicant to submit these factors for their 
incinerator(s). Calculating pollutant limits on an individual basis 
allows the actual performance of each incinerator and actual site 
conditions, such as topography, to be taken into account. EPA believes 
that this is more appropriate than mandating national pollutant 
limitations for sewage sludge incinerators.
    EPA received one comment on this issue. The commenter mistakenly 
believed that all incinerator applicants would have to resubmit 
information on their performance tests and air modeling. Incinerator 
applicants that have already submitted this information to the 
permitting authority do not have to resubmit. Permit applications have 
already been completed for most currently operating sewage sludge 
incinerators. This requirement applies to incinerators for which 
complete permit applications have not yet been submitted. At the next 
permit cycle an incinerator permittee can reference the previously 
submitted data unless the permitting authority requires new testing.
    In the development of Part 503, EPA determined that it would be 
infeasible to establish individual limits for each hydrocarbon in 
sewage sludge incinerator exit gas. Instead, the Agency adopted a 100 
ppm total hydrocarbon (THC) limit and required continuous THC 
monitoring to show compliance. Part 503 was amended on February 25, 
1994 (59 FR 9095) to allow sewage sludge incinerators whose exit gas 
does not exceed 100 ppm carbon monoxide (CO) to show compliance with 
the THC operational standard by monitoring CO instead of THC. 
Paragraphs (H), (I), and (J) of proposed Sec. 122.21(q)(11)(iii) 
requested information on the incinerator's exit gas concentration of 
THC or CO, oxygen, and moisture.
    One commenter questioned the validity of this requirement. The 
commenter stated that since THC or CO data must be monitored 
continuously, a request for one data point on the permit application is 
meaningless. EPA agrees with this comment and has deleted these 
questions. In today's rule Sec. 122.21(q)(11)(iii)(I) asks whether the 
applicant monitors THC or CO.
    Many of the incinerator's site-specific factors that are used to 
calculate pollutant limits and compliance with the operational standard 
are highly dependent on the temperature at which the incinerator is 
operated and the rate at which sewage sludge is fed into the 
incinerator. For most incinerators, these parameters are determined 
during an

[[Page 42457]]

initial performance test. EPA asked for the information in paragraphs 
(K) through (O) of proposed Sec. 122.21(q)(11)(iii) in order to ensure 
appropriate pollutant limits and that the incinerator would be operated 
within the parameters of the original performance test.
    After reviewing these questions, EPA is making some changes in 
today's rule. The information in paragraphs (K), (N), and (O) of 
proposed Sec. 122.21(q)(11)(iii) remain unchanged but the paragraphs 
are renumbered as (J), (M), and (N). One commenter thought that 
proposed paragraph (O) is unnecessary and unclear. Part 503 requires 
that a sewage sludge incinerator's air pollution control devices be 
operated in a manner that is not significantly different from how they 
were operated during the performance test. This paragraph requests the 
performance test operating parameters for the air pollution control 
devices so compliance with this requirement can be determined. 
Therefore it is being promulgated as proposed.
    The information requested in proposed paragraphs (L) and (M) is 
from the performance test. Proposed paragraph (L) is finalized as 
paragraph (K). To be consistent with the amendments to Part 503, the 
term ``combustion temperature'' is changed to ``maximum performance 
test combustion temperature'', which is the arithmetic mean of the 
maximum combustion temperature for each of the runs in a performance 
test. Proposed paragraph (M) is finalized as paragraph (L) and is 
modified to clarify that the requested sewage sludge feed rate is that 
used during the performance test.
    Proposed paragraphs (P) and (Q) of Sec. 122.21(q)(11)(iii) are 
promulgated unchanged except for being renumbered as paragraphs (O) and 
(P). They request information on the monitoring equipment and air 
pollution control devices installed on the incinerator. Information on 
this equipment is necessary to ensure that the facility complies with 
the management practices at Sec. 503.45.
12. Disposal in a Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
    Section 122.21(q)(12) requests information on sewage sludge that is 
sent to a municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF). Section 503.4 states 
that sewage sludge sent to a MSWLF that complies with the requirements 
in 40 CFR Part 258 constitutes compliance with sec. 405(d) of the CWA. 
The questions in Sec. 122.21(q)(12) are necessary to ensure the 
availability of accurate information about a MSWLF and the sewage 
sludge that is sent there.
    Paragraphs (i) and (ii) of Sec. 122.21(q)(12) clarify existing 
requirements at Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(v), (viii), and (x) that request 
information on other permits, the location of disposal sites, and the 
annual sludge production volume. Paragraph (iii) requests information 
on the sewage sludge quality to ensure that it is acceptable for a 
MSWLF. Paragraph (iv) requests available information on whether the 
MSWLF is in compliance with Part 258.
    EPA received three comments on this section. All three commenters 
stated that permittees should not be asked about landfill compliance 
with Part 258 since they believe this is the responsibility of the 
landfill. EPA disagrees with the commenters and this section remains as 
proposed. Section 503.4 states that disposal in a MSWLF that complies 
with the requirements in 40 CFR part 258 constitutes compliance with 
section 405(d) of the CWA. Sewage sludge that is placed in a MSWLF does 
not have to meet any of the pollutant limits or pathogen and vector 
requirements that are contained in Part 503. Protection of public 
health and the environment is provided by the Part 258 requirements. If 
sewage sludge is disposed in a landfill that is not in compliance with 
part 258, there is no way to know if the landfill is designed and 
operated so as to protect the environment from any potential problems 
from the sewage sludge. The preamble to Part 503 (58 FR 9248) explains 
the relationship between Parts 258 and 503.
13. Contractors
    Section 122.21(q)(13) requires the applicant to provide contractor 
information. The applicant is required to identify all contractors 
responsible for any sewage sludge related operation or maintenance 
aspects of the TWTDS, and specify their responsibilities. The 
permitting authority uses this information to determine who has primary 
responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the TWTDS.
    EPA received four comments on this section. One commenter agreed 
with EPA's proposal to identify all contractors, one disagreed, one 
wanted information on the proposal but only on appliers, and one wanted 
more clarification about the scope of the requirement. EPA agrees that 
TWTDS cannot by contracting out sewage sludge use or disposal avoid 
their legal obligation to comply with Part 503 and any permit 
requirements. However, EPA believes it is helpful to the permitting 
authorities and the general public to know all parties involved in 
sewage sludge management at a facility. This requirement remains as 
proposed.
14. Other Information
    Section 122.21(q)(14) requires the applicant to report any 
information necessary to determine the appropriate standards for 
permitting under 40 CFR Part 503, and any other information the 
permitting authority may request and reasonably require to assess the 
sewage sludge use and disposal practices, to determine whether to issue 
a permit, or to identify appropriate permit requirements. This 
paragraph restates the existing requirements in Sec. 501.15(a)(2)(xi) 
and (xii). EPA received one comment on this section. The commenter 
agreed with the proposal, and it remains as proposed.
15. Signature
    Section 122.21(q)(15) requires that an authorized official sign and 
certify the form in compliance with 40 CFR 122.22. This ensures that 
the person signing the form has the authority to speak for and legally 
bind the permittee. No comments were received on this section and it 
remains as proposed.

H. Permit Conditions for POTWs (40 CFR 122.44(j))

    Under existing Sec. 122.21(j)(4), any POTW with an approved 
pretreatment program must provide a written technical evaluation of the 
need to revise local limits under 40 CFR 403.5(c)(1). This provision 
requires that the local limits evaluation be done prior to permit 
issuance. States and municipalities have expressed concerns that such 
evaluation would be more appropriate after permit issuance, so as to 
avoid the need for a second technical evaluation if the POTW's permit 
limits are revised in the new permit.
    In response to these concerns, the Agency proposed to change this 
from an application requirement to a POTW pretreatment program 
requirement at Sec. 403.8(f)(4). EPA did not receive any comments on 
this change but instead codifies this requirement at Sec. 122.44(j), 
which lists pretreatment program permit conditions that must be in a 
POTW's permit. As such the requirement to provide a written evaluation 
of the need to revise local limits will be included in permits. POTWs 
must evaluate their local limits during each permit cycle, rather than 
during the permit application process.

I. State Program Requirements (40 CFR Parts 123 & 501)

    EPA intends to maintain consistency between the NPDES permit 
application

[[Page 42458]]

requirements of Part 122 and the State sewage sludge permitting 
requirements of Parts 123 and 501. This reflects EPA's belief that a 
TWTDS should submit the same application information regardless of 
whether the permitting authority regulates sludge management under an 
approved NPDES or under a non-NPDES program. In fact, EPA published 
changes to Parts 123 and 501 (63 FR 45114, August 24, 1998) that 
consolidate all State sewage sludge management requirements under Part 
501. As part of this process, the December 6, 1995 proposal of today's 
rule included revisions to the language of Secs. 123.25(a)(4) and 
501.15(a)(2) to modify the sewage sludge information requirements. All 
four comments received by EPA supported having the same minimum 
requirements for EPA and authorized States.
    Today's rule adds paragraph 122.21(q) to the list in 
Sec. 123.25(a)(4) of provisions that States must implement to be 
granted NPDES authorization. The specific permit information 
requirements contained in Sec. 122.21(q) of today's final rule are 
referenced in Sec. 501.15(d)(1)(i)(B). The August 24, 1998 final rule 
states that Sec. 501.15(d)(1)(i)(B) is not effective until today's rule 
becomes effective. This was necessary because Sec. 122.21(q) was not 
yet final when the Part 501 and 123 revisions were published. 
Therefore, the August 24, 1998 final rule renumbered Sec. 501.15(a)(2) 
as Sec. 501.15(a)(4) and retained that section so that there would 
still be specific sludge permit information requirements in effect. The 
intent was that this new Sec. 501.15(a)(4) would be deleted upon 
publication of today's rule. Today's final rule deletes 
Sec. 501.15(a)(4) and makes Sec. 501.15(d)(1)(i)(B) effective on 
December 2, 1999.

III. Regulatory Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 Federal Register 51735 (October 4, 
1993)), the Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is 
``significant'' and therefore subject to OMB review and the 
requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant 
regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this rule is a ``significant regulatory action.'' As 
such, this action was submitted to OMB for review. Changes made in 
response to OMB suggestions or recommendations will be documented in 
the public record.

B. Executive Order 12875

    Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local 
or Tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds 
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those 
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by 
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office 
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
consultation with representatives of affected State, local and Tribal 
governments, the nature of their concerns, any written communications 
from the governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of State, local, and Tribal governments ``to provide 
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals 
containing significant unfunded mandates.''
    EPA has concluded that this rule will create a mandate on State, 
local, and Tribal governments and that the Federal government will not 
provide the funds necessary to pay the direct costs incurred by the 
State, local, and/or Tribal governments in complying with the mandate. 
In developing this rule, EPA consulted with State, local, and Tribal 
governments to enable them to provide meaningful and timely input in 
the development of this rule. EPA made efforts to consult with 
interested stakeholders during the development of the December 6, 1995, 
proposed rule. In late 1993 and early 1994, EPA sought feedback on 
draft forms and other elements of the proposal from States with 
approved NPDES programs, local governments, the Association of State 
and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators (ASIWPCA), the 
Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA), the California 
Association of Sanitation Agencies (CASA), the Water Environment 
Federation (WEF), and several environmental groups. In response to this 
outreach effort, EPA received written comments from a dozen States, 
several municipalities, and from AMSA. EPA also met with State and 
municipal representatives and participated in a conference call with 
representatives from ten POTWs and two States.
    EPA received 60 comments during the public comment period on the 
proposed rule and made numerous changes to the rule and the forms in 
response to the comments. Stakeholders raised a number of issues 
related to the possible impacts of the municipal application 
requirements on local governments. The most significant issue concerned 
the required sampling data. States were particularly concerned about 
the ability of small municipalities to provide the data. To address 
this concern, EPA modified the regulation to reduce the information 
required from small facilities under 0.1 mgd. Many municipalities and 
States were also concerned about redundant information. EPA resolved 
this issue by allowing States to waive requirements for information 
otherwise available to them and by allowing facilities to reference 
information they have already provided in annual reports, discharge 
monitoring reports (DMRs), or other reports. The final rule provides 
flexibility to the States and reduces the reporting burden for 
regulated facilities while ensuring that EPA and the States will obtain 
the information necessary to issue permits that protect the 
environment.

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. 
L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under UMRA section 202, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for rules with ``Federal mandates'' that may result in 
expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments in the aggregate, 
or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. 
Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is 
needed, UMRA section 205 generally requires EPA to identify and 
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the 
least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome

[[Page 42459]]

alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of 
UMRA section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with 
applicable law. Moreover, UMRA section 205 allows EPA to adopt an 
alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective or least 
burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final 
rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted.
    Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal 
governments, it must have developed under UMRA section 203 a small 
government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially 
affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small 
governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of 
EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental 
mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on 
compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    EPA has determined that today's rule does not include a Federal 
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more to 
either State, local and tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the 
private sector in any year. To the extent enforceable duties arise as a 
result of today's rule on State, local and tribal governments and the 
private sector, such enforceable duties do not result in a significant 
regulatory action being imposed upon State, local and tribal 
governments and the private sector since the estimated aggregate cost 
of compliance for the regulated entities is not expected to exceed $4.8 
million annually. Today's rule streamlines the permit application 
requirements for municipal and sludge application requirements to 
provide additional flexibility to the States in complying with current 
regulatory requirements and reduce the burden on affected governments. 
Thus, today's final rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 
202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments and thus this rule is not subject to the requirements in 
section 203 of UMRA. The amendments will not significantly affect small 
governments because as explained above, this rulemaking streamlines 
current regulatory requirements and provides additional flexibility to 
meet regulatory requirements. The small governments affected by this 
rule are tribal and municipal governments and the rule minimizes the 
impact on these small government entities.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the 
information collection requirements contained in this rule under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and 
has assigned OMB control number 2040-0086. A copy may be obtained from 
Sandy Farmer, OPPE Regulatory Information Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency (2137); 401 M St., S.W.; Washington, DC 20460; or by 
calling (202) 260-2740.
    The final rule consolidates application requirements from existing 
regulations into a ``modular'' permit application form, thereby 
streamlining and clarifying the process for permit applicants. EPA has 
developed forms 2A and 2S and the corresponding reporting requirements 
at Sec. 122.21(j) and Sec. 122.21(q) in order to consolidate the 
application requirements for POTWs and TWTDS. EPA has promulgated the 
Form 2A requirement under the statutory authority of section 402 of the 
CWA, as amended. Similarly, the Agency has promulgated the Form 2S 
requirement under section 405 of the CWA, as amended. Both operating 
statutes allow EPA to consider regulatory options to minimize the 
forms' economic impacts on small entities.
    The annual reporting and recordkeeping costs and burden for this 
collection of information are described in the following paragraphs.
    For Form 2A the total annual costs are $4,100,711. There are 731 
major applicants, 1230 minor applicants between 0.1 and 1.0 mgd, and 
1230 minor applicants <0.1 mgd. The cost per major (over 1.0 mgd) 
applicant is $4435, the cost per minor applicant between 0.1 and 1.0 
mgd is $477, and the cost per minor applicant <0.1 mgd is $221. The 
average cost per applicant is $1285. Total annual burden is 30,593 
hours. There are 731 major applicants, 1230 minor applicants between 
0.1 and 1.0 mgd, and 1230 minor applicants <0.1 mgd. The burden per 
major applicant is 24 hours, the burden per minor applicant between 0.1 
and 1.0 mgd is 6.2 hours, and the burden per minor applicant <0.1 mgd 
is 4.4 hours. The average burden per applicant is 9.6 hours.
    For Form 2S the total annual costs are $714,823. There are 3911 
NPDES POTW applicants, 221 NPDES privately owned treatment works 
applicants, 38 sludge-only POTW applicants, and 2 sludge-only privately 
owned treatment works applicants. The costs per applicant are: NPDES 
POTW $183, NPDES privately owned treatment works $551, sludge-only POTW 
$171, and sludge-only privately owned treatment works $242. The average 
cost per applicant is $207. Total annual burden is 32,628 hours. There 
are 3911 NPDES POTW applicants, 221 NPDES privately owned treatment 
works applicants, 38 sludge-only POTW applicants, and 2 sludge-only 
privately owned treatment works applicants. The burdens per applicants 
are: NPDES POTW 9.5 hours, NPDES privately owned treatment works 9.5 
hours, sludge-only POTW 3.9 hours, and sludge-only privately owned 
treatment works 2.5 hours. The average burden per applicant is 9.4 
hours.
    Overall, for both Form 2A and Form 2S the total annual costs are 
$4,815,534 and the total annual burden is 63,221 hours. The annual 
public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of 
information is estimated to average 9.5 hours per response. Burden 
means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by 
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide 
information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed 
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations are displayed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15. EPA 
is amending the table in 40 CFR Part 9 of currently approved ICR 
control numbers issued by OMB for various regulations to list the 
information requirements contained in this final rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 
generally requires an administrative agency as part of any rulemaking 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis to describe the impact of 
rules on small entities. Under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), no regulatory 
flexibility analysis is required, however, where the head of an agency 
certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities. Under RFA section 605(b), EPA

[[Page 42460]]

certifies that today's rule will not have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities.
    In developing these regulations, EPA considered their effects on 
small entities. Section 601(6) of the RFA defines small entities as 
small businesses, small governmental entities, and small, not-for-
profit organizations. The small entities affected by this rule include 
small governmental jurisdictions and small businesses that own or 
operate wastewater treatment works and sludge facilities or sludge 
facilities only. About 16,080 small entities are regulated by the rule. 
Ninety-three percent of the small entities are small governmental 
jurisdictions, i.e., publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) and six 
percent are small businesses, i.e., privately owned treatment works. 
Almost all of the small governmental jurisdictions (99%) will be 
required to complete both the municipal and sewage sludge application 
forms; the rest will only have to complete the sewage sludge 
application form. The small businesses will only have to complete the 
sewage sludge application form.
    Under the RFA, the term ``small governmental jurisdiction'' means, 
among other things, governments of cities, counties, towns or special 
districts with a population of fewer than 50,000. To evaluate the 
economic impact on small governmental jurisdictions subject to today's 
rule, EPA looked at the effect on 5 million gallons per day (mgd) or 
smaller POTWs, that is, those serving 50,000 or less. EPA cannot 
calculate from available data how many small governmental jurisdictions 
own and operate POTWs that are subject to the rule. EPA collects data 
on individual POTW operations and these data are not aggregated by the 
supplying public entities. EPA has data on POTWs by size, expressed in 
terms of mgd. With this information, EPA can determine with a fair 
degree of certainty what size community any given POTW serves. Thus, 
for example, a 1 mgd POTW will be needed to serve a community of around 
10,000. However, EPA cannot determine the number of small governmental 
jurisdictions operating POTWs by simply totaling the number of POTWs 
serving populations up to 50,000 (as measured by mgd). This would 
overstate the number of small governmental jurisdictions owning POTWs. 
The number of POTWs operated by public entities will obviously vary. A 
municipality (or sewerage district) may operate one or more POTWs or 
even none at all, if it chooses to rely on the services of a POTW in a 
neighboring jurisdiction. Consequently, the number of POTWs serving 
communities of 50,000 or fewer does not correspond to the number of 
small governmental jurisdictions with a population of 50,000 or fewer.
    While, as explained above, EPA could not determine how many POTWs a 
public entity owned and operated (and thus could not calculate the 
number of small governmental jurisdictions affected by the rule), EPA 
did calculate the economic impact on POTWs serving communities in a 
number of size ranges in order to evaluate the economic impact on small 
governmental jurisdictions as defined in the RFA. The result of this 
analysis showed that in no event would the impact to the community 
owning the POTW be significant as measured by the POTW's (and 
consequently, the public entity's) operating revenues. EPA concluded 
that the economic impact of the rule on small governmental 
jurisdictions as defined in the RFA would not be substantial in any 
circumstances.
    For purposes of evaluating the economic impact, EPA assumed that 
water supply revenues of a municipality with a population of 50,000 
were equivalent to those of a 5 mgd POTW. Of the data that is available 
in the 1991-1992 census of governments, the water supply revenue 
information is most likely to reflect revenues of POTWs, since customer 
billings generally cover water and sewer charges. To evaluate the 
economic impact on small businesses, EPA looked at private sewerage 
systems with annual revenues of 6 million or less, the Small Business 
Administration's definition of a small business for the sewerage 
industry.
    EPA considered a range of regulatory options for the proposed 
forms. In today's final rule, EPA adopted the modular permit 
application approach for both POTWs and privately owned treatment 
works. In the final rule, EPA imposes fewer, more focused requirements 
for facilities discharging less than 1.0 mgd, which are less likely to 
pollute and which have a lower capacity to absorb large monitoring 
costs. The smallest facilities, less than 0.1 mgd, complete only eight 
basic questions and provide information on only four pollutants. The 
more focused requirements result from adjustments that are appropriate 
to these less ``complex'' facilities.
    For purposes of evaluating the economic impact of this rule on 
small governmental jurisdictions, EPA compared costs with average 
annual water supply revenues for small governmental jurisdictions 
obtained from the 1991-1992 census of governments. Because annual 
revenues for small privately owned treatment works were not available, 
in evaluating the economic impact on small businesses, EPA used the 
average water supply revenue figure for small governmental 
jurisdictions as a proxy for small privately owned treatment works. For 
both small POTWs and small privately owned treatment works, EPA used 
the costs for compliance estimated in the ICR.
    EPA's assessment shows that the costs of complying with today's 
rule are not significant, even for very small POTWs and privately-owned 
treatment works. The total cost of complying with today's rule for all 
POTWs and privately-owned treatment works is $4,815,534 and consists 
entirely of paperwork and testing costs associated with collecting the 
required information and completing the forms.
    The five-year compliance cost estimates for small POTWs that are 
subject to both sets of application requirements are: $404 for POTWs 
less than 0.1 mgd; $660 for POTWs between 0.1 and 1.0 mgd; and $4,618 
for POTWs between 1.0 and 5.0 mgd. The five-year compliance cost 
estimate for small POTWs that are subject only to the sludge 
application requirements are $172. The five-year compliance cost 
estimate for the vast majority of small privately owned treatment 
works, that are subject only to the sludge application requirements, is 
$551. The five-year compliance cost for a few small privately owned 
treatment works that don't have wastewater discharges is only $242.
    The annual cost for a small POTW ranges from 0.02 to 0.09 percent 
of the average annual water supply revenues of these small governmental 
jurisdictions, depending on their size and whether or not they have to 
complete one or both application forms. The annual cost for most small 
privately owned treatment works will be about 0.08 percent of the 
average annual water supply revenue of these small businesses. The 
annual cost for a few small privately owned treatment works without 
wastewater discharges is even smaller (0.03 percent). Thus, impacts on 
small treatment facilities will not be significant.
    Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 
U.S.C. 605(b), the Agency certifies that today's rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

[[Page 42461]]

F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Pub. L. No. 104-113, Sec. 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standard bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA 
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

G. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 et.seq., as 
added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and the Comptroller General 
of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective on December 2, 1999.

H. Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies 
to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' 
as defined under E.O. 12866 and (2) concerns an environmental health or 
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate 
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the 
Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the 
planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is 
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible 
alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is not an 
economically significant action as defined by E.O. 12866 and it does 
not establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or 
safety risks. This rule is a procedural rule that streamlines existing 
regulations and application forms for municipal dischargers and 
treatment works who use or dispose of sludge.

I. Executive Order 13084

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance on those communities, unless the Federal government 
provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs 
incurred by the Tribal governments, or EPA consults with those 
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected Tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of Indian Tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian Tribal governments nor does it impose substantial 
direct compliance costs on them. This rule streamlines current 
regulatory requirements and provides additional flexibility to meet 
regulatory requirements. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) 
of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 9

    Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 122

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sewage disposal, Waste treatment and disposal, Water 
pollution control.

40 CFR Part 123

    Confidential business information, Hazardous materials, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Sewage disposal, Waste treatment and 
disposal, Water pollution control, Penalties.

40 CFR Part 124

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, 
Hazardous waste, Indian lands, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Water pollution control, Water supply.

40 CFR Part 501

    Confidential business information, Environmental protection, 
Publicly owned treatment works, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sewage disposal, Waste treatment and disposal.

    Dated: July 15, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, chapter I of title 40 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 9--OMB APPROVALS UNDER THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT

    1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003, 
2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33 
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318, 1321, 1326, 1330, 
1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 
1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 
300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300j-1, 300j-2, 
300j-3, 300j-4, 300j-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-7671q, 7542, 
9601-9657, 11023, 11048.
    2. In Sec. 9.1 the table is amended by adding entries in numerical 
order under the indicated headings, removing the entry for 
``122.21(j)(4)'', and revising the entry for ``123.25'' to read as 
follows:


Sec. 9.1  OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              40 CFR citation                      OMB control No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 *        *        *        *        *
   EPA Administered Permit Programs: The National Pollutant Discharge
                           Elimination System

                  *        *        *        *        *
122.21(j), (q)............................  2040-0086

[[Page 42462]]

                  *        *        *        *        *
122.44(j).................................  2040-0150

                 *        *        *        *        *
                       State Permit Requirements

                  *        *        *        *        *
123.25....................................  2040-0004
                                            2040-0110
                                            2040-0170
                                            2040-0180
                                            2040-0086

                  *        *        *        *        *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 122--EPA ADMINISTERED PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT 
DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM

    3. The authority citation for Part 122 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

    4. Section 122.2 is amended by adding a definition for ``Indian 
country'' and ``TWTDS'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec. 122.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Indian country means:
    (1) All land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the 
jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the 
issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way running through 
the reservation;
    (2) All dependent Indian communities with the borders of the United 
States whether within the originally or subsequently acquired territory 
thereof, and whether within or without the limits of a state; and
    (3) All Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which have not been 
extinguished, including rights-of-way running through the same.
* * * * *
    TWTDS means ``treatment works treating domestic sewage.''
* * * * *
    5. Section 122.21 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (c)(2), 
the introductory text of paragraph (f), and paragraph (j); removing and 
reserving paragraph (d)(3); revising paragraph (e); and by adding 
paragraph (q) before the notes to read as follows:


Sec. 122.21  Application for a permit (applicable to State programs, 
see Sec. 123.25).

    (a) Duty to apply. (1) Any person who discharges or proposes to 
discharge pollutants or who owns or operates a ``sludge-only facility'' 
whose sewage sludge use or disposal practice is regulated by part 503 
of this chapter, and who does not have an effective permit, except 
persons covered by general permits under Sec. 122.28, excluded under 
Sec. 122.3, or a user of a privately owned treatment works unless the 
Director requires otherwise under Sec. 122.44(m), must submit a 
complete application to the Director in accordance with this section 
and part 124 of this chapter.
    (2) Application Forms: (i) All applicants for EPA-issued permits 
must submit applications on EPA permit application forms. More than one 
application form may be required from a facility depending on the 
number and types of discharges or outfalls found there. Application 
forms may be obtained by contacting the EPA water resource center at 
(202) 260-7786 or Water Resource Center, U.S. EPA, Mail Code 4100, 401 
M Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20460 or at the EPA Internet site 
www.epa.gov/owm/npdes.htm. Applications for EPA-issued permits must be 
submitted as follows:
    (A) All applicants, other than POTWs and TWTDS, must submit Form 1.
    (B) Applicants for new and existing POTWs must submit the 
information contained in paragraph (j) of this section using Form 2A or 
other form provided by the director.
    (C) Applicants for concentrated animal feeding operations or 
aquatic animal production facilities must submit Form 2B.
    (D) Applicants for existing industrial facilities (including 
manufacturing facilities, commercial facilities, mining activities, and 
silvicultural activities), must submit Form 2C.
    (E) Applicants for new industrial facilities that discharge process 
wastewater must submit Form 2D.
    (F) Applicants for new and existing industrial facilities that 
discharge only nonprocess wastewater must submit Form 2E.
    (G) Applicants for new and existing facilities whose discharge is 
composed entirely of storm water associated with industrial activity 
must submit Form 2F, unless exempted by Sec. 122.26(c)(1)(ii). If the 
discharge is composed of storm water and non-storm water, the applicant 
must also submit, Forms 2C, 2D, and/or 2E, as appropriate (in addition 
to Form 2F).
    (H) Applicants for new and existing TWTDS, subject to paragraph 
(c)(2)(i) of this section must submit the application information 
required by paragraph (q) of this section, using Form 2S or other form 
provided by the director.
    (ii) The application information required by paragraph (a)(2)(i) of 
this section may be electronically submitted if such method of 
submittal is approved by EPA or the Director.
    (iii) Applicants can obtain copies of these forms by contacting the 
Water Management Divisions (or equivalent division which contains the 
NPDES permitting function) of the EPA Regional Offices. The Regional 
Offices' addresses can be found at Sec. 1.7 of this chapter.
    (iv) Applicants for State-issued permits must use State forms which 
must require at a minimum the information listed in the appropriate 
paragraphs of this section.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Permits under section 405(f) of CWA. All TWTDS whose sewage 
sludge use or disposal practices are regulated by part 503 of this 
chapter must submit permit applications according to the applicable 
schedule in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section.
    (i) A TWTDS with a currently effective NPDES permit must submit a 
permit application at the time of its next NPDES permit renewal 
application. Such information must be submitted in accordance with 
paragraph (d) of this section.
    (ii) Any other TWTDS not addressed under paragraphs (c)(2)(i) of 
this section must submit the information listed in paragraphs 
(c)(2)(ii)(A) through (E) of this section to the Director within 1 year 
after publication of a standard applicable to its sewage sludge use or 
disposal practice(s), using Form 2S or another form provided by the 
Director. The Director will determine when such TWTDS must submit a 
full permit application.
    (A) The TWTDS's name, mailing address, location, and status as 
federal, State, private, public or other entity;
    (B) The applicant's name, address, telephone number, and ownership 
status;
    (C) A description of the sewage sludge use or disposal practices. 
Unless the sewage sludge meets the requirements of paragraph (q)(8)(iv) 
of this section, the description must include the name and address of 
any facility where sewage sludge is sent for treatment or disposal, and 
the location of any land application sites;
    (D) Annual amount of sewage sludge generated, treated, used or 
disposed (estimated dry weight basis); and
    (E) The most recent data the TWTDS may have on the quality of the 
sewage sludge.
    (iii) Notwithstanding paragraphs (c)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section, 
the

[[Page 42463]]

Director may require permit applications from any TWTDS at any time if 
the Director determines that a permit is necessary to protect public 
health and the environment from any potential adverse effects that may 
occur from toxic pollutants in sewage sludge.
    (iv) Any TWTDS that commences operations after promulgation of an 
applicable ``standard for sewage sludge use or disposal'' must submit 
an application to the Director at least 180 days prior to the date 
proposed for commencing operations.
    (d) * * *
    (3) [Reserved]
    (e) Completeness. (1) The Director shall not issue a permit before 
receiving a complete application for a permit except for NPDES general 
permits. An application for a permit is complete when the Director 
receives an application form and any supplemental information which are 
completed to his or her satisfaction. The completeness of any 
application for a permit shall be judged independently of the status of 
any other permit application or permit for the same facility or 
activity. For EPA administered NPDES programs, an application which is 
reviewed under Sec. 124.3 of this chapter is complete when the Director 
receives either a complete application or the information listed in a 
notice of deficiency.
    (2) A permit application shall not be considered complete if a 
permitting authority has waived application requirements under 
paragraphs (j) or (q) of this section and EPA has disapproved the 
waiver application. If a waiver request has been submitted to EPA more 
than 210 days prior to permit expiration and EPA has not disapproved 
the waiver application 181 days prior to permit expiration, the permit 
application lacking the information subject to the waiver application 
shall be considered complete.
    (f) Information requirements. All applicants for NPDES permits, 
other than POTWs and other TWTDS, must provide the following 
information to the Director, using the application form provided by the 
Director. Additional information required of applicants is set forth in 
paragraphs (g) through (k) of this section.
* * * * *
    (j) Application requirements for new and existing POTWs. Unless 
otherwise indicated, all POTWs and other dischargers designated by the 
Director must provide, at a minimum, the information in this paragraph 
to the Director, using Form 2A or another application form provided by 
the Director. Permit applicants must submit all information available 
at the time of permit application. The information may be provided by 
referencing information previously submitted to the Director. The 
Director may waive any requirement of this paragraph if he or she has 
access to substantially identical information. The Director may also 
waive any requirement of this paragraph that is not of material concern 
for a specific permit, if approved by the Regional Administrator. The 
waiver request to the Regional Administrator must include the State's 
justification for the waiver. A Regional Administrator's disapproval of 
a State's proposed waiver does not constitute final Agency action, but 
does provide notice to the State and permit applicant(s) that EPA may 
object to any State-issued permit issued in the absence of the required 
information.
    (1) Basic application information. All applicants must provide the 
following information:
    (i) Facility information. Name, mailing address, and location of 
the facility for which the application is submitted;
    (ii) Applicant information. Name, mailing address, and telephone 
number of the applicant, and indication as to whether the applicant is 
the facility's owner, operator, or both;
    (iii) Existing environmental permits. Identification of all 
environmental permits or construction approvals received or applied for 
(including dates) under any of the following programs:
    (A) Hazardous Waste Management program under the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Subpart C;
    (B) Underground Injection Control program under the Safe Drinking 
Water Act (SDWA);
    (C) NPDES program under Clean Water Act (CWA);
    (D) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program under the 
Clean Air Act;
    (E) Nonattainment program under the Clean Air Act;
    (F) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 
(NESHAPS) preconstruction approval under the Clean Air Act;
    (G) Ocean dumping permits under the Marine Protection Research and 
Sanctuaries Act;
    (H) Dredge or fill permits under section 404 of the CWA; and
    (I) Other relevant environmental permits, including State permits;
    (iv) Population. The name and population of each municipal entity 
served by the facility, including unincorporated connector districts. 
Indicate whether each municipal entity owns or maintains the collection 
system and whether the collection system is separate sanitary or 
combined storm and sanitary, if known;
    (v) Indian country. Information concerning whether the facility is 
located in Indian country and whether the facility discharges to a 
receiving stream that flows through Indian country;
    (vi) Flow rate. The facility's design flow rate (the wastewater 
flow rate the plant was built to handle), annual average daily flow 
rate, and maximum daily flow rate for each of the previous 3 years;
    (vii) Collection system. Identification of type(s) of collection 
system(s) used by the treatment works (i.e., separate sanitary sewers 
or combined storm and sanitary sewers) and an estimate of the percent 
of sewer line that each type comprises; and
    (viii) Outfalls and other discharge or disposal methods. The 
following information for outfalls to waters of the United States and 
other discharge or disposal methods:
    (A) For effluent discharges to waters of the United States, the 
total number and types of outfalls (e.g, treated effluent, combined 
sewer overflows, bypasses, constructed emergency overflows);
    (B) For wastewater discharged to surface impoundments:
    (1) The location of each surface impoundment;
    (2) The average daily volume discharged to each surface 
impoundment; and
    (3) Whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent;
    (C) For wastewater applied to the land:
    (1) The location of each land application site;
    (2) The size of each land application site, in acres;
    (3) The average daily volume applied to each land application site, 
in gallons per day; and
    (4) Whether land application is continuous or intermittent;
    (D) For effluent sent to another facility for treatment prior to 
discharge:
    (1) The means by which the effluent is transported;
    (2) The name, mailing address, contact person, and phone number of 
the organization transporting the discharge, if the transport is 
provided by a party other than the applicant;
    (3) The name, mailing address, contact person, phone number, and 
NPDES permit number (if any) of the receiving facility; and
    (4) The average daily flow rate from this facility into the 
receiving facility, in millions of gallons per day; and

[[Page 42464]]

    (E) For wastewater disposed of in a manner not included in 
paragraphs (j)(1)(viii)(A) through (D) of this section (e.g., 
underground percolation, underground injection):
    (1) A description of the disposal method, including the location 
and size of each disposal site, if applicable;
    (2) The annual average daily volume disposed of by this method, in 
gallons per day; and
    (3) Whether disposal through this method is continuous or 
intermittent;
    (2) Additional Information. All applicants with a design flow 
greater than or equal to 0.1 mgd must provide the following 
information:
    (i) Inflow and infiltration. The current average daily volume of 
inflow and infiltration, in gallons per day, and steps the facility is 
taking to minimize inflow and infiltration;
    (ii) Topographic map. A topographic map (or other map if a 
topographic map is unavailable) extending at least one mile beyond 
property boundaries of the treatment plant, including all unit 
processes, and showing:
    (A) Treatment plant area and unit processes;
    (B) The major pipes or other structures through which wastewater 
enters the treatment plant and the pipes or other structures through 
which treated wastewater is discharged from the treatment plant. 
Include outfalls from bypass piping, if applicable;
    (C) Each well where fluids from the treatment plant are injected 
underground;
    (D) Wells, springs, and other surface water bodies listed in public 
records or otherwise known to the applicant within \1/4\ mile of the 
treatment works' property boundaries;
    (E) Sewage sludge management facilities (including on-site 
treatment, storage, and disposal sites); and
    (F) Location at which waste classified as hazardous under RCRA 
enters the treatment plant by truck, rail, or dedicated pipe;
    (iii) Process flow diagram or schematic.
    (A) A diagram showing the processes of the treatment plant, 
including all bypass piping and all backup power sources or redundancy 
in the system. This includes a water balance showing all treatment 
units, including disinfection, and showing daily average flow rates at 
influent and discharge points, and approximate daily flow rates between 
treatment units; and
    (B) A narrative description of the diagram; and
    (iv) Scheduled improvements, schedules of implementation. The 
following information regarding scheduled improvements:
    (A) The outfall number of each outfall affected;
    (B) A narrative description of each required improvement;
    (C) Scheduled or actual dates of completion for the following:
    (1) Commencement of construction;
    (2) Completion of construction;
    (3) Commencement of discharge; and
    (4) Attainment of operational level;
    (D) A description of permits and clearances concerning other 
Federal and/or State requirements;
    (3) Information on effluent discharges. Each applicant must provide 
the following information for each outfall, including bypass points, 
through which effluent is discharged, as applicable:
    (i) Description of outfall. The following information about each 
outfall:
    (A) Outfall number;
    (B) State, county, and city or town in which outfall is located;
    (C) Latitude and longitude, to the nearest second;
    (D) Distance from shore and depth below surface;
    (E) Average daily flow rate, in million gallons per day;
    (F) The following information for each outfall with a seasonal or 
periodic discharge:
    (1) Number of times per year the discharge occurs;
    (2) Duration of each discharge;
    (3) Flow of each discharge; and
    (4) Months in which discharge occurs; and
    (G) Whether the outfall is equipped with a diffuser and the type 
(e.g., high-rate) of diffuser used;
    (ii) Description of receiving waters. The following information (if 
known) for each outfall through which effluent is discharged to waters 
of the United States:
    (A) Name of receiving water;
    (B) Name of watershed/river/stream system and United States Soil 
Conservation Service 14-digit watershed code;
    (C) Name of State Management/River Basin and United States 
Geological Survey 8-digit hydrologic cataloging unit code; and
    (D) Critical flow of receiving stream and total hardness of 
receiving stream at critical low flow (if applicable);
    (iii) Description of treatment. The following information 
describing the treatment provided for discharges from each outfall to 
waters of the United States:
    (A) The highest level of treatment (e.g., primary, equivalent to 
secondary, secondary, advanced, other) that is provided for the 
discharge for each outfall and:
    (1) Design biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5 or 
CBOD5) removal (percent);
    (2) Design suspended solids (SS) removal (percent); and, where 
applicable,
    (3) Design phosphorus (P) removal (percent);
    (4) Design nitrogen (N) removal (percent); and
    (5) Any other removals that an advanced treatment system is 
designed to achieve.
    (B) A description of the type of disinfection used, and whether the 
treatment plant dechlorinates (if disinfection is accomplished through 
chlorination);
    (4) Effluent monitoring for specific parameters.
    (i) As provided in paragraphs (j)(4)(ii) through (x) of this 
section, all applicants must submit to the Director effluent monitoring 
information for samples taken from each outfall through which effluent 
is discharged to waters of the United States, except for CSOs. The 
Director may allow applicants to submit sampling data for only one 
outfall on a case-by-case basis, where the applicant has two or more 
outfalls with substantially identical effluent. The Director may also 
allow applicants to composite samples from one or more outfalls that 
discharge into the same mixing zone;
    (ii) All applicants must sample and analyze for the pollutants 
listed in Appendix J, Table 1A of this part;
    (iii) All applicants with a design flow greater than or equal to 
0.1 mgd must sample and analyze for the pollutants listed in Appendix 
J, Table 1 of this part. Facilities that do not use chlorine for 
disinfection, do not use chlorine elsewhere in the treatment process, 
and have no reasonable potential to discharge chlorine in their 
effluent may delete chlorine from Table 1;
    (iv) The following applicants must sample and analyze for the 
pollutants listed in Appendix J, Table 2 of this part, and for any 
other pollutants for which the State or EPA have established water 
quality standards applicable to the receiving waters:
    (A) All POTWs with a design flow rate equal to or greater than one 
million gallons per day;
    (B) All POTWs with approved pretreatment programs or POTWs required 
to develop a pretreatment program;
    (C) Other POTWs, as required by the Director;
    (v) The Director should require sampling for additional pollutants, 
as appropriate, on a case-by-case basis;

[[Page 42465]]

    (vi) Applicants must provide data from a minimum of three samples 
taken within four and one-half years prior to the date of the permit 
application. Samples must be representative of the seasonal variation 
in the discharge from each outfall. Existing data may be used, if 
available, in lieu of sampling done solely for the purpose of this 
application. The Director should require additional samples, as 
appropriate, on a case-by-case basis.
    (vii) All existing data for pollutants specified in paragraphs 
(j)(4)(ii) through (v) of this section that is collected within four 
and one-half years of the application must be included in the pollutant 
data summary submitted by the applicant. If, however, the applicant 
samples for a specific pollutant on a monthly or more frequent basis, 
it is only necessary, for such pollutant, to summarize all data 
collected within one year of the application.
    (viii) Applicants must collect samples of effluent and analyze such 
samples for pollutants in accordance with analytical methods approved 
under 40 CFR part 136 unless an alternative is specified in the 
existing NPDES permit. Grab samples must be used for pH, temperature, 
cyanide, total phenols, residual chlorine, oil and grease, and fecal 
coliform. For all other pollutants, 24-hour composite samples must be 
used. For a composite sample, only one analysis of the composite of 
aliquots is required.
    (ix) The effluent monitoring data provided must include at least 
the following information for each parameter:
    (A) Maximum daily discharge, expressed as concentration or mass, 
based upon actual sample values;
    (B) Average daily discharge for all samples, expressed as 
concentration or mass, and the number of samples used to obtain this 
value;
    (C) The analytical method used; and
    (D) The threshold level (i.e., method detection limit, minimum 
level, or other designated method endpoints) for the analytical method 
used.
    (x) Unless otherwise required by the Director, metals must be 
reported as total recoverable.
    (5) Effluent monitoring for whole effluent toxicity.
    (i) All applicants must provide an identification of any whole 
effluent toxicity tests conducted during the four and one-half years 
prior to the date of the application on any of the applicant's 
discharges or on any receiving water near the discharge.
    (ii) As provided in paragraphs (j)(5)(iii)-(ix) of this section, 
the following applicants must submit to the Director the results of 
valid whole effluent toxicity tests for acute or chronic toxicity for 
samples taken from each outfall through which effluent is discharged to 
surface waters, except for combined sewer overflows:
    (A) All POTWs with design flow rates greater than or equal to one 
million gallons per day;
    (B) All POTWs with approved pretreatment programs or POTWs required 
to develop a pretreatment program;
    (C) Other POTWs, as required by the Director, based on 
consideration of the following factors:
    (1) The variability of the pollutants or pollutant parameters in 
the POTW effluent (based on chemical-specific information, the type of 
treatment plant, and types of industrial contributors);
    (2) The ratio of effluent flow to receiving stream flow;
    (3) Existing controls on point or non-point sources, including 
total maximum daily load calculations for the receiving stream segment 
and the relative contribution of the POTW;
    (4) Receiving stream characteristics, including possible or known 
water quality impairment, and whether the POTW discharges to a coastal 
water, one of the Great Lakes, or a water designated as an outstanding 
natural resource water; or
    (5) Other considerations (including, but not limited to, the 
history of toxic impacts and compliance problems at the POTW) that the 
Director determines could cause or contribute to adverse water quality 
impacts.
    (iii) Where the POTW has two or more outfalls with substantially 
identical effluent discharging to the same receiving stream segment, 
the Director may allow applicants to submit whole effluent toxicity 
data for only one outfall on a case-by-case basis. The Director may 
also allow applicants to composite samples from one or more outfalls 
that discharge into the same mixing zone.
    (iv) Each applicant required to perform whole effluent toxicity 
testing pursuant to paragraph (j)(5)(ii) of this section must provide:
    (A) Results of a minimum of four quarterly tests for a year, from 
the year preceding the permit application; or
    (B) Results from four tests performed at least annually in the four 
and one half year period prior to the application, provided the results 
show no appreciable toxicity using a safety factor determined by the 
permitting authority.
    (v) Applicants must conduct tests with multiple species (no less 
than two species; e.g., fish, invertebrate, plant), and test for acute 
or chronic toxicity, depending on the range of receiving water 
dilution. EPA recommends that applicants conduct acute or chronic 
testing based on the following dilutions:
    (A) Acute toxicity testing if the dilution of the effluent is 
greater than 1000:1 at the edge of the mixing zone;
    (B) Acute or chronic toxicity testing if the dilution of the 
effluent is between 100:1 and 1000:1 at the edge of the mixing zone. 
Acute testing may be more appropriate at the higher end of this range 
(1000:1), and chronic testing may be more appropriate at the lower end 
of this range (100:1); and
    (C) Chronic testing if the dilution of the effluent is less than 
100:1 at the edge of the mixing zone.
    (vi) Each applicant required to perform whole effluent toxicity 
testing pursuant to paragraph (j)(5)(ii) of this section must provide 
the number of chronic or acute whole effluent toxicity tests that have 
been conducted since the last permit reissuance.
    (vii) Applicants must provide the results using the form provided 
by the Director, or test summaries if available and comprehensive, for 
each whole effluent toxicity test conducted pursuant to paragraph 
(j)(5)(ii) of this section for which such information has not been 
reported previously to the Director.
    (viii) Whole effluent toxicity testing conducted pursuant to 
paragraph (j)(5)(ii) of this section must be conducted using methods 
approved under 40 CFR part 136. West coast facilities in Washington, 
Oregon, California, Alaska, Hawaii, and the Pacific Territories are 
exempted from 40 CFR part 136 chronic methods and must use alternative 
guidance as directed by the permitting authority.
    (ix) For whole effluent toxicity data submitted to the Director 
within four and one-half years prior to the date of the application, 
applicants must provide the dates on which the data were submitted and 
a summary of the results.
    (x) Each POTW required to perform whole effluent toxicity testing 
pursuant to paragraph (j)(5)(ii) of this section must provide any 
information on the cause of toxicity and written details of any 
toxicity reduction evaluation conducted, if any whole effluent toxicity 
test conducted within the past four and one-half years revealed 
toxicity.
    (6) Industrial discharges. Applicants must submit the following 
information about industrial discharges to the POTW:
    (i) Number of significant industrial users (SIUs) and categorical 
industrial users (CIUs) discharging to the POTW; and

[[Page 42466]]

    (ii) POTWs with one or more SIUs shall provide the following 
information for each SIU, as defined at 40 CFR 403.3(t), that 
discharges to the POTW:
    (A) Name and mailing address;
    (B) Description of all industrial processes that affect or 
contribute to the SIU's discharge;
    (C) Principal products and raw materials of the SIU that affect or 
contribute to the SIU's discharge;
    (D) Average daily volume of wastewater discharged, indicating the 
amount attributable to process flow and non-process flow;
    (E) Whether the SIU is subject to local limits;
    (F) Whether the SIU is subject to categorical standards, and if so, 
under which category(ies) and subcategory(ies); and
    (G) Whether any problems at the POTW (e.g., upsets, pass through, 
interference) have been attributed to the SIU in the past four and one-
half years.
    (iii) The information required in paragraphs (j)(6)(i) and (ii) of 
this section may be waived by the Director for POTWs with pretreatment 
programs if the applicant has submitted either of the following that 
contain information substantially identical to that required in 
paragraphs (j)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section.
    (A) An annual report submitted within one year of the application; 
or
    (B) A pretreatment program;
    (7) Discharges from hazardous waste generators and from waste 
cleanup or remediation sites. POTWs receiving Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act (RCRA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), or RCRA Corrective Action 
wastes or wastes generated at another type of cleanup or remediation 
site must provide the following information:
    (i) If the POTW receives, or has been notified that it will 
receive, by truck, rail, or dedicated pipe any wastes that are 
regulated as RCRA hazardous wastes pursuant to 40 CFR part 261, the 
applicant must report the following:
    (A) The method by which the waste is received (i.e., whether by 
truck, rail, or dedicated pipe); and
    (B) The hazardous waste number and amount received annually of each 
hazardous waste;
    (ii) If the POTW receives, or has been notified that it will 
receive, wastewaters that originate from remedial activities, including 
those undertaken pursuant to CERCLA and sections 3004(u) or 3008(h) of 
RCRA, the applicant must report the following:
    (A) The identity and description of the site(s) or facility(ies) at 
which the wastewater originates;
    (B) The identities of the wastewater's hazardous constituents, as 
listed in Appendix VIII of part 261 of this chapter; if known; and
    (C) The extent of treatment, if any, the wastewater receives or 
will receive before entering the POTW;
    (iii) Applicants are exempt from the requirements of paragraph 
(j)(7)(ii) of this section if they receive no more than fifteen 
kilograms per month of hazardous wastes, unless the wastes are acute 
hazardous wastes as specified in 40 CFR 261.30(d) and 261.33(e).
    (8) Combined sewer overflows. Each applicant with combined sewer 
systems must provide the following information:
    (i) Combined sewer system information. The following information 
regarding the combined sewer system:
    (A) System map. A map indicating the location of the following:
    (1) All CSO discharge points;
    (2) Sensitive use areas potentially affected by CSOs (e.g., 
beaches, drinking water supplies, shellfish beds, sensitive aquatic 
ecosystems, and outstanding national resource waters); and
    (3) Waters supporting threatened and endangered species potentially 
affected by CSOs; and
    (B) System diagram. A diagram of the combined sewer collection 
system that includes the following information:
    (1) The location of major sewer trunk lines, both combined and 
separate sanitary;
    (2) The locations of points where separate sanitary sewers feed 
into the combined sewer system;
    (3) In-line and off-line storage structures;
    (4) The locations of flow-regulating devices; and
    (5) The locations of pump stations;
    (ii) Information on CSO outfalls. The following information for 
each CSO discharge point covered by the permit application:
    (A) Description of outfall. The following information on each 
outfall:
    (1) Outfall number;
    (2) State, county, and city or town in which outfall is located;
    (3) Latitude and longitude, to the nearest second; and
    (4) Distance from shore and depth below surface;
    (5) Whether the applicant monitored any of the following in the 
past year for this CSO:
    (i) Rainfall;
    (ii) CSO flow volume;
    (iii) CSO pollutant concentrations;
    (iv) Receiving water quality;
    (v) CSO frequency; and
    (6) The number of storm events monitored in the past year;
    (B) CSO events. The following information about CSO overflows from 
each outfall:
    (1) The number of events in the past year;
    (2) The average duration per event, if available;
    (3) The average volume per CSO event, if available; and
    (4) The minimum rainfall that caused a CSO event, if available, in 
the last year;
    (C) Description of receiving waters. The following information 
about receiving waters:
    (1) Name of receiving water;
    (2) Name of watershed/stream system and the United States Soil 
Conservation Service watershed (14-digit) code (if known); and
    (3) Name of State Management/River Basin and the United States 
Geological Survey hydrologic cataloging unit (8-digit) code (if known); 
and
    (D) CSO operations. A description of any known water quality 
impacts on the receiving water caused by the CSO (e.g., permanent or 
intermittent beach closings, permanent or intermittent shellfish bed 
closings, fish kills, fish advisories, other recreational loss, or 
exceedance of any applicable State water quality standard);
    (9) Contractors. All applicants must provide the name, mailing 
address, telephone number, and responsibilities of all contractors 
responsible for any operational or maintenance aspects of the facility; 
and
    (10) Signature. All applications must be signed by a certifying 
official in compliance with Sec. 122.22.
* * * * *
    (q) Sewage sludge management. All TWTDS subject to paragraph 
(c)(2)(i) of this section must provide the information in this 
paragraph to the Director, using Form 2S or another application form 
approved by the Director. New applicants must submit all information 
available at the time of permit application. The information may be 
provided by referencing information previously submitted to the 
Director. The Director may waive any requirement of this paragraph if 
he or she has access to substantially identical information. The 
Director may also waive any requirement of this paragraph that is not 
of material concern for a specific permit, if approved by the Regional 
Administrator. The waiver request to the Regional Administrator must 
include the State's justification for the waiver. A Regional 
Administrator's disapproval of a State's proposed waiver does not 
constitute final Agency action, but does provide notice to the State 
and

[[Page 42467]]

permit applicant(s) that EPA may object to any State-issued permit 
issued in the absence of the required information.
    (1) Facility information. All applicants must submit the following 
information:
    (i) The name, mailing address, and location of the TWTDS for which 
the application is submitted;
    (ii) Whether the facility is a Class I Sludge Management Facility;
    (iii) The design flow rate (in million gallons per day);
    (iv) The total population served; and
    (v) The TWTDS's status as Federal, State, private, public, or other 
entity;
    (2) Applicant information. All applicants must submit the following 
information:
    (i) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the 
applicant; and
    (ii) Indication whether the applicant is the owner, operator, or 
both;
    (3) Permit information. All applicants must submit the facility's 
NPDES permit number, if applicable, and a listing of all other Federal, 
State, and local permits or construction approvals received or applied 
for under any of the following programs:
    (i) Hazardous Waste Management program under the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA);
    (ii) UIC program under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA);
    (iii) NPDES program under the Clean Water Act (CWA);
    (iv) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program under 
the Clean Air Act;
    (v) Nonattainment program under the Clean Air Act;
    (vi) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 
(NESHAPS) preconstruction approval under the Clean Air Act;
    (vii) Dredge or fill permits under section 404 of CWA;
    (viii) Other relevant environmental permits, including State or 
local permits;
    (4) Indian country. All applicants must identify any generation, 
treatment, storage, land application, or disposal of sewage sludge that 
occurs in Indian country;
    (5) Topographic map. All applicants must submit a topographic map 
(or other map if a topographic map is unavailable) extending one mile 
beyond property boundaries of the facility and showing the following 
information:
    (i) All sewage sludge management facilities, including on-site 
treatment, storage, and disposal sites; and
    (ii) Wells, springs, and other surface water bodies that are within 
\1/4\ mile of the property boundaries and listed in public records or 
otherwise known to the applicant;
    (6) Sewage sludge handling. All applicants must submit a line 
drawing and/or a narrative description that identifies all sewage 
sludge management practices employed during the term of the permit, 
including all units used for collecting, dewatering, storing, or 
treating sewage sludge, the destination(s) of all liquids and solids 
leaving each such unit, and all processes used for pathogen reduction 
and vector attraction reduction;
    (7) Sewage sludge quality. The applicant must submit sewage sludge 
monitoring data for the pollutants for which limits in sewage sludge 
have been established in 40 CFR part 503 for the applicant's use or 
disposal practices on the date of permit application.
    (i) The Director may require sampling for additional pollutants, as 
appropriate, on a case-by-case basis;
    (ii) Applicants must provide data from a minimum of three samples 
taken within four and one-half years prior to the date of the permit 
application. Samples must be representative of the sewage sludge and 
should be taken at least one month apart. Existing data may be used in 
lieu of sampling done solely for the purpose of this application;
    (iii) Applicants must collect and analyze samples in accordance 
with analytical methods approved under SW-846 unless an alternative has 
been specified in an existing sewage sludge permit;
    (iv) The monitoring data provided must include at least the 
following information for each parameter:
    (A) Average monthly concentration for all samples (mg/kg dry 
weight), based upon actual sample values;
    (B) The analytical method used; and
    (C) The method detection level.
    (8) Preparation of sewage sludge. If the applicant is a ``person 
who prepares'' sewage sludge, as defined at 40 CFR 503.9(r), the 
applicant must provide the following information:
    (i) If the applicant's facility generates sewage sludge, the total 
dry metric tons per 365-day period generated at the facility;
    (ii) If the applicant's facility receives sewage sludge from 
another facility, the following information for each facility from 
which sewage sludge is received:
    (A) The name, mailing address, and location of the other facility;
    (B) The total dry metric tons per 365-day period received from the 
other facility; and
    (C) A description of any treatment processes occurring at the other 
facility, including blending activities and treatment to reduce 
pathogens or vector attraction characteristics;
    (iii) If the applicant's facility changes the quality of sewage 
sludge through blending, treatment, or other activities, the following 
information:
    (A) Whether the Class A pathogen reduction requirements in 40 CFR 
503.32(a) or the Class B pathogen reduction requirements in 40 CFR 
503.32(b) are met, and a description of any treatment processes used to 
reduce pathogens in sewage sludge;
    (B) Whether any of the vector attraction reduction options of 40 
CFR 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(8) are met, and a description of any 
treatment processes used to reduce vector attraction properties in 
sewage sludge; and
    (C) A description of any other blending, treatment, or other 
activities that change the quality of sewage sludge;
    (iv) If sewage sludge from the applicant's facility meets the 
ceiling concentrations in 40 CFR 503.13(b)(1), the pollutant 
concentrations in Sec. 503.13(b)(3), the Class A pathogen requirements 
in Sec. 503.32(a), and one of the vector attraction reduction 
requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(8), and if the sewage 
sludge is applied to the land, the applicant must provide the total dry 
metric tons per 365-day period of sewage sludge subject to this 
paragraph that is applied to the land;
    (v) If sewage sludge from the applicant's facility is sold or given 
away in a bag or other container for application to the land, and the 
sewage sludge is not subject to paragraph (q)(8)(iv) of this section, 
the applicant must provide the following information:
    (A) The total dry metric tons per 365-day period of sewage sludge 
subject to this paragraph that is sold or given away in a bag or other 
container for application to the land; and
    (B) A copy of all labels or notices that accompany the sewage 
sludge being sold or given away;
    (vi) If sewage sludge from the applicant's facility is provided to 
another ``person who prepares,'' as defined at 40 CFR 503.9(r), and the 
sewage sludge is not subject to paragraph (q)(8)(iv) of this section, 
the applicant must provide the following information for each facility 
receiving the sewage sludge:
    (A) The name and mailing address of the receiving facility;
    (B) The total dry metric tons per 365-day period of sewage sludge 
subject to this paragraph that the applicant provides to the receiving 
facility;
    (C) A description of any treatment processes occurring at the 
receiving facility, including blending activities

[[Page 42468]]

and treatment to reduce pathogens or vector attraction characteristic;
    (D) A copy of the notice and necessary information that the 
applicant is required to provide the receiving facility under 40 CFR 
503.12(g); and
    (E) If the receiving facility places sewage sludge in bags or 
containers for sale or give-away to application to the land, a copy of 
any labels or notices that accompany the sewage sludge;
    (9) Land application of bulk sewage sludge. If sewage sludge from 
the applicant's facility is applied to the land in bulk form, and is 
not subject to paragraphs (q)(8)(iv), (v), or (vi) of this section, the 
applicant must provide the following information:
    (i) The total dry metric tons per 365-day period of sewage sludge 
subject to this paragraph that is applied to the land;
    (ii) If any land application sites are located in States other than 
the State where the sewage sludge is prepared, a description of how the 
applicant will notify the permitting authority for the State(s) where 
the land application sites are located;
    (iii) The following information for each land application site that 
has been identified at the time of permit application:
    (A) The name (if any), and location for the land application site;
    (B) The site's latitude and longitude to the nearest second, and 
method of determination;
    (C) A topographic map (or other map if a topographic map is 
unavailable) that shows the site's location;
    (D) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the site 
owner, if different from the applicant;
    (E) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the person 
who applies sewage sludge to the site, if different from the applicant;
    (F) Whether the site is agricultural land, forest, a public contact 
site, or a reclamation site, as such site types are defined under 40 
CFR 503.11;
    (G) The type of vegetation grown on the site, if known, and the 
nitrogen requirement for this vegetation;
    (H) Whether either of the vector attraction reduction options of 40 
CFR 503.33(b)(9) or (b)(10) is met at the site, and a description of 
any procedures employed at the time of use to reduce vector attraction 
properties in sewage sludge; and
    (I) Other information that describes how the site will be managed, 
as specified by the permitting authority.
    (iv) The following information for each land application site that 
has been identified at the time of permit application, if the applicant 
intends to apply bulk sewage sludge subject to the cumulative pollutant 
loading rates in 40 CFR 503.13(b)(2) to the site:
    (A) Whether the applicant has contacted the permitting authority in 
the State where the bulk sewage sludge subject to Sec. 503.13(b)(2) 
will be applied, to ascertain whether bulk sewage sludge subject to 
Sec. 503.13(b)(2) has been applied to the site on or since July 20, 
1993, and if so, the name of the permitting authority and the name and 
phone number of a contact person at the permitting authority;
    (B) Identification of facilities other than the applicant's 
facility that have sent, or are sending, sewage sludge subject to the 
cumulative pollutant loading rates in Sec. 503.13(b)(2) to the site 
since July 20, 1993, if, based on the inquiry in paragraph (q)(iv)(A), 
bulk sewage sludge subject to cumulative pollutant loading rates in 
Sec. 503.13(b)(2) has been applied to the site since July 20, 1993;
    (v) If not all land application sites have been identified at the 
time of permit application, the applicant must submit a land 
application plan that, at a minimum:
    (A) Describes the geographical area covered by the plan;
    (B) Identifies the site selection criteria;
    (C) Describes how the site(s) will be managed;
    (D) Provides for advance notice to the permit authority of specific 
land application sites and reasonable time for the permit authority to 
object prior to land application of the sewage sludge; and
    (E) Provides for advance public notice of land application sites in 
the manner prescribed by State and local law. When State or local law 
does not require advance public notice, it must be provided in a manner 
reasonably calculated to apprize the general public of the planned land 
application.
    (10) Surface disposal. If sewage sludge from the applicant's 
facility is placed on a surface disposal site, the applicant must 
provide the following information:
    (i) The total dry metric tons of sewage sludge from the applicant's 
facility that is placed on surface disposal sites per 365-day period;
    (ii) The following information for each surface disposal site 
receiving sewage sludge from the applicant's facility that the 
applicant does not own or operate:
    (A) The site name or number, contact person, mailing address, and 
telephone number for the surface disposal site; and
    (B) The total dry metric tons from the applicant's facility per 
365-day period placed on the surface disposal site;
    (iii) The following information for each active sewage sludge unit 
at each surface disposal site that the applicant owns or operates:
    (A) The name or number and the location of the active sewage sludge 
unit;
    (B) The unit's latitude and longitude to the nearest second, and 
method of determination;
    (C) If not already provided, a topographic map (or other map if a 
topographic map is unavailable) that shows the unit's location;
    (D) The total dry metric tons placed on the active sewage sludge 
unit per 365-day period;
    (E) The total dry metric tons placed on the active sewage sludge 
unit over the life of the unit;
    (F) A description of any liner for the active sewage sludge unit, 
including whether it has a maximum permeability of 1  x  
10-7 cm/sec;
    (G) A description of any leachate collection system for the active 
sewage sludge unit, including the method used for leachate disposal, 
and any Federal, State, and local permit number(s) for leachate 
disposal;
    (H) If the active sewage sludge unit is less than 150 meters from 
the property line of the surface disposal site, the actual distance 
from the unit boundary to the site property line;
    (I) The remaining capacity (dry metric tons) for the active sewage 
sludge unit;
    (J) The date on which the active sewage sludge unit is expected to 
close, if such a date has been identified;
    (K) The following information for any other facility that sends 
sewage sludge to the active sewage sludge unit:
    (1) The name, contact person, and mailing address of the facility; 
and
    (2) Available information regarding the quality of the sewage 
sludge received from the facility, including any treatment at the 
facility to reduce pathogens or vector attraction characteristics;
    (L) Whether any of the vector attraction reduction options of 40 
CFR 503.33(b)(9) through (b)(11) is met at the active sewage sludge 
unit, and a description of any procedures employed at the time of 
disposal to reduce vector attraction properties in sewage sludge;
    (M) The following information, as applicable to any ground-water 
monitoring occurring at the active sewage sludge unit:
    (1) A description of any ground-water monitoring occurring at the 
active sewage sludge unit;
    (2) Any available ground-water monitoring data, with a description 
of

[[Page 42469]]

the well locations and approximate depth to ground water;
    (3) A copy of any ground-water monitoring plan that has been 
prepared for the active sewage sludge unit;
    (4) A copy of any certification that has been obtained from a 
qualified ground-water scientist that the aquifer has not been 
contaminated; and
    (N) If site-specific pollutant limits are being sought for the 
sewage sludge placed on this active sewage sludge unit, information to 
support such a request;
    (11) Incineration. If sewage sludge from the applicant's facility 
is fired in a sewage sludge incinerator, the applicant must provide the 
following information:
    (i) The total dry metric tons of sewage sludge from the applicant's 
facility that is fired in sewage sludge incinerators per 365-day 
period;
    (ii) The following information for each sewage sludge incinerator 
firing the applicant's sewage sludge that the applicant does not own or 
operate:
    (A) The name and/or number, contact person, mailing address, and 
telephone number of the sewage sludge incinerator; and
    (B) The total dry metric tons from the applicant's facility per 
365-day period fired in the sewage sludge incinerator;
    (iii) The following information for each sewage sludge incinerator 
that the applicant owns or operates:
    (A) The name and/or number and the location of the sewage sludge 
incinerator;
    (B) The incinerator's latitude and longitude to the nearest second, 
and method of determination;
    (C) The total dry metric tons per 365-day period fired in the 
sewage sludge incinerator;
    (D) Information, test data, and documentation of ongoing operating 
parameters indicating that compliance with the National Emission 
Standard for Beryllium in 40 CFR part 61 will be achieved;
    (E) Information, test data, and documentation of ongoing operating 
parameters indicating that compliance with the National Emission 
Standard for Mercury in 40 CFR part 61 will be achieved;
    (F) The dispersion factor for the sewage sludge incinerator, as 
well as modeling results and supporting documentation;
    (G) The control efficiency for parameters regulated in 40 CFR 
503.43, as well as performance test results and supporting 
documentation;
    (H) Information used to calculate the risk specific concentration 
(RSC) for chromium, including the results of incinerator stack tests 
for hexavalent and total chromium concentrations, if the applicant is 
requesting a chromium limit based on a site-specific RSC value;
    (I) Whether the applicant monitors total hydrocarbons (THC) or 
Carbon Monoxide (CO) in the exit gas for the sewage sludge incinerator;
    (J) The type of sewage sludge incinerator;
    (K) The maximum performance test combustion temperature, as 
obtained during the performance test of the sewage sludge incinerator 
to determine pollutant control efficiencies;
    (L) The following information on the sewage sludge feed rate used 
during the performance test:
    (1) Sewage sludge feed rate in dry metric tons per day;
    (2) Identification of whether the feed rate submitted is average 
use or maximum design; and
    (3) A description of how the feed rate was calculated;
    (M) The incinerator stack height in meters for each stack, 
including identification of whether actual or creditable stack height 
was used;
    (N) The operating parameters for the sewage sludge incinerator air 
pollution control device(s), as obtained during the performance test of 
the sewage sludge incinerator to determine pollutant control 
efficiencies;
    (O) Identification of the monitoring equipment in place, including 
(but not limited to) equipment to monitor the following:
    (1) Total hydrocarbons or Carbon Monoxide;
    (2) Percent oxygen;
    (3) Percent moisture; and
    (4) Combustion temperature; and
    (P) A list of all air pollution control equipment used with this 
sewage sludge incinerator;
    (12) Disposal in a municipal solid waste landfill. If sewage sludge 
from the applicant's facility is sent to a municipal solid waste 
landfill (MSWLF), the applicant must provide the following information 
for each MSWLF to which sewage sludge is sent:
    (i) The name, contact person, mailing address, location, and all 
applicable permit numbers of the MSWLF;
    (ii) The total dry metric tons per 365-day period sent from this 
facility to the MSWLF;
    (iii) A determination of whether the sewage sludge meets applicable 
requirements for disposal of sewage sludge in a MSWLF, including the 
results of the paint filter liquids test and any additional 
requirements that apply on a site-specific basis; and
    (iv) Information, if known, indicating whether the MSWLF complies 
with criteria set forth in 40 CFR part 258;
    (13) Contractors. All applicants must provide the name, mailing 
address, telephone number, and responsibilities of all contractors 
responsible for any operational or maintenance aspects of the facility 
related to sewage sludge generation, treatment, use, or disposal;
    (14) Other information. At the request of the permitting authority, 
the applicant must provide any other information necessary to determine 
the appropriate standards for permitting under 40 CFR part 503, and 
must provide any other information necessary to assess the sewage 
sludge use and disposal practices, determine whether to issue a permit, 
or identify appropriate permit requirements; and
    (15) Signature. All applications must be signed by a certifying 
official in compliance with Sec. 122.22.
* * * * *
    6. Section 122.44 is amended by revising paragraph (j)(2) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 122.44  Establishing limitations, standards, and other permit 
conditions (applicable to State NPDES programs, see Sec. 123.25).

* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (2)(i) Submit a local program when required by and in accordance 
with 40 CFR part 403 to assure compliance with pretreatment standards 
to the extent applicable under section 307(b). The local program shall 
be incorporated into the permit as described in 40 CFR part 403. The 
program must require all indirect dischargers to the POTW to comply 
with the reporting requirements of 40 CFR part 403.
    (ii) Provide a written technical evaluation of the need to revise 
local limits under 40 CFR 403.5(c)(1), following permit issuance or 
reissuance.
* * * * *
    7. Part 122 is amended by adding Appendix J to read as follows:

Appendix J to Part 122--NPDES Permit Testing Requirements for 
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (Sec. 122.21(j))

Table 1A--Effluent Parameters for All POTWS

Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD-5 or CBOD-5)
Fecal coliform
Design Flow Rate
pH
Temperature
Total suspended solids

Table 1--Effluent Parameters for All POTWS With a Flow Equal to or 
Greater Than 0.1 MGD

Ammonia (as N)
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
Dissolved oxygen

[[Page 42470]]

Nitrate/Nitrite
Kjeldahl nitrogen
Oil and grease
Phosphorus
Total dissolved solids

Table 2--Effluent Parameters for Selected POTWS

Hardness
Metals (total recoverable), cyanide and total phenols
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Total phenolic compounds
Volatile organic compounds
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Bromoform
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
Chloroform
Dichlorobromomethane
1,1-dichloroethane
1,2-dichloroethane
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
1,1-dichloroethylene
1,2-dichloropropane
1,3-dichloropropylene
Ethylbenzene
Methyl bromide
Methyl chloride
Methylene chloride
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1,1,1-trichloroethane
1,1,2-trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
Acid-extractable compounds
P-chloro-m-creso
2-chlorophenol
2,4-dichlorophenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
2,4-dinitrophenol
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Base-neutral compounds
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Butyl benzyl phthalate
2-chloronaphthalene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1,3-dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
3,3'-dichlorobenzidine
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Hexachloroethane
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1,2,4,-trichlorobenzene

PART 123--STATE PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

    8. The authority citation for part 123 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

    9. Section 123.25 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 123.25  Requirements for Permitting.

    (a) * * *
    (4) Sections 122.21(a), (b), (c)(2), (e) through (k), and (m) 
through (p), and (q)--(Application for a permit)
* * * * *
    10. Section 123.43 is amended by adding paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 123.43  Transmission of information to EPA.

* * * * *
    (b) If the State intends to waive any of the permit application 
requirements of Sec. 122.21(j) or (q) of this chapter for a specific 
applicant, the Director must submit a written request to the Regional 
Administrator no less than 210 days prior to permit expiration. This 
request must include the State's justification for granting the waiver.
* * * * *

PART 124--PROCEDURES FOR DECISIONMAKING

    11. The authority citation for part 124 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 
6901 et seq.; Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300(f) et seq.; 
Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 
7401 et seq.

    12. Section 124.8 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(9) as follows:


Sec. 124.8  Fact sheet.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (9) Justification for waiver of any application requirements under 
Sec. 122.21(j) or (q) of this chapter.

PART 501--STATE SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM REGULATIONS

    13. The authority citation for part 501 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

    14. Section 501.15 is amended by removing paragraph (a)(4).

    Note: The following forms and instructions will not appear in 
the Code of Federal Regulations.

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

[[Page 42471]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.000



[[Page 42472]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.001



[[Page 42473]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.002



[[Page 42474]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.003



[[Page 42475]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.004



[[Page 42476]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.005



[[Page 42477]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.006



[[Page 42478]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.007



[[Page 42479]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.008



[[Page 42480]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.009



[[Page 42481]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.010



[[Page 42482]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.011



[[Page 42483]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.012



[[Page 42484]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.013



[[Page 42485]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.014



[[Page 42486]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.015



[[Page 42487]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.016



[[Page 42488]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.017



[[Page 42489]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.018



[[Page 42490]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.019



[[Page 42491]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.020



BILLING CODE: 6560-50-C

[[Page 42492]]

Instructions for Completing Form 2A--Application for an NPDES 
Permit

    Paperwork Reduction Act Notice: The annual public reporting and 
recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to 
average 9.6 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or 
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, 
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This 
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, 
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of 
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and 
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; 
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable 
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to 
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review 
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the 
information. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number.
    Send comments regarding the Agency's need for this information, the 
accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods 
for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of 
automated collection techniques to the Director, OP Regulatory 
Information Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2137), 401 
M St., S.W., Washington, DC 20460. Include the OMB control number in 
any correspondence. Do not send the completed Form 2A to this address.

Background Information

    Each wastewater treatment works that discharges treated effluent to 
waters of the United States must apply for a permit for its discharges. 
This permitting requirement is part of the National Pollutant Discharge 
Elimination System (NPDES) program, which is implemented by the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). You can obtain a permit for your 
treatment works by filling out and sending in the appropriate form(s) 
to your permitting authority. If the State in which your treatment 
works is located operates its own NPDES program, then the State is your 
permitting authority and you should ask your State for permit 
application forms. On the other hand, if EPA operates the NPDES program 
in your State, then EPA is the permitting authority, and you must fill 
out and send in Form 2A.
    These instructions explain how to fill out each question in Form 
2A. However, not every applicant will have to fill out every section of 
Form 2A. You may determine which parts of Form 2A apply the your 
treatment works by reading the Application Overview section on page 1 
of Form 2A before filling out the form.

Commonly Asked Questions

What If I Need More Space for My Answer?

    If you need more room for your answer than is provided on the form, 
attach a separate sheet called ``Additional Information.'' At the top 
of the separate sheet, put the name of your plant, your plant's NPDES 
permit number, and the number of the outfall that you are writing 
about, if applicable. Also, next to your answer, put the question 
number (from Form 2A). Provide this information on any drawings or 
other papers that you attach to your application as well.

Will the Public Be Able To See the Information I Submit?

    Any information you submit on Form 2A will be available to the 
public. If you send in more information than is requested on Form 2A 
that is considered company-privileged information, you may ask EPA to 
keep that extra information confidential. Note that you cannot ask EPA 
to keep effluent data confidential. If you want any of the extra 
information to be kept confidential, inform EPA of this when you submit 
your application. Otherwise, EPA may make the information public 
without letting you know in advance. For more information on claims of 
confidentiality, see EPA's business confidentiality regulations at 
Title 40, Part 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

How Do I Complete the Forms?

    Answer every question on Form 2A that applies to your treatment 
works. If your answer to a question requires more room than there is on 
the form, please attach additional sheets as described above. If a 
particular question does not apply to your treatment works, write ``N/
A'' (meaning ``not applicable'') as your answer to that question. If 
you need additional guidance on filling out these forms, contact your 
EPA Regional Office or your State office.

Which Parts of the Form Apply?

    Form 2A is presented in a modular format, consisting of two 
packets: the Basic Application Information packet and the Supplemental 
Application Information packet. The Basic Application Information 
Packet is divided into three parts. All applicants must complete Part A 
(Basic Application Information For All Applicants) and Part C 
(Certification). Applicants with a design flow greater than or equal to 
0.1 mgd must also complete Part B (Additional Application Information 
For Applicants With A Design Flow Greater Than Or Equal To 0.1 MGD). 
Some applicants must also complete the Supplemental Application 
Information packet. Refer to the Application Overview on page 1 of Form 
2A to determine which parts of the Supplemental Application Information 
you must complete.

Step-by-Step Instructions

    The following section provides clarification and additional 
information for the questions on Form 2A. Most of the terms used in 
Form 2A are defined in the NPDES regulations at 40 CFR 122.2.

Basic Application Information

Part A (Basic Application Information for All Applicants)

A.1. Facility Information
    Provide your plant's official or legal name. Do not use a nickname 
or short name. Also provide your plant's mailing address, a contact 
person at the plant, his/her title, and that person's work telephone 
number. The contact person should be someone who has a thorough 
understanding of the operation of the treatment works. The permitting 
authority may call this person if there are any questions about the 
application. Also provide the actual facility address (if different 
than the mailing address). The facility location should be a street 
address (not a Post Office box number) or other description of the 
actual location of the facility. Be sure to provide the city or county 
and state in which the facility is located.
A.2. Applicant Information
    If someone other than the facility contact person is actually 
submitting this application (e.g., a consultant), provide the name and 
mailing address of that person's organization. Also provide the name of 
a contact person, his/her title, and his/her work telephone number. The 
permitting authority may call this person if there are any questions 
about the application.
A.3. Existing Environmental Permits
    Provide the permit number of each currently effective permit issued 
to the treatment works for NPDES, UIC, RCRA,

[[Page 42493]]

PSD, and any other environmental programs. If you have previously filed 
an application but have not yet received a permit, give the number of 
the application, if any. If you have more than one currently effective 
permit under a particular permit program, list each such permit number. 
List any other relevant environmental permits under ``Other.''
A.4. Collection System Information
    Provide the names of all the cities, towns, and unincorporated 
areas served by your plant and enter the number of people served by 
your plant at the time you complete this form. Indicate whether each 
portion of the collection system is separate or combined storm and 
sanitary, if known, and note the ownership status of each portion of 
the system (municipal, private, etc.).
A.5. Indian Country
    Indian Country means all land within the limits of any Indian 
reservation under the jurisdiction of the United States Government 
notwithstanding the issuance of any patent, and including rights-of-way 
running through the reservation. Indicate whether your plant is located 
in (i.e., within the limits of) Indian Country and whether the water 
body into which your plant discharges flows through Indian Country 
after it receives your plant discharge.
A.6. Flow
    a. Provide your plant's current design flow rate. Treatment works 
with a design flow less than 5 mgd must provide the design influent 
flow rate to two decimal places. Treatment works that are greater than 
or equal to 5 mgd must report this to 1 decimal place. This is because 
fluctuations of 0.01 mgd to 0.09 mgd in smaller treatment works 
represent a significant percentage of daily flow.
    b. Enter the annual average daily flow rate, in million gallons per 
day, that your plant actually treated this year and each of the past 
two years for days that your plant actually discharges. Each year's 
data must be based on a 12-month time period, with the 12th month of 
``this year'' occurring no more than three months prior to this 
application submittal.
    c. Enter the maximum daily flow rate, in million gallons per day 
(mgd), that your plant received this year and each of the past two 
years. Each year's data must be based on a 12-month time period, with 
the 12th month of ``this year'' occurring no more than three months 
prior to this application submittal.
A.7. Collection System
    Indicate what type of collection system brings wastewater to your 
plant. If you check both of the collection systems indicated on the 
form, you must also provide an estimate of what percentage (in terms of 
miles of pipe) of your entire collection system each type represents. 
For example, 80 percent separate sanitary sewers would mean that 80 
percent of the actual miles of pipes are separate sanitary sewers (and 
20 percent are combined sewers).
A.8. Discharges and Other Disposal Methods
    a. Note whether the treatment works discharges effluent to waters 
of the U.S. If yes, note the number of treated effluent discharge 
points, untreated or partially treated effluent discharge points, 
combined sewer overflow points, constructed emergency overflows prior 
to the headworks, and any other discharge points. Dischargers of 
effluent to waters of the U.S. with flow rates greater than or equal to 
0.1 mgd must also complete questions B.1 through B.6 and, in some 
cases, Part D (Expanded Effluent Testing Data) of Form 2A. See the 
Application Overview on page 1 of Form 2A for more information.
    b. A surface impoundment with no point source discharge (to waters 
of the U.S.) is a holding pond or basin that is large enough to contain 
all wastewaters discharged into it. It has no places where water 
overflows from it. It is used for evaporation of water and very little 
water seeps into the ground. Your plant must report the location of 
each surface impoundment, the annual average volume discharged to each 
impoundment, and the frequency of discharge into the surface 
impoundment (i.e., is the discharge continuous or intermittent). If 
your plant discharges to more than one surface impoundment, use an 
additional sheet (or sheets) to give this information for each 
impoundment. Attach the additional sheet(s) to the application form. 
The information on the location of the surface impoundment(s) may be 
referenced on the topographic map prepared under question B.2, if 
applicable.
    c. Land application is the spraying or spreading of treated 
wastewater over an area of land. If your plant applies wastewater to 
land, you must list the site location, the size of the site (in acres), 
the annual average daily volume applied to the site, and the frequency 
of application (i.e., is the application continuous or intermittent). 
If your plant applies wastewater to more than one site, provide the 
information for each site on a separate sheet (or sheets). Attach the 
additional sheet(s) to your application form. The information on the 
location of the land application site may be referenced on the 
topographic map prepared under question B.2, if applicable.
    d. If your plant discharges treated or untreated wastewater to 
another treatment works (including a municipal waste transport or 
collection system), provide the information requested in question 
A.8.d. If your plant sends wastewater to more than one treatment works, 
provide this information for each treatment works on an additional 
sheet (or sheets). Attach the additional sheet(s) to your application 
form. Describe how the wastewater is transported to the other treatment 
works. Also provide the name and mailing address of the company that 
transports your plant's wastewater to this treatment works as well as 
the name, phone number, and title of the contact person at the 
transportation company. Also provide the name and mailing address of 
each treatment works that receives wastewater from your plant as well 
as the name, phone number, and title of the contact person at the 
treatment works that receives your plant's wastewater and the NPDES 
permit number for the treatment works, if known. Indicate the average 
daily flow, in million gallons per day, that is sent from your plant to 
the other treatment works.
    e. If your plant disposes of its wastewater in some way that was 
not described by A.8.a through A.8.d above, briefly describe how your 
plant discharges or disposes of its wastewater. Also give the annual 
daily volumes disposed of this way and indicate whether the discharge 
is continuous or intermittent. Other ways to discharge or dispose 
include underground percolation and well injection.
    Wastewater Discharges. If this treatment works does not discharge 
treated wastewater to waters of the United States, do not complete 
questions A.9 through A.11. Instead, go to Part C (Certification). Note 
that you may also be required to complete portions of the Supplemental 
Application Information packet.
    Answer questions A.9 through A.12 once for each outfall (including 
bypass points) through which your treatment works discharges effluent 
to surface waters of the United States. Do not include information 
about combined sewer overflow discharge points. Surface water means 
creeks, streams, rivers, lakes, estuaries, and oceans. If your 
treatment works has more than one

[[Page 42494]]

outfall, copy and complete questions A.9 through A.12 once for each 
outfall.
A.9. Description of Outfall
    a-e. Give the outfall number and its location. For location, 
provide the city or town (if applicable), zip code, county, state, and 
latitude and longitude to the nearest second. If this outfall is a 
subsurface discharge (e.g., into an estuary, lake, or ocean), indicate 
how far the outfall is from shore and how far below the water's surface 
it is. Give these distances in feet at the lowest point of low tide. 
Also provide the average daily flow rate in million gallons per day.
    f. Mark whether this outfall is a periodic or intermittent 
discharge. A ``periodic discharge'' is one that happens regularly (for 
example, monthly or seasonally), but is not continuous all year. An 
``intermittent discharge'' is one that happens sometimes, but not 
regularly. Discharges from holding ponds, lagoons, etc., may be 
included as periodic or intermittent. Give the number of times per year 
a discharge occurs from this outfall. Also tell how long each discharge 
lasts and how much water is discharged, in million gallons per day. 
List each month when discharge happens. If you do not have records of 
exact months in which such discharges occurred, provide an estimate 
based on the best available information.
    g. Indicate whether the outfall is equipped with a diffuser.
A.10. Description of Receiving Waters
    a. Give the name of the surface water to which this outfall 
discharges and the waterbodies to which the discharge will ultimately 
flow. For example, ``Control Ditch A, then into Stream B, then into 
River C, and finally into River D in River Basin E.''
    b. If known, provide the name of the watershed in which the 
receiving water (identified in question A.10.a) is located. If known, 
also provide the 14-digit watershed code assigned to this watershed by 
the U.S. Soil Conservation Service.
    c. If known, provide the name of the State Management/River Basin 
into which this outfall discharges. If known, also provide the 8-digit 
hydrologic cataloging unit code assigned by the U.S. Geological Survey.
    d. If known and if the water body is a river or stream, provide the 
acute and chronic critical low flow in cubic feet per second (cfs). If 
you are unsure of these numbers, the U.S. Geological Survey may be able 
to give them to you or you may be able to get these numbers from prior 
studies.
    e. Give the total hardness of the receiving stream at critical low 
flow, in milligrams per liter of CaCO3, if applicable.
A.11. Description of Treatment
    a. Indicate the levels of treatment that your plant provides for 
the discharge from this outfall.
    b. Give the design removal rates, in percent, for biochemical 
oxygen demand (BOD5) or carbonaceous biochemical oxygen 
demand (CBOD5), suspended solids (SS), phosphorus (P), 
nitrogen (N), and any other parameter requested by the permitting 
authority.
    c. Describe the type of disinfection your plant uses (for example, 
chlorination, ozonation, ultraviolet, etc.) and any seasonal variation 
in disinfection technique that may occur. If your plant uses 
chlorination, indicate whether it also dechlorinates.
    d. Note whether the facility has post aeration.
A.12. Effluent Testing Information
    All applicants that discharge effluent to waters of the United 
States must provide effluent testing data for each outfall. Refer to 
the following table to determine which effluent testing information 
questions you must complete and to determine the number of pollutant 
scans on which to base your data. See the Application Overview on page 
1 of Form 2A for more information.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Minimum number
          Treatment works characteristics                        Form 2A requirements              of scans (see
                                                                                                    Appendix A)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design flow rate less than 1 mgd,
  and                                                Question A.12                                            3
Not required to have (or does not have) a
 pretreatment program
Design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mgd, or  Question A.12 and Part D of Supplemental                 3
Required to have a pretreatment program (or has one   Application Information Packet
 in place), or
Otherwise required by the permitting authority to
 provide the data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Complete question A.12 once for each outfall through which effluent 
is discharged to waters of the United States. Indicate on each page the 
outfall number (as assigned in question A.9) for which the data are 
provided. Do not include information about combined sewer overflow 
discharge points in question A.12. For specific instructions on 
completing the pollutant tables in question A.12, refer to Appendix A 
of these instructions.

Part B (Additional Application Information for Applicants With a Design 
Flow Greater Than Equal to 0.1 MGD)

    All applicants with a design flow rate greater than or equal to 0.1 
mgd must answer questions B.1 through B.6.
B.1. Inflow and Infiltration
    Estimate the average daily flow rate of inflow and infiltration in 
gallons per day and steps the facility is taking to minimize inflow and 
infiltration.
B.2. Topographic Map
    Provide a topographic map (or other map if a topographic map is 
unavailable) extending at least one mile beyond property boundaries of 
the treatment plant, including all unit processes. In addition, the map 
must show the following:
    a. Treatment plant area and unit processes;
    b. Major pipes or other structures through which wastewater enters 
the treatment plant and the pipes or other structures through which 
treated wastewater is discharged from the treatment plant. Include 
outfalls from bypass piping, if applicable;
    c. Each well where fluids from the treatment plant is injected 
underground;
    d. Wells, springs, and other surface waterbodies listed in public 
records or otherwise known to the applicant within one-quarter mile of 
the treatment works' property boundary;
    e. Sewage sludge management facilities (including on-site 
treatment, storage, and disposal sites); and
    f. Location at which waste classified as hazardous under RCRA 
enters the treatment plant by truck, rail, or dedicated pipe.

[[Page 42495]]

B.3. Process Flow Diagram or Schematic
    Provide a diagram showing the processes of the treatment plant, 
including all bypass piping and all backup power sources or redundancy 
in the system. Include a water balance showing all treatment units, 
including disinfection, and showing daily average flow rates at 
influent and discharge points, and approximate daily flow rates between 
treatment units. Include a brief narrative description of the diagram.
B.4. Operation/Maintenance Performed by Contractor(s)
    If a contractor carries out any operational or maintenance aspects 
associated with wastewater treatment or effluent quality at this 
facility, provide the name, mailing address, and telephone number of 
each such contractor. Also provide a description of the 
responsibilities of the contractor. Attach additional pages if 
necessary.
B.5. Scheduled Improvements and Schedules of Implementation
    Provide information on any improvements to your treatment works 
that you are currently planning. Include only those improvements that 
will affect the wastewater treatment, effluent quality, or design 
capacity of your treatment works (such improvements may include 
regionalization of treatment works). Also list the schedule for when 
these improvements will be started and finished. If your treatment 
works has more than one improvement planned, use a separate sheet of 
paper to provide information for each one.
    a. List each outfall number that is covered by the implementation 
schedule. The outfall numbers you use must be the same as the ones 
provided under question A.9.
    b. Indicate whether the planned improvements or implementation 
schedules are required by local, State, or Federal agencies.
    c. Provide a brief description of the improvements to be made for 
the outfalls listed in question B.5.a, including new maximum daily 
inflow rate, if applicable.
    d. Provide the information requested for each planned improvement. 
Supply dates for the following stages of any compliance schedule. For 
improvements that are planned independently of local, State, or Federal 
agencies, indicate planned or actual completion dates, as applicable. 
If a step has already been finished, give the date when that step was 
completed.
     ``Begin Construction'' means the date you plan to start 
construction.
     ``End Construction'' means the date you expect to finish 
construction.
     ``Begin Discharge'' means the date that you expect a 
discharge will start.
     ``Attain Operational Level'' means the date that you 
expect the effluent level will meet your plant's implementation 
schedule conditions.
    e. Note whether your treatment works has received appropriate 
permits or clearances that are required by other Federal or State 
requirements. If you have received such permits, describe them.

Part C (Certification)

    Before completing the Certification statement, review the 
Application Overview section on the cover page of Form 2A to make sure 
that you have completed all applicable sections of Form 2A, including 
any parts of the Supplemental Application Information packet.
    All permit applications must be signed and certified. Also indicate 
in the boxes provided which sections of Form 2A you are submitting with 
this application.
    An application submitted by a municipality, State, Federal, or 
other public agency must be signed by either a principal executive 
officer or ranking elected official. A principal executive officer of a 
Federal agency includes: (1) The chief executive officer of the agency, 
or (2) a senior executive officer having responsibility for the overall 
operations of a principal geographic unit of the agency (e.g., Regional 
Administrators of EPA).
    An application submitted by a corporation must be signed by a 
responsible corporate officer. A responsible corporate officer means: 
(1) A president, secretary, treasurer, or vice president in charge of a 
principal business function, or any other person who performs similar 
policy- or decision-making functions; or (2) the manager of 
manufacturing, production, or operating facilities employing more than 
250 persons or having gross annual sales or expenditures exceeding $25 
million (in second quarter 1980 dollars), if authority to sign 
documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager in accordance 
with corporate procedures.
    An application submitted by a partnership or sole proprietorship 
must be signed by a general partner or the proprietor, respectively.

Supplemental Application Information Packet

    EPA has developed Form 2A in a modular format, consisting of two 
packets: the Basic Application Information packet and the Supplemental 
Application Information packet. As directed by the Application Overview 
section on page 1 of Form 2A, certain applicants will need to complete 
one or more parts of the Supplemental Application Information packet in 
addition to some or all of the Basic Application Information packet. 
Refer to the Application Overview section to determine which part(s) of 
Form 2A you must complete.
    The Supplemental Application Information packet is divided into the 
following parts:
     Part D Expanded Effluent Testing Data
     Part E Toxicity Testing Data
     Part F Industrial User Discharges and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes
     Part G Combined Sewer Systems

Part D (Expanded Effluent Testing Data)

    A treatment works that discharges effluent to surface waters of the 
United States and meets one or more of the following criteria must 
complete Part D (Expanded Effluent Testing Data):
     Has a design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mgd;
     Is required to have a pretreatment program (or has one in 
place); or
     Is otherwise required by the permitting authority to 
provide the information
    Refer to the following table to determine which effluent testing 
information questions you must complete and to determine the number of 
pollutant scans on which to base your data.

[[Page 42496]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Minimum number
          Treatment works characteristics                        Form 2A requirements              of scans (see
                                                                                                    Appendix A)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design flow rate less than 1 mgd but greater than    Question B.6                                             3
 0.1 mgd, and
Not required to have (or does not have) a
 pretreatment program
Design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mgd, or  Question B.6 and Part D of Supplemental                  3
Required to have a pretreatment program (or has one   Application Information Packet
 in place), or
Otherwise required by the permitting authority to
 provide the data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Complete Part D once for each outfall through which effluent is 
discharged to waters of the United States. Indicate on each page the 
outfall number (as assigned in question A.9 of the Basic Application 
Information packet) for which the data are provided. Using the blank 
rows provided on the form, submit any data the facility may have for 
pollutants not specifically listed in Part D. Note that the permitting 
authority may require additional testing on a case-by-case basis.
    For specific instructions on completing the pollutant tables in 
Part D, refer to Appendix A of these instructions.

Part E (Toxicity Testing Data)

    Treatment works meeting one or more of the following criteria must 
complete Part E (Toxicity Testing Data):
     Treatment works with a design flow rate greater than or 
equal to one mgd; or
     Treatment works with an approved pretreatment program (as 
well as those required to have one under 40 CFR Part 403); or
     Treatment works otherwise required by the permitting 
authority to submit the results of whole effluent toxicity testing.
    Applicants completing Part E must submit the results from any whole 
effluent toxicity test conducted during the past four and one-half 
years that have not been reported or submitted to the permitting 
authority for each outfall discharging effluent to the waters of the 
United States. Do not include information on combined sewer overflows 
in this section. If the applicant conducted a whole effluent toxicity 
test during the past four and one-half years that revealed toxicity, 
then provide any information available on the cause of the toxicity or 
any results of a toxicity reduction evaluation, if one was conducted.
    Test results provided in Part E must be based on multiple species 
being tested quarterly for a minimum of one year. For multiple species, 
EPA requires a minimum of two species (e.g., vertebrates and 
invertebrates). The permitting authority may require the applicant to 
include other species (e.g., plants) as well. Applicants must provide 
these tests for either acute or chronic toxicity depending on the range 
of the receiving water dilution. EPA recommends that applicants conduct 
acute or chronic toxicity testing based on the following dilutions:
     Acute toxicity testing if the dilution of the effluent is 
greater than 1000:1 at the edge of the mixing zone.
     Acute or chronic toxicity testing if the dilution of the 
effluent is between 100:1 and 1000:1 at the edge of the mixing zone. 
Acute testing may be more appropriate at the higher end of this range 
(1000:1), and chronic testing may be more appropriate at the lower end 
of this range (100:1).
     Chronic toxicity testing if the dilution of the effluent 
is less than 100:1 at the edge of the mixing zone.
    All data provided in Part E must be based on tests performed within 
four and one-half years prior to completing this application. The tests 
must have been conducted since the last NPDES permit issuance or permit 
modification under 40 CFR 122.62(a). In addition, applicants only need 
to submit data that have not previously been submitted to the 
permitting authority. Thus, if test data have already been submitted 
(within the last four and one-half years) in accordance with an issued 
NPDES permit, the treatment works may note the dates the tests were 
submitted and need not fill out the information requested in question 
E.2 for that test.
    Additional copies of Part E may be used in submitting the required 
information. A permittee having no significant toxicity in the effluent 
over the past year and who has submitted all toxicity test results 
through the end of the calendar quarter preceding the time of permit 
application would need to supply no additional toxicity testing data as 
part of this application. Instead, the applicant should complete 
question E.4, which requests a summary of bioassay test information 
already submitted. (See below for more detailed instructions on 
completing question E.4)
    Where test data are requested to be reported, the treatment works 
has the option of reporting the requested data on Form 2A or on reports 
supplied by the laboratories conducting the testing, provided the data 
requested are complete and presented in a logical fashion. The 
permitting authority reserves the right to request that the data be 
reported on Form 2A.
E.1. Required Tests
    Provide the total number of chronic and acute whole effluent 
toxicity tests conducted in the past four and one-half years. A 
``chronic'' toxicity test continues for a relatively long period of 
time, often one-tenth the life span of the organism or more. An 
``acute'' toxicity test is one in which the effect is observed in 96 
hours or less.
E.2. Individual Test Data
    Complete E.2 for each test conducted in the last four and one-half 
years for which data has not been submitted. Use the columns provided 
on the form for each test and specify the test number at the top of 
each column. Use additional copies of question E.2 if more than three 
tests are being reported. The parameters listed on the form are based 
on EPA-recommended test methods. Permittees may be required by the 
permitting authority to submit additional test parameter data for the 
purposes of quality assurance.
    If the treatment works is conducting whole effluent toxicity tests 
and reporting its results in accordance with a NPDES permit 
requirement, then the treatment works may note the dates the tests were 
submitted and need not fill out the information requested in question 
E.2. for those tests (unless otherwise required by the permitting 
authority).
    a. Provide the information requested on the form for each test 
reported. Under ``Test species & test method number,'' provide the 
scientific name of the organism used in the test and the test method 
number. The ``Outfall number'' reported must correlate to the outfall 
numbers listed in question A.9 of the Basic Application Information 
packet.
    b. Provide the source of the toxicity test methods followed. In 
conducting the tests, the treatment works must use methods approved in 
accordance with 40 CFR Part 136.


[[Page 42497]]


    Note: Approved methods are currently under development.

    c. Indicate whether 24-hour composite or grab samples were used for 
each test. For multiple grab samples, provide the number of grab 
samples used. Refer to Appendix A of the instructions for a definition 
of composite and grab samples.
    d. Indicate whether the sample was taken before or after 
disinfection and/or after dechlorination.
    e. Provide a description of the point in the treatment process at 
which the sample was collected.
    f. Indicate whether the test was intended to assess chronic or 
acute toxicity.
    g. Indicate which type of test was performed. A ``static'' test is 
a test performed with a single constant volume of water. In a ``static-
renewal'' test, the volume of water is renewed at discrete intervals. 
In a ``flow-through'' test, the volume of water is renewed 
continuously.
    h. Indicate whether laboratory water or the receiving water of the 
tested outfall was used as the source of dilution water. If laboratory 
water was used, provide the type of water used.
    i. Indicate whether fresh or salt water was used as the dilution 
water. For salt water, specify whether the salt water was natural or 
artificial (specify the type of artificial water used).
    j. For each concentration in the test series, provide the 
percentage of effluent used.
    k. Provide the minimum and maximum parameters measured during the 
test for pH, salinity, temperature, ammonia, and dissolved oxygen.
    l. Provide the results of each test performed. For acute toxicity 
tests, provide the percent survival of the test species in 100 percent 
effluent. Also provide the LC50 (Lethal Concentration to 50 
percent) of the test. ``LC50'' is the effluent (or toxicant) 
concentration estimated to be lethal to 50 percent of the test 
organisms during a specific period. Provide the 95% confidence 
interval, control percent survival, and any other test results 
requested by the permitting authority in the space provided. For 
chronic toxicity tests, provide data at the most sensitive endpoint. 
While this is generally expressed as a ``NOEC'' (No Observed Effect 
Concentration), it may be expressed as an ``Inhibition Concentration'' 
(e.g., ``IC25''--Inhibition Concentration to 25 percent). 
The NOEC is the highest measured concentration of an effluent (or a 
toxicant) at which no significant adverse effects are observed on the 
test organisms at a specific time of observation. The IC25 
is the effluent (or toxicant) concentration estimated to cause a 25 
percent reduction in reproduction, fecundity, growth, or other non-
quantal biological measurements. Provide the control percent survival. 
Indicate any other test results in the space provided.
    m. Note whether reference toxicant data is available and indicate 
whether the reference toxicant test was within acceptable bounds. 
Provide the date on which the reference toxicant test was run. Also 
provide any other quality control/quality assurance information that 
may be requested by the permitting authority.
E.3. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation
    A Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) is a site-specific study 
conducted in a stepwise process designed to identify the causative 
agents of effluent toxicity, evaluate the effectiveness of toxicity 
control options, and then confirm the reduction in effluent toxicity. 
If the treatment works is conducting a TRE as part of a NPDES permit 
requirement or enforcement order, then you only need to provide the 
date of the last progress report concerning the TRE in the area 
reserved for details of the TRE.
E.4. Summary of Submitted Biomonitoring Test Information
    As stated above, applicants that have already submitted the results 
of biomonitoring test information over the past four and one-half years 
do not need to resubmit this data with Form 2A. Instead, indicate in 
question E.4 the date you submitted each report and provide a summary 
of the test results for each report. Include in this summary the 
following information: the outfall number and collection dates of the 
samples tested, dates of testing, toxicity testing method(s) used, and 
a summary of the results from the test (e.g, 100% survival in 40% 
effluent).

Part F (Industrial User Discharges and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes)

    All treatment works receiving discharges from significant 
industrial users (SIUs) or facilities that receive RCRA, CERCLA, or 
other remedial wastes must complete Part F.
    A ``categorical industrial user'' is an industrial user that is 
subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards under 40 CFR 403.6 and 40 
CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N, which are technology-based standards 
developed by EPA setting industry-specific effluent limits. (A list of 
Industrial Categories subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards is 
included in Appendix B.)
    A ``significant industrial user'' is defined in 40 CFR 403.3(t) as 
an industrial user that:
     Is subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards under 40 
CFR 403.6 and 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N; and
     Any other industrial user that: discharges an average of 
25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to the treatment 
works (excluding sanitary, non-contact cooling and boiler blowdown 
wastewater); contributes a process wastestream that makes up 5 percent 
or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic capacity of the 
treatment works; or is designated as such by the Control Authority as 
defined in 40 CFR 403.12(a) on the basis that the industrial user has a 
reasonable potential for adversely affecting the treatment works 
operation or for violating any pretreatment standard or requirement (in 
accordance with 40 CFR 403.8(f)(6)).
    An ``industrial user'' means any industrial or commercial entity 
that discharges wastewater that is not domestic wastewater. Domestic 
wastewater includes wastewater from connections to houses, hotels, non-
industrial office buildings, institutions, or sanitary waste from 
industrial facilities. The number of ``industrial users'' is the total 
number of industrial and commercial users that discharge to the 
treatment works.
    For the purposes of completing the application form, please provide 
information on non-categorical SIUs and categorical industrial users 
separately.
F.1. Pretreatment Program
    Indicate whether the treatment works has an approved pretreatment 
program. An ``approved pretreatment program'' is a program administered 
by a treatment works that meets the criteria established in 40 CFR 
403.8 and 403.9 and that has been approved by a Regional Administer or 
State Director.
    Note that if this treatment works has or is required to have a 
pretreatment program, you must also complete Parts D and E of the 
Supplemental Application Information packet.
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical 
Industrial Users (CIUs)
    Provide the number of SIUs and the number of CIUs that discharge to 
the treatment works.
    Significant Industrial User (SIU) Information. All treatment works 
that receive discharges from SIUs must complete questions F.3 through 
F.8. If your treatment works receives wastewater from more than one 
SIU,

[[Page 42498]]

complete questions F.3 through F.8 once for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information
    Provide the name and mailing address of each SIU. Submit additional 
pages as necessary.
F.4. Industrial Processes
    Describe the actual process(es) (rather than simply listing them) 
at the SIU that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge. For 
example, in describing a metal finishing operation, include such 
information as how the product is cleaned prior to finishing, what type 
of plating baths are in operation (e.g., nickel, chromium), how paint 
is applied, and how the product is polished. Attach additional sheets 
if necessary.
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s)
    List principal products that the SIU generates and the raw 
materials used to manufacture the products.
F.6. Flow Rate
    ``Process wastewater'' means any water that, during manufacturing 
or processing, comes into direct contact with or results from the 
production or use of any raw material, intermediate product, finished 
product, byproduct, or waste product. Indicate the average daily 
volume, in gallons per day, of process wastewater and non-process 
wastewater that the SIU discharges into the collection system. Specify 
whether the discharges are continuous or intermittent.
F.7. Pretreatment Standards
    Indicate whether the SIU is subject to local limits and categorical 
pretreatment standards. ``Local limits'' are enforceable local 
requirements developed by treatment works to address Federal standards 
as well as state and local regulations. ``Categorical pretreatment 
standards'' are national technology-based standards developed by EPA, 
setting industry-specific effluent limits. These standards are 
implemented by 40 CFR 403.6. If the treatment works is subject to 
categorical pretreatment standards, indicate the category and 
subcategory.
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharged by 
the SIU
    Provide information concerning any problems the treatment works has 
experienced that are attributable to discharges from the SIUs. Problems 
may include upsets or interference at the plant, corrosion in the 
collection system, or other similar events in the past three years.
    RCRA Hazardous Waste Received by Truck, Rail or Dedicated Pipeline. 
As defined in Section 1004(5) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery 
Act (RCRA), ``Hazardous waste'' means ``a solid waste, or combination 
of solid wastes, which because of its quantity, concentration, or 
physical, chemical or infectious characteristics may:
     Cause or significantly contribute to an increase in 
mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating 
reversible, illness; or
     Pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human 
health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, 
or disposed of, or otherwise managed.''
    Those solid wastes that are considered hazardous are listed under 
40 CFR Part 261. Treatment works that accept hazardous wastes by truck, 
rail, or dedicated pipeline (a pipeline that is used to carry hazardous 
waste directly to a treatment works without prior mixing with domestic 
sewage) within the property boundary of the treatment works are 
considered to be hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal 
facilities (TSDFs) and, as such, are subject to regulations under RCRA. 
Under RCRA, mixtures of domestic sewage and other wastes that commingle 
in the treatment works collection system prior to reaching the property 
boundary, including those wastes that otherwise would be considered 
hazardous, are excluded from regulation under the domestic sewage 
exclusion. Hazardous wastes that are delivered directly to the 
treatment works by truck, rail, or dedicated pipeline do not fall 
within the exclusion. Hazardous wastes received by these routes may 
only be accepted by treatment works if the treatment works complies 
with applicable RCRA requirements for TSDFs.
    Applicants completing questions F.9 through F.11 should have 
indicated all points at which RCRA hazardous waste enters the treatment 
works by truck, rail, or dedicated pipe in the map provided in question 
B.2 of the Basic Application Information packet, if applicable.
F.9. RCRA Waste
    Indicate whether the treatment works currently receives or has 
received RCRA waste by truck, rail, or dedicated pipe in the past three 
years.
F.10. Waste Transport
    Indicate the method by which RCRA waste is received at the 
treatment works.
F.11. Waste Description
    Provide the EPA hazardous waste numbers, which are located in 40 
CFR Part 261, Subparts C & D, and the amount (in volume or mass) 
received.
    CERCLA (Superfund) Wastewater and RCRA Remediation/ Corrective 
Action Wastewater. Substances that are regulated under Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) are 
described and listed in 40 CFR Part 302. Questions F.12 through F.15 
apply to the type, origin, and treatment of CERCLA wastes currently (or 
expected to be) discharged to the treatment works.
F.12. CERCLA Waste
    Indicate whether this treatment works currently receives waste from 
a CERCLA (Superfund) site or plans to accept waste from a CERCLA site 
in the next five years. If it does, provide the information requested 
in F.13 through F.15 once for each site.
F.13. Waste Origin
    Provide information about the CERCLA site that is discharging waste 
to the treatment works. Information must include a description of the 
type of facility and an EPA identification number if one exists.
F.14. Pollutants
    Provide a list of the pollutants that are or will be discharged by 
the CERCLA site and the volume and concentration of such pollutants.
F.15. Waste Treatment
    Provide information concerning the treatment used (if any) by the 
CERCLA site to treat the waste prior to discharging it to the treatment 
works. The information should include a description of the treatment 
technology, information on the frequency of the discharge (continuous 
or intermittent) and any data concerning removal efficiency.

Part G. (Combined Sewer Systems)

    A combined sewer system collects a mixture of both sanitary 
wastewater and storm water runoff.
G.1. System Map
    Indicate on a system map all CSO discharge points. For each such 
point, indicate any sensitive use areas and any waters supporting 
threatened or endangered species that are potentially affected by CSOs. 
Sensitive use areas include beaches, drinking water supplies, shellfish 
beds, sensitive aquatic ecosystems, and outstanding natural resource 
waters.

[[Page 42499]]

    Applicants may provide the information requested in question G.1 on 
the map submitted in response to question B.2 in the Basic Application 
Information packet, if applicable.
    All maps should be either on paper or other material appropriate 
for reproduction. If possible, all sheets should be approximately 
letter size with margins suitable for filing and binding. As few sheets 
should be used as necessary to show clearly what is involved. All 
discharge points should be identified by outfall number. Each sheet 
should be labeled with the applicant's name, NPDES permit number, 
location (city, county, or town), date of drawing, and designation of 
the number of sheets of each diagram as ``page ____ of ____.''
G.2. System Diagram
    Diagram the location of combined and separate sanitary major sewer 
trunk lines and indicate any connections where separate sanitary sewers 
feed into the combined sewer system. Clearly indicate the location of 
all in-line and off-line storage structures, flow regulating devices, 
and pump stations.
    The drawing should be either on paper or other material appropriate 
for reproduction. If possible, all sheets should be approximately 
letter size with margins suitable for filing and binding. As few sheets 
should be used as necessary to show clearly what is involved. All 
discharge points should be identified by outfall number. Each sheet 
should be labeled with the applicant's name, NPDES permit number, 
location (city, county, or town), date of drawing, and designation of 
the number of sheets of each diagram as ``page ____ of ____''.
    CSO Outfalls. Fill out a copy of questions G.3 through G.6 once for 
each CSO discharge point. Attach additional pages as necessary.
G.3. Description of Outfall
    a-f. Provide the outfall number and location (including city or 
town if applicable, state, county, and latitude and longitude to the 
nearest second). For subsurface discharges (e.g., discharges to lakes, 
estuaries, and oceans), provide the distance (in feet) of the discharge 
point from the shore and the depth (in feet) of the discharge point 
below the surface of the discharge point. Provide these distances at 
the lowest point of low tide. Indicate whether rainfall, CSO flow 
volume, CSO pollutant concentrations, receiving water quality, or CSO 
frequency were monitored during the past 12 months. In addition, 
provide the number of storm events monitored during the past 12 months.
G.4. CSO Events
    a. Provide the number of CSO events that have occurred in the past 
12 months. Indicate whether this is an actual or approximate number.
    b. Provide the average duration (in hours) per CSO event. Indicate 
whether this is an actual or approximate value.
    c. Provide the average volume (in million gallons) of discharge per 
CSO incidents over the past 12 months. Indicate whether this is an 
actual or approximate number.
    d. Provide the minimum amount of rainfall that caused a CSO 
incident in the past 12 months.
G.5. Description of Receiving Waters
    a. List the name(s) of immediate receiving waters starting at the 
CSO discharge point and moving downstream. For example, ``Control Ditch 
A, thence to Stream B, thence to River C, and thence to River D in the 
River Basin E.''
    b. Provide the name of the watershed/river/stream system in which 
the receiving water (identified in question A.10.a) is located. If 
known, also provide the 14-digit watershed code assigned to this 
watershed by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service.
    c. Provide the name of the State Management/River Basin into which 
this outfall discharges. If known, also provide the 8-digit hydrologic 
cataloging unit code assigned by the U.S. Geological Survey.
G.6. CSO Operations
    Provide a description of any known water quality impacts on the 
receiving water caused by CSOs from this discharge point. Water quality 
impacts include, but are not limited to, permanent or intermittent 
beach closings, permanent or intermittent shell fish bed closings, fish 
kills, fish advisories, other recreational loss, or violation of any 
applicable State water quality standard.

Appendix A--Guidance for Completing the Effluent Testing Information; 
All Treatment Works

    All applicants must provide data for each of the pollutants in 
question A.12 of the Basic Application Information packet. Some 
applicants must also provide data for the pollutants in question B.6 
of the Basic Application Information packet and Part D of the 
Supplemental Application Information packet. All applicants 
submitting effluent testing data must base this data on a minimum of 
three pollutant scans. All samples analyzed must be representative 
of the discharge from the sampled outfall.
    If you have existing data that fulfills the requirements 
described below, you may use that data in lieu of conducting 
additional sampling. If you measure more than the required number of 
daily values for a pollutant and those values are representative of 
your wastestream, you must include them in the data you report. In 
addition, use the blank rows provided on the form to provide any 
existing sampling data that your facility may have for pollutants 
not listed in the appropriate sections. All data provided in the 
application must be based on samples taken within three years prior 
to the time of this permit application.
    Sampling data must be representative of the treatment works' 
discharge and take into consideration seasonal variations. At least 
two of the samples used to complete the effluent testing information 
questions must have been taken no fewer than 4 months and no more 
than 8 months apart. For example, one sample may be taken in April 
and another in October to meet this requirement. Applicants unable 
to meet this time requirement due to periodic, discontinuous, or 
seasonal discharges can obtain alternative guidance on this 
requirement from their permitting authority.
    The collection of samples for the reported analyses should be 
supervised by a person experienced in performing wastewater 
sampling. Specific requirements contained in the applicable 
analytical methods should be followed for sample containers, sample 
preservation, holding times, and collection of duplicate samples. 
Samples should be taken at a time representative of normal 
operation. To the extent feasible, all processes that contribute to 
wastewater should be in operation and the treatment system should be 
operating properly with no system upsets. Samples should be 
collected from the center of the flow channel (where turbulence is 
at a maximum), at a location specified in the current NPDES permit, 
or at any location adequate for the collection of a representative 
sample.
    A minimum of four grab samples must be collected for pH, 
temperature, cyanide, total phenols, residual chlorine, oil and 
grease, fecal coliform, E. coli, and enterococci (applicants need 
only provide data on either fecal coliform or E. coli and 
enterococci). For all other pollutants, 24-hour composite samples 
must be collected. However, a minimum of one grab sample, instead of 
a 24-hour composite, may be taken for effluent from holding ponds or 
other impoundments that have a retention period greater than 24 
hours.
    Grab and composite samples are defined as follows:
     Grab sample: an individual sample of at least 100 
milliliters collected randomly for a period not exceeding 15 
minutes.
     Composite sample: a sample derived from two or more 
discrete samples collected at equal time intervals or collected 
proportional to the flow rate over the compositing period. The 
composite collection method may vary depending on pollutant 
characteristics or discharge flow characteristics.
    The permitting authority may allow or establish appropriate 
site-specific sampling procedures or requirements, including 
sampling locations, the season in which sampling takes place, the 
duration between

[[Page 42500]]

sampling events, and protocols for collecting samples under 40 CFR 
Part 136. Contact EPA or the State permitting authority for detailed 
guidance on sampling techniques and for answers to specific 
questions. The following instructions explain how to complete each 
of the columns in the pollutant tables in the effluent testing 
information sections of Form 2A.
    Maximum Daily Discharge. For composite samples, the daily 
discharge is the average pollutant concentration and total mass 
found in a composite sample taken over a 24-hour period. For grab 
samples, the daily discharge is the arithmetic or flow-weighted 
total mass or average pollutant concentration found in a series of 
at least four grab samples taken during the operating hours of the 
treatment works during a 24-hour period.
    To determine the maximum daily discharge values, compare the 
daily discharge values from each of the sample events. Report the 
highest total mass and highest concentration level from these 
samples.
     ``Concentration'' is the amount of pollutant that is 
present in a sample with respect to the size of the sample. The 
daily discharge concentration is the average concentration of the 
pollutant throughout the 24-hour period.
     ``Mass'' is calculated as the total mass of the 
pollutant discharged over the 24-hour period.
     All data must be reported as both concentration and 
mass (where appropriate). Use the following abbreviations in the 
columns headed ``Units.''

ppm--parts per million
gpd--gallons per day
mgd--million gallons per day
su--standard units
mg/l--milligrams per liter
ppb--parts per billion
ug/l--micrograms per liter
lbs--pounds
ton--tons (English tons)
mg--milligrams
g--grams
kg--kilograms
T--tonnes (metric tons)


    Average Daily Discharge. The average daily discharge is 
determined by calculating the arithmetic mean daily pollutant 
concentration and the arithmetic mean daily total mass of the 
pollutant from each of the sample events within the three years 
prior to this permit application. Report the concentration, mass, 
and units used under the Average Daily Discharge column, along with 
the number of samples on which the average is based. Use the unit 
abbreviations shown above in ``Maximum Daily Discharge.''
    If data requested in Form 2A have been reported on the treatment 
works' Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs), you may compile such 
data and report it under the maximum daily discharge and the average 
daily discharge columns of the form.
    Analytical Method. All information reported must be based on 
data collected through analyses conducted using 40 CFR Part 136 
methods. Applicants should use methods that enable pollutants to be 
detected at levels adequate to meet water quality-based standards. 
Where no approved method can detect a pollutant at the water 
quality-based standards level, the most sensitive approved method 
should be used. If the applicant believes that an alternative method 
should be used (e.g., due to matrix interference), the applicant 
should obtain prior approval from the permitting authority. If an 
alternative method is specified in the existing permit, the 
applicant should use that method unless otherwise directed by the 
permitting authority. Where no approved analytical method exists, an 
applicant may use a suitable method but must provide a description 
of the method. For the purposes of the application, ``suitable 
method'' means a method that is sufficiently sensitive to measure as 
close to the water quality-based standard as possible.
    Indicate the method used for each pollutant in the ``Analytical 
Method'' column of the pollutant tables. If a method has not been 
approved for a pollutant for which you are providing data, you may 
use a suitable method to measure the concentration of the pollutant 
in the discharge, and provide a detailed description of the method 
used or a reference to the published method. The description must 
include the sample holding time, preservation techniques, and the 
quality control measures used. In such cases, indicate the method 
used and attach to the application a narrative description of the 
method used.
    Reporting Levels. The applicant should provide the method 
detection limit (MDL), minimum level (ML), or other designated 
method endpoint reflecting the precision of the analytical method 
used.
    All analytical results must be reported using the actual numeric 
values determined by the analysis. In other words, even where 
analytical results are below the detection or quantitation level of 
the method used, the actual data should be reported, rather than 
reporting ``non-detect'' (``ND'') or ``zero'' (``0''). Because the 
endpoint of the method has also been reported along with the test 
results, the permitting authority will be able to determine if the 
data are in the ``non-detect'' or ``below quantitation'' range.
    For any dilutions made and any problems encountered in the 
analysis, the applicant should attach an explanation and any 
supporting documentation with the application. For GC/MS, report all 
results found to be present by spectral confirmation (i.e., 
quantitation limits or detection limits should not be used as a 
reporting threshold for GC/MS).
    Total Recoverable Metals. Total recoverable metals are measured 
from unfiltered samples using EPA methods specified in 40 CFR Part 
136.3. A digestion procedure is used to solubilize suspended 
materials and destroy possible organic metal complexes. The method 
measures dissolved metals plus those metals recovered from suspended 
particles by the method digestion.

Appendix B--Industrial Categories Subject to National Categorical 
Pretreatment Standards

Industrial Categories with Pretreatment Standards in Effect

Aluminum Forming
Asbestos Manufacturing
Battery Manufacturing
Builder's Paper and Board Mills
Carbon Black Manufacturing
Coil Coating
Copper Forming
Electrical and Electronic Components
Electroplating
Feedlots
Ferroalloy Manufacturing
Fertilizer Manufacturing
Glass Manufacturing
Grain Mills Manufacturing
Ink Formulating
Inorganic Chemicals
Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Leather Tanning and Finishing
Metal Finishing
Metal Molding and Casting
Nonferrous Metals Forming and Metal Powders
Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing
Organic Chemicals, Plastics and Synthetic Fibers
Paint Formulating
Paving and Roofing
Pesticide Manufacturing
Petroleum Refining
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Porcelain Enameling
Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
Rubber Manufacturing
Soap and Detergents Manufacturing
Steam Electric Power Generating
Sugar Processing
Timber Products Manufacturing

Industrial Categories with Effluent Guidelines Currently Under 
Development

Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard
Pesticide Formulating, Packaging, and Repackaging
Centralized Waste Treatment
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Metal Products and Machinery, Phase I
Industrial Laundries
Transportation Equipment Cleaning
Landfills and Incinerators
Metal Products and Machinery, Phase II

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

[[Page 42501]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.021



[[Page 42502]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.022



[[Page 42503]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.023



[[Page 42504]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.024



[[Page 42505]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.025



[[Page 42506]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.026



[[Page 42507]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.027



[[Page 42508]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.028



[[Page 42509]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.029



[[Page 42510]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.030



[[Page 42511]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.031



[[Page 42512]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.032



[[Page 42513]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.033



[[Page 42514]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.034



[[Page 42515]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.035



[[Page 42516]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.036



[[Page 42517]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.037



[[Page 42518]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.038



[[Page 42519]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.039



[[Page 42520]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.040



[[Page 42521]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.041



[[Page 42522]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.042



[[Page 42523]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.043



BILLING CODE 6560-50-C

[[Page 42524]]

Instructions for Completing Form 2S--Application for a Sewage 
Sludge Permit

    Paperwork Reduction Act Notice: The annual public reporting and 
recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to 
average 9.4 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or 
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, 
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This 
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, 
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of 
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and 
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; 
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable 
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to 
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review 
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the 
information. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number.
    Send comments regarding the Agency's need for this information, the 
accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods 
for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of 
automated collection techniques to the Director, OP Regulatory 
Information Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2137), 401 
M St., S.W., Washington, DC 20460. Include the OMB control number in 
any correspondence. Do not send the completed Form 2S to this address.

Background Information

    You can obtain a permit for your facility by filling out and 
sending in the appropriate form(s) to your permitting authority. If the 
State in which your facility is located operates its own authorized 
sewage sludge program, then the State is your permitting authority and 
you should ask your State for permit application forms. On the other 
hand, if EPA operates the sewage sludge program in your State, then EPA 
is the permitting authority, and you must fill out and send in Form 2S.
    Be sure to read the Preliminary Information section of Form 2S 
before you start filling out the form. It will help you determine 
whether you must fill out Part 1 or Part 2.

Commonly Asked Questions

What If I Need More Space for My Answer?

    If you need more room for your answer than is provided on the form, 
attach a separate sheet called ``Additional Information.'' At the top 
of the separate sheet, put the name of your treatment works and your 
facility's NPDES permit number (if you have one). Also, next to your 
answer, put the question number from Form 2S. Provide this information 
on any drawings or other papers that you attach to your application as 
well.

Will the Public Be Able To See the Information I Submit?

    Any information you submit on Form 2S will be available to the 
public. If you send in more information than is requested on Form 2S 
that is considered company-privileged information, you may ask EPA to 
keep that extra information confidential. If you want any of the extra 
information to be kept confidential, tell EPA this when you submit your 
application. Otherwise, EPA may make the information public without 
letting you know in advance. For more information on claims of 
confidentiality, see EPA's business confidentiality regulations at 
Title 40, Part 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

How Do I Complete the Forms?

    Answer every question on Form 2S that applies to your facility. If 
your answer to a question requires more room than there is on the form, 
attach additional sheets (see above). If a particular question does not 
apply, write ``N/A'' (meaning ``not applicable'') as your answer to 
that question. If you need advice on how to fill out these forms, write 
or contact your EPA Regional Office or your State office.

Who Must Submit Application Information?

    This application form collects information from all treatment works 
treating domestic sewage (TWTDS) whose sewage sludge use or disposal 
method is regulated by 40 CFR Part 503. This includes the following:
     Any person who generates sewage sludge that is ultimately 
regulated by Part 503 (i.e., it is applied to the land, placed on a 
surface disposal site, fired in a sewage sludge incinerator, or placed 
in a municipal solid waste landfill unit);
     Any person who derives material from, or otherwise changes 
the quality of, sewage sludge (e.g., an intermediate treatment facility 
such as a composting facility, or a facility that processes sewage 
sludge for sale or give away in a bag or other container for 
application to the land), if that sewage sludge is used or disposed in 
a manner subject to Part 503;
     Any person who owns or operates a sewage sludge surface 
disposal site; and
     Any person who fires sewage sludge in a sewage sludge 
incinerator.
    In addition, the permitting authority can require other persons to 
submit permit application information.

Which Parts of the Form Apply?

    Form 2S is presented in a modular format, enabling information 
collection to be tailored to your facility's sewage sludge generation, 
treatment, use, or disposal practices. The form tells you which parts 
must be filled out for each type of applicant.
    Part 1 requests a limited amount of information from ``sludge-
only'' facilities (facilities without a currently effective NPDES 
permit) that are not directed by the permitting authority to submit a 
full permit application at this time. This limited screening 
information must be submitted as expeditiously as possible, but no 
later than 180 days after publication of an applicable use or disposal 
standard or 180 days before commencing operation for a new ``sludge-
only facility''. It is intended to allow the permitting authority to 
identify these facilities, track sewage sludge use and disposal, and 
establish priorities for permitting.
    Part 2 of Form 2S is for facilities that are submitting a full 
permit application at this time. Review items 1-5 of the Part 2 
Application Overview on plage 6 of Form 2S to determine which sections 
of Part 2 cover your facility's sewage sludge use or disposal 
practices. The table below summarizes which sections cover which 
activities.

                                        Guidelines for Completing Part 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Activity(ies) performed                 A             B             C             D             E
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generates sewage sludge or derives                  (B.1-
 material from sewage sludge--                                   B.3)

[[Page 42525]]


    that meets ceiling concentrations in               
     Table 1 of 40 CFR 503.13, pollutant                        (B.4)
     concentrations in Table 3 of Sec.
     503.13, Class A pathogen requirements
     in Sec.  503.32, and one of the eight
     vector attraction reduction options
     in Sec.  503.33(b)(1)-(8)............
    that is sold or given away in bag or               
     other container for application to                         (B.5)
     the land.............................
    that is shipped off site for treatment             
     or blending..........................                      (B.6)
    that is applied to the land in bulk                       
     form.................................                      (B.7)
    that is placed on a surface disposal               
     site.................................                      (B.8)
    that is fired in a sewage sludge                   
     incinerator..........................                      (B.9)
    that is sent to a municipal solid                  
     waste landfill.......................                     (B.10)
Applies bulk sewage sludge to land........                           
Owns or operates a surface disposal site..                                         
Fires sewage sludge in a sewage sludge                                                           
 incinerator..............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional Information and Instructions

    The following section provides clarification and additional 
information for many of the questions on Form 2S. All applicants must 
also be in compliance with the Standards for the Use or Disposal of 
Sewage Sludge, published at 40 CFR Part 503 (58 FR 9248). Most of the 
terms used in Form 2S are defined in Secs. 503.9, 503.11, 503.21, and 
503.41. Additional terms are defined in the NPDES regulations at 40 CFR 
122.2.

General Information for All Parts of Form 2S

     At the top of each page of Form 2S, put your facilities 
NPDES permit number (if you have one) in the appropriate space.
     Always report official names rather than colloquial names.
     When a facility address or site location is requested (as 
opposed to a mailing address) provide the physical location of the 
facility. If the facility or site lacks a street address or route 
number, provide the most accurate alternative geographic information 
(e.g., township and range, section or quarter section number, or nearby 
highway intersection).
     Options for meeting Class A pathogen reduction are listed 
at 40 CFR Part 503.32(a). Options for meeting Class B pathogen 
reduction are listed at Sec. 503.32(b).
     Vector Attraction Reduction Options 1-8 are typically met 
at the point where sewage sludge is generated or where a material is 
derived from sewage sludge, and Options 9-11 are typically met at the 
point of use or disposal.
     If a map is used to obtain latitude and longitude, provide 
map datum (e.g., NAD 27, NAD 83) and map scale (e.g., 1:24000, 
1:100000).
     When asked for population enter the best estimate of the 
actual population served at the time of application for all areas 
served by the treatment works (municipalities and unincorporated 
service areas). If another treatment works discharges into this 
treatment works, provide on a separate attachment the name of the other 
treatment works and the actual population it serves (it is not 
necessary to list the communities served by the other treatment works).
     When asked to submit a topographic map, make sure each map 
includes the map scale, a meridian arrow showing north, and latitude 
and longitude at the nearest whole second. Use a 7\1/2\-minute series 
map published by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), which may be 
obtained through the USGS Earth Science Information Center (ESIC) 
listed below. If a 7\1/2\-minute series map has not been published for 
your facility site, then you may use a 15-minute series map from the 
U.S. Geological Survey. If neither a 7\1/2\-minute nor 15-minute series 
map has been published for your facility site, use a plat map or other 
appropriate map, including all the requested information. If you have 
previously prepared a map that includes the required items, that map 
may be submitted to fulfill this requirement if it is still accurate.
     Maps may be purchased at local dealers (listed in your 
local yellow pages) or purchased over the counter at the following USGS 
Earth Science Information Centers (ESIC):

Anchorage--ESIC, 4230 University Dr., Rm. 101, Anchorage, AK 99508-
4664, (907) 786-7011.
Lakewood--ESIC, Box 25046, Bldg. 25, Rm. 1813, Denver Federal 
Center, MS 504, Denver, CO 80225-0046, (303) 236-5829.
Lakewood Open Files--ESIC, Box 25286, Bldg. 810, Denver Federal 
Center, Denver, CO.
Menlo Park--ESIC, Bldg. 3, Rm. 3128, MS 532, 345 Middlefield Rd., 
Menlo Park, CA 94025-3591, (415) 329-4309.
Reston--ESIC, 507 National Center, Reston, VA 22092, (703) 648-6045.
Rolla--ESIC, 1400 Independence Rd., MS 231, Rolla, MO 65401-2602, 
(314) 341-0851.
Salt Lake City--ESIC, 2222 West 2300 South, Salt Lake City, UT 
84119, (801) 975-3742.
Sioux Falls--ESIC, EROS Data Center, Sioux Falls, SD 57198-0001, 
(605) 594-6151.
Spokane--ESIC, U.S. Post Office Bldg., Rm. 135, 904 W. Riverside 
Ave., Spokane, WA 99201-1088, (509) 3532524.
Stennis Space Center--ESIC, Bldg. 3101, Stennis Space Center, MS 
39529, (601) 688-3541.
Washington, D.C.--ESIC, U.S. Dept. of Interior, 1849 C St., NW, Rm. 
2650, Washington, D.C. 20240, (202) 208-4047.

    When submitting a map as few sheets as necessary should be used to 
clearly show what is involved. Each sheet should be labeled with your 
facility's name, permit number, location (city, county, or town), date 
of drawing, and designation of the number of sheets of each diagram as 
``page ____ of ____.''
     The certification requirements are as follows:
    An application submitted by a municipality, State, Federal, or 
other public agency must be signed by either a principal executive 
officer or ranking elected official. A principal executive officer of a 
Federal agency includes: (1) The chief executive officer of the agency, 
or (2) a senior executive officer having responsibility for the overall 
operations of a principal geographic unit of the agency (e.g., Regional 
Administrators of EPA).
    An application submitted by a corporation must be signed by a 
responsible corporate officer. A responsible corporate officer means: 
(1) A president, secretary, treasurer, or vice president in charge of a 
principal business function, or any other person who performs similar 
policy- or decision-making functions; or (2) the

[[Page 42526]]

manager of manufacturing, production, or operating facilities employing 
more than 250 persons or having gross annual sales or expenditures 
exceeding $25 million (in second quarter 1980 dollars), if authority to 
sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager in 
accordance with corporate procedures.
    An application submitted by a partnership or sole proprietorship 
must be signed by a general partner or the proprietor, respectively.

Information on Specific Sections of Form 2S

Section B (Generation of Sewage Sludge or Preparation of a Material 
Derived From Sewage Sludge)

    Complete this section if you are a ``person who prepares sewage 
sludge.'' This section pertains to any POTW or other TWTDS that 
generates sewage sludge, as well as to any facility that derives a 
material from sewage sludge (e.g., it composts sewage sludge or blends 
sewage sludge with another material). Simply distributing sewage sludge 
or placing it in a bag or other container for sale or give-away for 
application to the land is not considered ``deriving a material'' from 
sewage sludge (because it does not change sludge quality), and thus a 
facility that only distributes or bags a sewage sludge is not required 
to provide the information in this section.
B.4. Preparation of Sewage Sludge Meeting Ceiling and Pollutant 
Concentrations, Class A Pathogen Requirements, and One of Vector 
Attraction Options 1-8
    Sewage sludge meeting all of these criteria is often referred to as 
``exceptional quality (EQ)''. It is exempt from the general 
requirements of Sec. 503.12 and the management practices of 
Sec. 503.14, and thus fewer permitting and permit application 
requirements typically pertain to facilities generating such sludge. 
For this reason, if you are eligible to complete Section B.4, you may 
skip Sections B.5-B.7 unless specifically required to complete any of 
them by the permitting authority.
B.5. Sale or Give-Away in a Bag or Other Container for Application to 
the Land
    When sewage sludge is placed in a bag or other container for sale 
or give-away for application to the land, either a label must be 
affixed to the bag or other container, or an information sheet must be 
provided to the person receiving the sewage sludge. The information 
that must be on the label or information sheet is listed at 40 CFR Part 
503.14(e).
B.7. Land Application of Bulk Sewage Sludge
    If you complete this section (which requests summary information 
for all bulk sewage sludge that is applied to the land), also complete 
Section C for each land application site. Current regulations require 
you to submit a land application plan at the time of permit application 
if you intend to apply sewage sludge that does not meet the EQ 
requirements to land application sites that have not been identified at 
the time of permit application. The minimum requirements for this plan 
are listed in Sec. 122.21(q)(9)(v). The permit writer will work with 
you to develop additional details of the land application plan on a 
case-by-case basis. Such details could include site selection criteria 
(site slope, run-on and run-off control, etc.) and site management 
guidelines (sludge application rates, access controls, etc.). A land 
application plan provides for public notice when the land application 
plan is developed as part of the permit, and it discusses how the 
public will be notified about new sites. If any land application sites 
are located in States other than the State where you generate the bulk 
sewage sludge or derive the material from sewage sludge, the notice to 
the permitting authority in the States where the land application sites 
are located must contain the requirements listed at Sec. 503.12(i).
B.8. Surface Disposal
    If you own or operate a surface disposal site, also complete 
Section D.
B.9. Incineration
    If you own or operate a sewage sludge incinerator, also complete 
Section E.
B.10. Disposal on a Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
    Sewage sludge placed on a MSWLF must meet requirements in Part 258 
concerning the quality of materials placed on a MSWLF unit. Part 258 
specifies minimum Federal criteria for MSWLFs, including landfills that 
accept sewage sludge along with household waste. In contrast to Part 
503, Part 258 controls sewage sludge placed on MSWLFs through a 
facility design and management practice approach. In Part 503, EPA has 
adopted the Part 258 criteria as the appropriate standard for sewage 
sludge disposed of with municipal waste. EPA concluded that if sewage 
sludge is disposed of in a MSWLF complying with Part 258 criteria, 
public health and the environment are protected. Note that the POTW is 
legally responsible for knowing whether a MSWLF is in compliance with 
Part 258 and may be liable if it sends its sludge to an MSWLF that is 
not in compliance with Part 258.

Section C (Land Application of Bulk Sewage Sludge)

    Complete this section if you completed Section B.7 (Land 
Application of Bulk Sewage Sludge). Unless the permitting authority 
specifically requires you to complete this section, you may skip this 
section for sewage sludge that is covered in any of the following 
sections of this application:
     Section B.4. Such sewage sludges are exempt from the 
general requirements and management practices of Part 503 when they are 
land applied (unless the permitting authority requires otherwise), and 
thus the site information in Section C is not required for permitting.
     Section B.5 Section C does not cover the sale or give-away 
of sewage sludge in a bag or other container for application to the 
land because EPA typically will not control the users of such sewage 
sludge (typically, home gardeners or other small-scale users), or the 
land on which the sludge is applied, through the generator's permit.
     Section B.6 Section C does not apply to a generator that 
sends sewage sludge to another facility for treatment or for blending, 
because the Part 503 requirements addressed by Section C will largely 
be the responsibility of the receiving facility.
    Provide the information in this section for each land application 
site that has been identified at the time of permit application. In 
cases where the sewage sludge is applied to numerous sites with similar 
characteristics, you may combine the information for several sites 
under a single response (the name and address of each site must still 
be provided, however).
C.5. Crop or Other Vegetation Grown on Site
    a. If the crop or vegetation to be grown on the site is not yet 
known, or is likely to change in an unforeseeable manner during the 
life of the permit, you may so indicate instead of providing the type 
of crop or other vegetation.
    b. Information on the nitrogen content of vegetation grown on the 
site may be obtained from local agricultural extension services, a 
local Farm Advisor's Office, or published sources.
C.6. Vector Attraction Reduction
    Options 1-8 were covered in Section B.3, which requests information 
on sewage sludge treatment at the facility generating the sewage 
sludge. If you met any of options 1-8 (e.g., processes to

[[Page 42527]]

reduce volatile solids, reduce specific oxygen uptake rate, raise pH, 
raise percent solids), you should have identified that option in 
Question B.3.c and described how the option is met in Question B.3.d.
    By contrast, vector attraction reduction options 9 and 10 are 
typically met at the land application site. Options 9 and 10 are not 
available for sewage sludge applied to a lawn or home garden.
C.7. Cumulative Loadings and Remaining Allotments
    Complete Section C.7. only for sewage sludge that is applied to the 
site subject to cumulative pollutant loading rates (CPLRs). Sewage 
sludge applied to the site on or before July 20, 1993, is not subject 
to this section. You may not apply bulk sewage sludge subject to CPLRs 
to the site until you have contacted the permitting authority in that 
State.

Section D (Surface Disposal)

    Complete this section if you own or operate a surface disposal site 
and are required to submit a full permit application (i.e., Part 2 of 
Form 2S) at this time. A sewage sludge surface disposal site is, by 
definition, a treatment works treating domestic sewage, and the owner/
operator of the site is required to apply for a permit. You are 
required to submit Part 2 of this form (including Section D) if:
     The surface disposal site is already covered by an NPDES 
permit (e.g., a POTW's NPDES permit); or
     You have been required by the permitting authority to 
submit a full permit application at this time.
    If none of these criteria apply, you should submit Part 1 instead 
of Part 2 (and may therefore skip Section D). Part 1 requests a limited 
amount of information from so-called ``sludge-only'' facilities 
(facilities without a currently-effective NPDES permit) that are not 
requesting site-specific permit limits and are not otherwise required 
to submit a full permit application at this time. Part 1 is intended to 
allow the permitting authority to identify these facilities, track 
sewage sludge use and disposal, and establish priorities for 
permitting.
D.1. Information on Active Sewage Sludge Units
    Most requirements for surface disposal of sewage sludge under Part 
503 pertain to individual active sewage sludge units at a surface 
disposal site. Permit conditions for your facility may be developed on 
a unit-by-unit basis, or may be developed for the entire surface 
disposal site if all units are sufficiently similar.
D.4. Ground-Water Monitoring
    Placement of sewage sludge on an active sewage sludge unit must not 
contaminate an aquifer. Compliance must be demonstrated through either: 
(1) The results of a ground-water monitoring program developed by a 
qualified ground-water scientist, or (2) certification by a qualified 
ground-water scientist that contamination has not occurred. This 
section solicits existing ground-water monitoring data and other 
documentation to indicate the potential for contamination of an aquifer 
at the active sewage sludge unit, and the capability of the owner/
operator of the surface disposal site to demonstrate that contamination 
has not occurred.
D.5. Site-Specific Limits
    After August 18, 1993, you are allowed to seek site-specific 
pollutant limits only for good cause, and must do so within 180 days of 
becoming aware that good cause exists. If you request site-specific 
pollutant limits with this permit application, you are required to 
submit information supporting the request, including a demonstration 
that existing values for site parameters specified by the permitting 
authority differ from the values for those parameters used to develop 
the pollutant limits in Table 1 of Sec. 503.23. You must also submit 
follow-up information at the request of the permitting authority. If 
the permitting authority determines that site-specific pollutant limits 
are appropriate, he or she may specify site-specific limits in the 
permit as long as the existing concentrations of the pollutants in the 
sewage sludge are not exceeded.

Section E (Incineration)

    Complete this section if you own or operate a sewage sludge 
incinerator. A sewage sludge incinerator is, by definition, a treatment 
works treating domestic sewage, and the owner/operator of a sewage 
sludge incinerator is required to submit a full permit application 
(i.e., Part 2 of Form 2S).
E.3. Beryllium NESHAP
    The firing of sewage sludge in a sewage sludge incinerator must not 
violate the National Emission Standard (NESHAP) for beryllium as 
established in Subpart C of 40 CFR Part 61. The beryllium NESHAP only 
applies, however, to sewage sludge incinerators firing ``beryllium-
containing waste.'' The beryllium NESHAP is 10 grams of beryllium in 
the exit gas over a 24-hour period, unless the incinerator owner/
operator has been approved to meet a 30-day average ambient 
concentration limit on beryllium in the vicinity of the sewage sludge 
incinerator of 0.01 g/m3. Complete this section to demonstrate 
compliance with the beryllium NESHAP.
E.4. Mercury NESHAP
    The firing of sewage sludge in a sewage sludge incinerator must not 
violate the NESHAP for mercury as established in Subpart E of 40 CFR 
Part 61. Complete this section to demonstrate compliance with the 
mercury NESHAP. Information on stack testing and sewage sludge sampling 
can be found at 40 CFR Parts 61.53 and 61.54.

[FR Doc. 99-18866 Filed 8-3-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P