99-18866. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Application Requirements for Publicly Owned Treatment Works and Other Treatment Works Treating Domestic Sewage  

  • [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="">5 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
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
08/04/1999
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
99-18866
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.
Pages:
42434-42527 (94 pages)
Docket Numbers:
FRL-6401-2
RINs:
2040-AB39: NPDES Wastewater Permit Application Forms and Regulatory Revisions for Municipal Discharges and Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/2040-AB39/npdes-wastewater-permit-application-forms-and-regulatory-revisions-for-municipal-discharges-and-sewa
PDF File:
99-18866.pdf
CFR: (23)
40 CFR 123.25(a)(4)
40 CFR 501.15(a)(4)
40 CFR 501.15(a)(2)(ix)
40 CFR 501.15(a)(2)(viii)
40 CFR 503.13(b)(2)
More ...