EPA-430/9-76-015
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS PROGRAM
     REQUIREMENTS
      GUIDANCE  FOR  PREPARING
             A  FACILITY  PLAN
                 REVISED - MAY 1975
         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             OFFICE OF WATER PROGRAM OPERATIONS
              MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION DIVISION
                 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                              MCD-46

-------
     GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING

         A FACILITY PLAN
  Municipal Construction Division
Office of Water Program Operations
  Environmental Protection Agency
      Washington, D. C.  20460

       Revised - May 1975

-------
                              FOREWORD
     This guidance is to assist with preparing a preliminary facility
plan for construction of municipal sewage treatment works.   The facility
plan is the first step in a three step process required to  complete
treatment works with Federal grants from the Environmental  Protection
Agency.  The second step is preparation of detailed design  plans and
specifications.  The third and final step is construction of the treat-
ment works.  EPA will generally provide 75 percent of the eligible costs
of the three steps in the grants program.

     This grants program is now the largest public works program in
the United States.  The purpose of the facility plan is to  assure that
the treatment works built under this program are environmentally
sound and cost-effective.

     The complexity of the process of preparing facility plans will
vary with local circumstances, the size and nature of needed facilities
and the extent of previous planning efforts.  EPA is preparing model
facility plans, one for a community of about 5,000, and one for a very
small community of only a few hundred persons.  These model plans,
which are scheduled to be available in mid-1975, will give  an indication
of the amount of detail appropriate for communities of these sizes.

     Effective July 1, 1975, this guidance supersedes "Guidance for Facilities
Planning" issued in January 1974.  It presents a more streamlined and up-to-
date description of the basic requirements and ways of meeting them.  We
welcome your suggestions for changes, additions or deletions which
would help achieve the Agency's objective of timely preparation of
facility plans of quality.
                                James L. Agee, Assistant Administrator
                                for Water and Hazardous Materials

-------
                 GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING A FACILITY PLAN


FOREWORD

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 .    INTRODUCTION

      1.1   Purpose
      1.2   Relationship of Facility Plans to Other Water Planning and
            Management Programs

            1.2.1  State Continuing Planning Process and Basin Plans
            1.2.2  Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plans
            1.2.3  Municipal Permits
            1.2.4  State Responsibilities

2.    FACILITY PLANNING AREA

3.    PLAN OF STUDY (POS)

4.    FACILITY PLAN

      4.1   Step 1:  Effluent Limitations
      4.2   Step 2:  Assess Current Situation

            4.2.1  Introduction
            4.2.2  Existing Conditions in the Planning Area Without the
                   Project
            4.2.3  Existing Wastewater Flows and Treatment Systems
            4.2.4  Infiltration and Inflow
            4.2.5  Performance of Existing System

      4.3   Step 3:  Assess Future Situation

            4.3.1  Planning Period
            4.3.2  Land Use
            4.3.3  Demographic and Economic Projections
            4.3.4  Forecasts of Flow and Waste Loads
            4.3.5  Future Environment   of the Planning Area Without the Project

      4.4   Step 4:  Develop and Evaluate Alternatives

            4.4.1  Baseline:  Optimum Operation of Existing Facilities
            4.4.2  Regional Solutions
            4.4.3  Alternative Waste Treatment Systems
            4.4.4  Environmental Impacts

                   4.4.4.1  General
                   4.4.4.2  Primary Impacts
                   4.4.4.3  Secondary Impacts

-------
            4.4.5  Additional Guidance on Evaluation of Alternatives

                   4.4.5.1    Institutional arrangements
                   4.4.5.2    Industrial Services
                   4.4.5.3    Flow and waste reduction
                   4.4.5.4    Sewers
                   4.4.5.5    Sludge disposal
                   4.4.5.6    Location of facilities
                   4.4.5.7    Revision of wasteload allocation
                   4.4.5.8    Phased construction
                   4.4.5.9    Flexibility
                   4.4.5.10   Reliability

      4.5   Step 5:  Select Plan

            4.5.1  Selection  Process
            4.5.2  Environmental Impacts of the Selected Plan

      4.6   Step 6:  Preliminary Design of Treatment Works
      4.7   Step 7:  Arrangements for Implementation

5.    PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

      5.1   Introduction
      5.2   Relationships between Planner and Public
      5.3   Requirement for Public Hearing
      5.4   Summary of Public Participation

6 .    EVALUATION OF COSTS

      6.1   Introduction
      6.2   Sunk Costs
      6.3   Present Worth and Equivalent Annual Costs
      6.4   Example 1:  Constant 0 & M Costs
      6.5   Example 2:  Varying 0 & M Costs
      6.6   Example 3:  Varying 0 & M Costs, Phased Construction and
            Salvage Value

7.    ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION

      7.1   Purpose
      7.2   Facility Planning and the Environmental Assessment
      7.3   Environmental Impact Statements
      7.4   Environmental Considerations

8.    PLAN SELECTION

      8.1   Introduction
      8.2   Comparison and Ranking of Proposals

9.    FORMAT FOR SUBMISSION OF PLAN

      9.1   Outline of Plan
      9.2   Appendices

-------
 10.   REVIEW, CERTIFICATION AND APPROVAL OF PLANS

      10.1  Purpose
      10.2  Three Levels of Review
      10.3  Compliance with OMB Circular A-95
      10.4  Submission to State
      10.5  Submission to EPA
      10.6  Revisions to Plans
      10.7  EPA Review
      10.8  EPA Approval

 APPENDIX A - REFERENCES

      A.I  FEDERAL REGULATIONS
      A.2  EPA DOCUMENTS
      A.3  CIRCULARS AND MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATIONS

APPENDIX B

      Construction Grant Regulation

 APPENDIX C

      Addresses of Regional Offices

-------
1.    INTRODUCTION

     1.1   Purpose

          This guidance suggests procedures  for preparing a  facility plan
     for  publicly-owned treatment works.   The plan  is  required  before a
     municipality may obtain a Federal  grant under  the Federal  Water Pollution
     Control  Amendments of 1972 to prepare detailed design plans  and specifi-
     cations, and to construct the treatment works  itself.

          The approach used here is to  describe the requirements  in  the
     applicable laws and regulations and  suggest a  planning  process  by which
     they can be met.  The principal laws are the Federal  Water Pollution
     Control  Amendments of 1972 (FWPCA) and  the National  Environmental Policy
     Act  (NEPA).  Federal  documents which provide guidance and  assistance  with
     preparing a facility plan are listed in Appendix  A.   These documents  are
     referenced in the portion of this  guidance to  which  they apply.  They may
     be obtained from the Regional Offices listed in Appendix C.   The principal
     regulation dealing with the facility planning  process is enclosed with
     this guidance as Appendix B, "Water  Pollution  Control,  Construction Grants
     for  Waste Treatment Works" (see particularly Section 35.917).

          The level  of detail required  in a  facility plan will  vary  according to
     the  nature, scale and location of  the undertaking.   Local  municipalities
     and  consultants should discuss the extent of planning required  by their
     community with officials of the State and the  Federal Environmental Pro-
     tection  Agency.  Preapplication conferences of Federal, State and local
     officials to discuss how to proceed  will be held  to  the extent  resources
     permit.

     1.2   Relationship of Facility Plans  to  Other Water Planning  and Management
          Programs

          1.2.1  State Continuing Planning Process  and Basin Plans

               Facility plans will conform to applicable  approved basin  plans
          prepared under Section 303 of FWPCA (references h, i, and  u).

               Under the State continuing planning  process,  "segments" of  the
          nation's waterways have been  classified initially as  "water quality
          limited" or "effluent limited".  "Water quality limited" segments
          are those which cannot be expected to meet established  water quality
          standards even if all point sources achieve  the effluent limitations
          required by Section 301 of FWPCA.   "Effluent limited" segments are
          those where water quality standards can be achieved after  all  point
          sources meet the effluent limitations required  by Section  301.

               All publicly-owned treatment  works which are constructed with
          Federal grant funds authorized  after June 30,  1974, must achieve "best
          practicable waste treatment technology",  as  defined in  reference o.
          Publicly-owned treatment works  discharging to "effluent limited"

-------
segments must, as a minimum, provide secondary treatment as defined
in reference j.  Such works shall  provide additional  treatment or
include the use of other waste management techniques, when factors
such as water quality standards for the affected waterway or avail-
ability of cost-effective technology warrant standards more stringent
than secondary treatment.  The precise discharge limitation for
facilities on "water quality limited" segments will  be determined in
the basin planning process or, where this is not complete, in con-
junction with the permit program.

1.2.2  Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plans

     Areawide plans, authorized under section 208  of FWPCA, are to
set forth a comprehensive management program for collection and
treatment of wastes, and for controlling pollution from all point
and non-point sources.  Controls for abating these sources are to
utilize a mix of land-use measures, management and regulatory pro-
grams, as well as structural methods.  The portion of the areawide
plan devoted to construction of publicly-owned treatment works in
the future should select and describe planning and service areas and
treatment systems, and provide supporting analysis for the selection.

     Areawide planning requirements, therefore, overlap with facility
planning requirements.  The Agency's policy on relationships between
the two programs during the period before final completion and
approval of an areawide plan is as follows:

     a.   New facility plans will  be started and carried out as
     provided in the State priority list.

     b.   The scope and funding of facility planning  will  be
     sufficient to collect all data and conduct all  analyses
     necessary for expeditious completion of the facility plan.

     c.   Facility and areawide planning will coordinate closely
     and share their data and analytical work, but completion of
     facility plans should not be  dependent on the areawide planning
     process.

     d.   After a facility plan is completed, the project should
     continue through the remaining steps of the grants process after
     opportunity for timely review and comment by the 208 plannfng Agency.

     e.   After interim outputs have been developed and approved by
     the State and EPA for the areawide planning area, new facility
     plans must be consistent with the approved interim 208 outputs.
     The scope and funding of new  facility planning should not extend
     to preparing a justification  for the interim 208 outputs.  This
     justification already will be available from the areawide
     planning process.

-------
     The following will  be the policy after the areawide plan has
been completed and approved, and the agency or agencies identified
to construct, operate and maintain the municipal  treatment facilities
required by the plan:

     a.   All facility plans underway at the time of approval will  be
     completed by the agency which received the grant for the facility
     planning.  The planning effort will continue as before approval
     unless the analysis in the approved 208 plan clearly justifies a
     change in required  treatment levels or alternative approach on
     the basis of lower  costs or major changes in environmental  impacts.

     b.   The scope and  funding of new facility plans started after
     approval of the areawide plan will  be sufficient to supplement
     the data and analysis in the areawide plan to the extent necessary
     to provide a complete facility plan as required by Section  35.917
     of the construction grants regulation (Appendix B).

     c.   New grants for facility plans  will  be made to the management
     agencies designated in the approved areawide plans.  New facility
     planning will be consistent with the approved areawide plan.

1.2.3  Municipal Permits

     Facility plans must, as a minimum,  conform with all applicable
permit requirements, and include a copy  of the permit.   Where a
permit has not been issued, the facility plan should describe the
applicable Federal and State effluent limitations.  These limitations,
if not known, should be  obtained from State officials and the
Environmental Protection Agency.

1.2.4  State Responsibilities

     States play a central role in management of facility planning.
The States' responsibilities are as follows:

     a.   To prepare a State priority list for construction grants
     based on a determination of where and when treatment works  will
     be required (see reference b).

     b.   To determine,  through the basin planning process, the
     effluent limitations which must be  met by publicly-owned treat-
     ment works to comply with applicable requirements of Federal,
     State and local law.

     c.   To delineate,  on a preliminary basis, the boundaries of the
     facility planning area.  These boundaries may be adjusted as a
     result of information obtained during the facility planning
     process.

     d.   To review the  plan of study to ensure that (1) the geographic
     planning area is adequate, (2) the  nature and scope of the  planning
     tasks are properly  defined and cover only essential works,  and
     (3) planning costs  are reasonable.

-------
               e.   To review facility plans and certify that (i) tne plans
               conform with the requirements of the construction grants regula-
               tion (Appendix B); (2) the plan conforms with any existing final
               basin plans approved under section 303(e) of the Act; (3) any
               concerned areawide planning agency has been afforded the
               opportunity to comment on the plan; and (4) the plan conforms
               with any areawide treatment management plan completed and.
               approved in accordance with section 208 of FWPCA.

2.   FACILITY PLANNING AREA

     The facility planning area for new wastewater treatment systems should be
large enough to analyze the cost-effective alternative methods of waste trans-
port, treatment, handling and disposal of sludge and disposal of treated effluent.
It also should be large enough to analyze the environmental effects of alterna-
tives, as required by the regulation, "Preparation of Environmental Impact
Statements"  (reference a).  This regulation requires an environmental assessment
as an integral part of a facility plan.

     Note, however, that facility planning shall be conducted only to the ex-
tent that the Regional Administrator determines to be necessary to meet these
requirements and to permit reasonable evaluation of grant applications and sub-
sequent preparation of design construction drawings and specifications (see
Section 35.917-4 of the Construction Grants Regulation in Appendix B).

     An applicant for a facility planning grant need not hold current legal
authority to implement all aspects of a facility plan as it may eventually
develop.  He must, however, have both the legal ability and the practical ex-
pection of acquiring such authority at the proper point in the grants process.
The proper time, in many cases, will be after the final waste management
alternative  has been chosen near the conclusion of the facility plan.

3.   PLAN OF STUDY (POS)

     The Plan of Study (POS) must be prepared and approved by the State and EPA
before a facility plan is begun, and before a Federal grant may be approved for
a facility plan  (see Section 35.920-3 in Appendix B).  The POS should briefly
(generally in ten pages or less) describe the scope, schedule and costs of the
proposed facility plan.  The POS should:

     a. Provide a map or maps showing the planning area; the SMSA; the boundaries
     of political jurisdictions; boundaries of streams, lakes, water impoundments
     and water basins; and the service areas of existing waste treatment systems.

     b. List the responsible planning organizations and agreements or resolutions
     for conducting joint planning,  if any.

     c. Provide the 1970 population  in the planning area.

     d. Describe briefly why a grant for facility construction  is necessary,
     including water quality problems and applicable effluent limitations  if
     this information  is readily available.

     e. Summarize briefly the unit  processes in the existing system, if any,
     and communities and major industries served.

     f. Describe data, plans and other  information available to assist with
     facility planning.

-------
     g.   Say if the State is expected to certify that "excessive infiltration/
     inflow" does not exist (see part 4.2.4 below);  or that additional  data
     collection may be necessary.   If the applicant  believes that "excessive
     infiltration/inflow" exists and a detailed sewer evaluation will  be
     necessary, the Plan of Study should so state.

     h.   Provide a schedule for completion of the specific tasks necessary
     to prepare the facility plan.

     i.   Estimate the cost for each task and the total  costs for the facility
     plan.

4.   FACILITY PLAN

     A facility plan can be prepared in seven major  steps.   Each step is dis-
cussed in a separate section below, along with recommendations on how it can be
completed.  The applicability of these recommendations will vary with local
circumstances.

     Environmental considerations should be addressed during facility planning
to meet the requirement for an environmental assessment of  each project (see
reference a).  For example, information on existing  and future environmental
conditions should be gathered and assessed along with the information on other
aspects of the existing and future situation (see section 4.2 and 4.3).  Alterna-
tives should be evaluated for environmental impact at the same time they are
evaluated for costs and other impacts (see section 4.4). A separate section of
the facility plan, however, should summarize the environmental considerations to
demonstrate that they have been adequately covered and provide a single point of
reference for a person interested in reviewing the environmental analysis.
(See Part 7 of this Guidance.)

     4.1   Step 1:  Effluent Limitations

          The facility plan should list the effluent limitations applicable to
     the facility being planned.  These effluent limitations normally may be
     found in a municipal permit issued under the National  Pollutant Discharge
     Elimination System.  A copy of the municipal permit should be attached to
     the plan.

          If the facility is on a "water quality limited" waterway (see section
     1.2.1 above), the applicable water quality standards should be obtained
     from the State and briefly summarized in the plan, in  addition to the
     effluent limitations necessary to meet the applicable  water quality
     standards.

     4.2  Step 2:  Assess Current Situation

          4.2.1  Introduction

               The facility plan should briefly describe the existing conditions
          to be considered when weighing alternatives during the facility
          planning process.

-------
                           6

4.2.2  Existing Conditions in the Planning Area Without the Project

     The following existing conditions should be described to the
extent necessary to analyze alternatives and determine the environ-
mental impacts of the proposed actions.   Only conditions which are
applicable to the project should be discussed.

     a.   Planning area description,  planning  area boundaries, poli-
     tical jurisdictions and physical  characteristics, including
     climate, geology, soils, topography and hydrology.

     b.   Organizational context,  the role of  all  organizations in-
     volved in planning, financing and operating publicly-owned waste
     treatment works in the planning area.

     c.   Demographic data,  the 1970 census population, land-use
     patterns, and major employment generating  activities.

     d.   Water quality,  existing quality, quantity,  and uses of
     surface and ground water.

     e.   Other existing environmental conditions,   air quality, noise
     levels, energy production and consumption, wetlands, flood plains,
     coastal zones and other environmentally sensitive areas, historic
     and archaeological sites, other related Federal  or State projects
     in the area, and plant and animal communities  which may be
     affected, especially those containing threatened or endangered
     species.

Sources of information used to describe the existing environment and
to assess future environmental impacts should be cited.

4.2.3  Existing Wastewater Flows and Treatment Systems

     An inventory of existing wastewater treatment  systems should be pro-
vided, including services, treatment plants, effluent disposal or reuse
methods, sludge disposal methods, and flow and waste reduction measures
currently being used, if any.

     The discussion of flows should include average and peak wastewater
flows, wastewater characteristics and wasteloads at key points in the
system, dry and wet-weather flows, combined sewer overflows, and the
location of bypasses.  Available data on industrial and commercial flows
should be summarized.

4.2.4  Infiltration and Inflow

     The construction grants regulation (Appendix B) provides that the
State may certify that excessive infiltration/inflow does not exist.
The certification may be based on studies or other information available
on the sewer system before facility planning begins, or gathered in the
course of the facility planning process.

-------
          When the certification cannot be made because information  is  inade-
     quate, an infiltration/inflow analysis should  be conducted  in accordance
     with EPA "Guidance for Sewer System Evaluation"  (reference  t).
     The purpose of the analysis is to estimate infiltration/inflow
     into the system;  to approximate,  on a preliminary basis,  the costs
     of treating the infiltration/inflow versus the costs  of rehabilitating
     the sewer system to eliminate the problem; and finally, to  determine
     if the infiltration/inflow is excessive,  as defined in  reference t.

          If the infiltration/inflow analysis  demonstrates the existence
     or possible existence of excessive infiltration/inflow, a sewer
     system evaluation survey should be conducted,  in accordance with
     reference t,   to analyze the problems in more detail and determine
     needed corrective actions and their costs.

     4.2.5  Performance of Existing System

          The performance of existing  wastewater treatment facilities
     should be evaluated to determine  their operational efficiency.   The
     evaluation should compare existing performance with optimum perform-
     ance obtainable in terms of effluent quality and treatment  capacity.
     The effect of the following factors on performance should be considered.

          a.   Adequacy of plan design.

          b.   Quality of operation and control.

          c.   Caliber and number of operating personnel.

          d.   Adequacy of sampling and testing program.

          e.   Adequacy of laboratory  facilities, and

          f.   Quality of maintenance  program.

4.3  Step 3:  Assess Future Situation

     4.3.1  Planning Period

          The planning period is the time span over which  wastewater
     management needs are forecast, facilities are  planned to  meet such
     needs, and costs are amortized.  The facility  planning  period should
     extend 20 years beyond the date when the  planned facility is scheduled
     to begin operation.  The most cost-effective plan may provide for
     phasing construction of operable  parts of the  facility  to meet
     changing conditions over the planning period.

          Phased construction of treatment plants,  in particular, will  often
     be the most cost-effective approach.  Consideration should  be given
     to initial construction of a plant with a capacity to handle the waste-
     water flows projected for only a  part of  the 20  years planning
     period.  The plan should provide  in this  case  for adding  more capacity
     later to treat the remaining increase in  wastewater flows projected
     for the rest of the planning period.

-------
                            8

     Wastewater flows may be projected for years beyond the 20 year
planning period when determining the most cost-effective design for
interceptor sewers.  Design flows must be fully justified in the
facility plan.

4.3.2  Land Use

     The facility plan should be carefully coordinated with applicable
State, local and regional land-use management regulations, policies
and plans.  Projected land-use patterns and densities should be used
as one basis for determining the optimum capacity and location of
facilities.

     Where land use plans have not been prepared for all  or part of
the planning area, an estimate of future land use patterns and densi-
ties should be prepared in consultation with existing planning agencies,
zoning commissions and public officials.

     Careful consideration should be given before providing sewerage
for areas subject to flood hazards.  The facility plan should be com-
patible with State and local programs for flood plain management.

4.3.3  Demographic and Economic Projections

     Projections of economic and population growth should be used as
one basis for estimating future wasteloads and flows.

     For SMSAs, economic^and population projections should follow the
work of the Bureau of Economic Analysis incorporating the "Series E"
projections of the Census Bureau.  Reasons for departures should be
fully documented.

     Projections of economic and population growth for non-SMSA
communities may be based on extension of current (1960 or 1965 to
present) growth trends.  Economic projections of industrial employ-
ment may assist with projections of population growth.

     All projections should be consistent with those used for control
of air quality, water resources management, and other environmental
programs unless new information and analysis justify departures.
Reasons for any departures should be documented.

     Projections should be adjusted to reflect constraints on growth
imposed by air quality implementation plans and land-use and develop-
ment controls.

4.3.4  Forecasts of Flow and Wasteloads

     The following factors should be considered when estimating waste-
loads and flows for the future:

     a.   projections of economic and population growth

     b.   an estimate of non-excessive infiltration/inflow

-------
          c.   analysis of pollutant content and flows in the existing system.

          d.   an analysis of the rate, duration, pollutant content and loca-
          tion of combined sewer overflows in the existing system during
          storms of different magnitude.  The analysis should be linked to
          the drainage area tributary to the combined sewer system.  This
          would facilitate forecasting of flow and wasteload increases from
          future changes in the nature and extent of the drainage area.

          e.   projection of future changes in flow and wasteloads from
          industries to be served by the municipality.  This projection should
          take into account reductions in industrial flow and waste which will
          result from Federal, State and local pretreatment requirements and
          from imposition of user and cost recovery charges.

          f.   projection of gains possible from selected measures to reduce
          flow and wastes.

     4.3.5  Future Environment of the Planning Area Without the Project

          The future environmental conditions for the delineated planning
     area under the "no project" alternative should be predicted, covering
     the same areas considered under Section 4.2.2.

4.4  Step 4.  Develop and Evaluate Alternatives

     4.4.1  Baseline:  Optimum Operation of Existing Facilities

          The alternative of optimizing performance of existing facilities
     should be considered first.  The level of treatment attainable with
     optimum performance should serve as a baseline for planning additions
     or modifications to the treatment system.

     4.4.2  Regional Solutions

          The possibility of a regional solution to wastewater treatment
     problems should be explored early in the planning process to reduce
     the number of options requiring detailed consideration to a manageable
     number.  Regional solutions may include interconnection of facilities,
     construction of one or more large facilities to eliminate the need for
     many small facilities and joint management of facilities to improve
     operation and maintenance and reduce costs.  Joint facilities may
     involve interceptors, treatment plants and sludge and effluent disposal
     systems.

          Existing plans which address regional options should be referenced
     and important conclusions summarized in the facility plan.  Further
     analysis of options will not be necessary if regional questions are
     resolved by existing plans.

-------
                           10
     Where regional  questions have not been resolved,  discharge combi-
nations and effluent limitations related to each combination  should be
estimated by the applicant or the State.  Any simplifying assumptions
needed for such preliminary analyses should be documented.  Monetary
costs and environmental  impacts should be estimated.
     The analysis of regional solutions should address the following
special considerations:
     a.   effects of interceptor location on land use  within  and
     between urban areas, particularly where land is undeveloped.
     b.   effects of alternative combinations on stream flows in the
     regions.
     c.   possible limitation on future expansion due  to unavailability
     of land.
     d.   differences in reliability, operation and maintenance of
     facilities.
     e.   environmental  and economic costs of delays likely to be
     associated with efforts to achieve a regional  solution.
     A map of treatment system configurations should be prepared on
the basis of the above analysis.  It should show the boundaries of
political jurisdictions and service areas for each treatment  plant.
4.4.3  Alternative Waste Treatment Systems
     Alternative waste treatment systems for each service area should
be considered in addition to the regional questions outlined  above.
     First, the implication of the "no action" plan should be set
forth with respect to potential effects on:
     a.   surface water quality
     b.   groundwater quality  (if applicable)
     c.   land use limitation if "no action" alternative is selected
     d.   socio-economic factors (e.g., residential,  industrial
     development and health hazards).
     Second, the plan should consider, where applicable, the  primary
options for:
     a.   flow and waste reduction
     b.   configuration of sewers and interceptors
     c.   treatment and disposal of effluent
     d.   sludge disposal.

-------
                           11

Options should be rejected from the outset if they fajl  to meet physical
constraints of the planning area, such as climate, soils or topography,
or if they are incompatible with air and water quality plans.   These
options should be presented in the plan, however,  with a very brief
summary of the reasons for their rejection.

     Alternative waste treatment systems must be considered in accordance
with information included in references o and s.  The following three
alternatives must be considered, as a minimum, to  meet the requirements
for best practicable waste treatment technology:

     a.   treatment and discharge of effluent

     b.   treatment and reuse

     c.   land application

     Options for treatment and discharge should, as appropriate, take
into account and allow to the extent practicable for the application of
technology at a later date to provide for the reclaiming or recycling
of water or otherwise eliminate the discharge of pollutants.

     Following initial screening of the alternative systems,  a limited
number of the most feasible options should be evaluated in detail.   The
evaluation should follow the guidance on monetary  costs in Chapter  6
and on environmental and other considerations in the remainder of this
chapter.

     Proposals should be re-evaluated and compared after refinement and
estimation of monetary costs, environmental  effects and other considera-
tions.  Features should be added where practicable to each alternative
to offset or mitigate adverse environmental  impacts.  Each alternative,
including its costs and environmental effects, will then be displayed
to inform the public and solicit public opinions to help select a plan.

4.4.4  Environmental Impacts

     4.4.4.1  General

          Alternatives should be evaluated and screened for their envir-
     onmental impacts.  Adverse impacts could be a basis for rejecting an
     option and, thus, reducing the number of alternatives.   C^her impacts
     may require further study and should be identified, to the extent
     possible, early in the planning process.

          The evaluation should assess both beneficial and adverse  primary
     and secondary environmental impacts.  A definition and examples of
     each type follows:

     4.4.4.2  Primary Impacts

          Primary impacts are those directly related to construction and
     operation of the treatment works.  Some examples are:

          a.   Destruction of historical, archaeological, geological,
          cultural or recreational areas during construction.

-------
                            12

           b.    Destruction of  sensitive  ecosystems  including  wetlands  and
           the habitats of endangered  species  during  construction.

           c.    Damage and pollution of surface  waters  due  to  erosion
           during construction.

           d.    Displacement of households,   businesses  or  services.

           e.    Noise pollution, air pollution and odor and public  health
           problems associated  with construction and  operation.

           f.    Direct violation during construction  or operation of Federal,
           State or local  environmental and  land-use  statutes,  or regu-
           lations and plans imposed by such statutes and regulations.

      4.4.4.3   Secondary Impacts

           Secondary impacts of a project are  (1)  indirect  or  induced changes
      in the patterns of land-use and  population growth, and (2) other  envi-.
      ronmental  effects resulting from changes in  land  use  and population
      growth.

           Examples of secondary impacts  are:

           a.    changes in the  rate, density,  or type of development, in-
           cluding residential,  commercial,  industrial  development, or
           changes in the use of open  space  or other  categories of  land.

           b.    air, water, noise, solid  waste or pesticide pollution
           stemming from the induced changes in  population  and land use.

           c.    damage to sensitive ecosystems (wetlands, habitats  of endan-
           gered species) and environmentally  protected areas  (parks, his-
           toric sites) resulting from changes in population and land use.

           Primary attention in the environmental  assessment should be
      given to determining if secondary impacts  will  possibly contravene
      environmental and land use statutes or regulations, or standards,
      limitations and plans imposed by such  statutes  and regulations
      Relevant Federal, State and local environmental and land use  statutes
      and regulations should be considered.

4.4.5  Additional Guidance on Evaluation  of  Alternatives

      4.4.5.1   Institutional Arrangements

           Evaluation of alternatives  should include  a  comparison of
      existing institutional arrangements and  authorities with those
      necessary to implement each option.  The organization to be
      responsible for management of the waste treatment facilities  also
      should be identified with each option.  Further,  the  costs to
      each jurisdiction for construction, operation  and maintenance
      of the facilities should  be estimated.  These  matters, as v/ell as
      the total  costs and effects of each proposal,  should  be discussed
      with representatives of local government units, and the views of
      other interested parties  solicited  during  public  review.

-------
                     13

4.4.5.2  Industrial  Service

     Industrial  use of municipal  facilities should be encouraged
when environmental  and monetary costs would be minimized.   Costs
of separate treatment of industrial  waste should be compared with
costs of pretreatment plus the cost to the municipality
for joint treatment, when industrial  flow to be handled
by municipal  systems is significant.   Pretreatment is required
in accordance with Federal pretreatment standards (reference g)
and any existing State and local  standards.  The analysis  should
focus on those industries which desire municipal service but are
not yet so served when facility planning is initiated.

4.4.5.3  Flow and Waste Reduction

     Some types of flow and waste reduction measures are listed
below:

     a.   measures for reducing sewer system infiltration/inflow

     b.   household water-saving devices

     c.   water meters

     d.   land use and development regulations

     e.   industrial reuse and recycling

     f.   on-site (private) facilities such as septic tanks

     Procedures for determining the cost effectiveness of measures
for reducing infiltration/inflow are found in EPA "Guidance for
Sewer System Evaluation" (reference t).  The cost-effectiveness
of water conservation measures can be determined by comparing the
cost with resultant savings for both waste treatment and water
supply.

4.4.5.4  Sewers

     Alternative arrangements of interceptors and trunk lines
should be compared to determine the most cost-effective configu-
ration.  Sewers in developing areas should be planned on the basis
of anticipated changes in land use and density.

     Analysis should be made, whenever possible, of the residential,
commercial and industrial land use changes that a centralized project
will induce.

     The sizes of interceptors should be based on cost-effective
analysis of alternative pipe sizes.   The analysis should reflect the
expected useful  life of the pipe, all costs related to future pipe
installation, and induced growth effects of initial provision of
substantial excess capacity.

4.4.5.5  Sludge Disposal

     Environmentally acceptable methods of sludge utilization and
disposal include stabilization and subsequent land application for

-------
                      14

agriculture, enhancement of parks and forests, reclamation of
poor or damaged terrain, sanitary land fill,  or sludge incinera-
tion and disposal of resulting ash.   Ocean disposal  may be allowed
under special circumstances (subject to reference k).

4.4.5.6  Location of Facilities

     Evaluation and choice of sites  for treatment plants,  inter-
ceptors, transmission lines, outfalls, pumping stations,  and
other major works should take into account the factors cited
below and discussed further in references p,  q, and  y.

     a.   minimize odors and locate  away from residential  areas
     which would be affected by odors

     b.   minimize aesthetic problems by design and  landscaping

     c.   locate outfalls where they will not affect public water
     supply, shell fishing beds, and  contact recreational  waters.
     Where alternative sites are unavailable, special  precautions
     must be taken in accordance with references p and y.

     d.   locate treatment plants and other facilities in general
     outside of floodplains.  Where  such locations are
     not practicable or would lead to excessive costs, the plant
     and equipment will be protected against  flooding  as  described
     in reference p.

4.4.5.7  Revision of Wasteload Allocation

     Wasteload allocations are the basis for  determining  effluent
limitations to be achieved by a treatment plant.  They are
normally prepared as part of the State basin  planning  process and
are reflected in the discharge permit.  Facility planning may
result in a change in the discharge  locations and the  wasteload
distribution among the locations.  The wasteload allocation, in
this case, should be reviewed by the State or EPA and  modified
to reflect the configuration of discharges in the proposed plan.

4.4.5.8  Phased Construction

     Adding capacity in phases during a planning period will,be
more cost-effective in some cases than providing sufficient capa-
city in initial construction for the entire planning period.  A
method for cost analysis of phased development is discussed in
Chapter 6.  Factors to be considered are:

     a.   relative cost of providing excess capacity initially
     compared with the present worth of deferred costs for pro-
     viding capacity when needed.

-------
                               15

               b.    uncertainties of projected  long-term  wastewater  flows,
               and possible technological  advances  or  flow and waste reduc-
               tion measures which may  limit  need for  excess  capacity.

               Modular development of operable  components of  a treatment
          plant is advisable in areas where high growth rates are  projected,
          where treatment must become more stringent later in the  planning
          period,  or where existing facilities  are  to  be  used initially but
          phased out later.

          4.4.5.9   Flexibility

               Facility planning should consider providing sufficient land
          and choosing layouts and siting  to  allow  for expansion of  the plant
          to handle unforeseen increases in wastewater flows  and required
          treatment levels.

               Interceptors and collection systems  may be planned  to meet
          unforeseen expansions of the  service  area.   Consideration  should
          be given, for example, to obtaining extra sewer rights-of-way for
          staged parallel pipes and pipe extensions and temporary  treatment
          plants.

          4.4.5.10  Reliability

               Emphasis on reliability  should focus on the most  critical
          processes in accordance with  the requirements  in reference p.

4.5  Step 5.  Select Plan

     4.5.1  Selection Process

          The public should be provided with  alternative  proposals,  and a
     public meeting or hearing held to  explain  each proposal  and obtain the
     views of all  concerned (see Chapter 5).  The  opinions expressed should  be
     weighed with estimated environmental  effects,  monetary costs, feasibility,
     resources and energy use, and reliability.  The alternative proposals
     should be ranked on the basis of these considerations and  a plan selected.
     Additional guidance on selection of a plan is  provided in  Chapter 8.

-------
                               16

     4.5.2  Environmental  Impacts of the Selected Plan

          The primary and secondary impacts of the selected plan should be
     summarized.  Special  attention should be given in the summary to the
     following:

          a.   Any unavoidable adverse impacts resulting from the project.

          b.   Relationship between local  short term uses of the environment
          and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity.   This
          should include a description of the extent to which the action
          involves tradeoffs between short term environmental gains at the
          expense of long term gains or vice-versa, and the extent to which
          the proposed action forecloses future options.  Special
          attention should be given to effects which narrow the range
          of future uses of land and water resources or pose long-term
          risks to health or safety.

          c.   Irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources.
          An evaluation should be made of the extent to which the
          proposed action requires commitment of construction materials,
          man-hours, energy and other resources, and curtails the range
          of future uses of land and water resources.

          d.   Steps to minimize adverse effects.  Structural and
          nonstructural measures, if any,  should be described to
          mitigate or eliminate significant adverse effects on the
          human and natural environments.

4.6  Step 6:  Preliminary Design of Treatment Works

     Preliminary engineering designs will  be prepared  in accordance with
references p, q, and y for those treatment works proposed for initial
construction and scheduled for preparation of drawings and specifica-
tions.   Such information would include, as appropriate, a schematic
flow diagram, unit processes, plant site plans, sewer pipe plans and
profiles, and design data regarding detention times, flow rates, sizing
of units and so forth.  It would also include a summary of requirements
for operation and maintenance of the treatment works.   Cost estimates
for final design, preparation of plans and specifications, and
construction of the treatment works, together with a schedule for
completion of all such work, should be presented.

-------
                                    17

      4.7  Step 7:  Arrangements for Implementation

           Following selection of plan and design, existing institutional arrange-
      ments should be reviewed and a financial program developed, including
      preliminary allocation of the costs among various classes of users of the
      system (see Appendix B).  Agreement should be reached among participating
      entities on arrangements for implementing the plan.  The State and Regional
      Administrator may approve the plan, however, even in the absence of final
      agreement on such arrangements.

            A preliminary plan of operation should be prepared to provide for
      staffing, management, training, sampling and analysis for effective operation
      and maintenance of the facility.

5.    PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

      5.1  Introduction

           Minimum requirements for the public role in facility planning are
      described in the Construction Grants regulation (Appendix B) and the regu-
      lation entitled "Public Participation in Water Pollution Control" (refer-
      ence f).  The public should participate from the beginning in facility
      planning so that interests and potential conflicts may be identified early
      and considered as planning proceeds.

      5.2  Relationships between Planner and Public

           The planner should define issues and analyze information so that the
      public will  clearly understand the costs and benefits of alternatives
      considered during the planning process.  He also should ensure that the
      interests of a broad spectrum of the public are represented in the
      planning process.

           The public can be involved through a variety of means, including the
      following:

           -advisory groups         -public hearings       -news media
           -information contacts    -task forces           -speeches
           -correspondence          -workshops             -seminars
           -interviews              -exhibitions           -depositions
           -liaison with citizen    -mailings              -surveys
              groups
           -public meetings         -newsletters           -polls

      5.3  Requirement for Public Hearings

           A public hearing must be held on the facility plan unless EPA has
      waived the requirement in advance (see section 35.917-5 of Appendix B).
      The location of the hearing should be easily accessible and facilitate
      attendance and testimony by a cross-section of interested or affected
      organizations and interests.   Notice will  generally be given at least

-------
                                18


      thirty calendar days  before the hearing  is  to  be  held  to  obtain  formal
      comments of all concerned interests  on the  alternative proposals.   It
      is suggested that the notice include mention of where  information  on
      the facility plan may be obtained before the hearing.

      5.4    Summary of Pub!ic Participation

             A report summarizing public participation  should be prepared and
      submitted as part of  the facility plan.   It should as  a minimum  contain
      a brief description of the views expressed  at  any public hearings  held
      on the project.  It also may describe other measures taken to provide
      for, encourage concerned interests;  and  the disposition of the issues
      raised.

6.    EVALUATION OF COSTS

      6.1    Introduction

             Appendix A to  the construction grants regulation (see Appendix  B in
      this guidance) describes basic methodology  for calculation of direct mone-
      tary costs.  This chapter provides supplemental guidance for applying  this
      methodology in practice.

      6.2    Sunk Costs

             Appendix A to  the construction grants regulation provides comprehensive
      instructions for cost evaluation, except with  respect  to sunk costs.   Any
      investments or commitments made prior to our concurrent with facility
      planning will be regarded as sunk costs  and not included as monetary costs
      in the plan.  Such investments and commitments include:

             a.  investments in existing wastewater  treatment facilities and
             associated lands even though incorporated in the plan.

             b.  outstanding bond indebtness.

             c.  cost of preparing the facility plan.

      6.3    Present Worth  and Equivalent Annual  Costs

             The following examples show how to calculate present worth and  equiva-
      lent annual costs for a project.  Present worth may be thought of as the
      sum, which if  invested now at a given rate, would provide exactly the funds
      required to make all  necessary expenditures during the life of the project.
      Equivalent annual cost is the expression of a  non-uniform series of expen-
      ditures as a uniform annual amount to simplify calculation of present worth.
      Detailed procedures for making these calculations are well known and ex-
      plained in such books as Principles of Engineering Economy by Eugene L.

-------
                               19

Grant and W. Grant Ireson (reference aa), and Economics of Water Resource
Planning by L. Douglas James and Robert Lee (reference bb).

     The three cases described below include:  (1) a simplistic one, assuming
constant 0 & M costs; (2) a case with varying 0 & M costs; and (3) a third
case assuming varying 0 & M, phased construction and a positive salvage value.
Note that the second and third cases actually compare two alternatives for
treating a given community's waste.

     In order to perform the following analysis, you will need a table of
7.0 percent compound interest factors and a table of factors to compute
the present worth of a gradient series.  These tables may usually be found
in an engineering economics textbook.

     The interest rate of 7.0 percent is used for these examples only.  The
actual interest rate which must be used for evaluating costs in a facility
plan is published annually by the United States Water Resources Council
(see reference 1).

6.4  Example 1:  Constant 0 & M Costs

     GIVEN:

         sewage treatment plant #1
         capacity: 10 mgd
         average flow through plant:  9 mgd
         planning period:  20 years
         salvage value at the end of 20 years:  $0
         initial cost of plant:  $3 million
         average annual operation and maintenance cost:  $190,000
         interest rate:  7.0 percent

     DETERMINE:  Present worth and equivalent annual cost of this plant
                 over 20 years.

     METHOD:  Present worth equals initial cost plus the present worth of
                 the operating and maintenance costs.  Equivalent annual
                 costs equals the present worth times the appropriate
                 capital recovery factor.

     Step  1

         Initial cost =                           $3,000,000

     Step  2

         Present worth of annual 0 & M cost equals annual 0 & M costs times
         the uniform series present worth factor @ 7.0% for 20 years.  Thus:

         $190,000 (10.594) =                      $2,013.000

-------
                                20

     Step 3

         Sum of numbers obtained in the above steps  yields  present worth

         initial cost =                           $3,000,000
         present worth of 0 & M cost =            $2,013.000
         present worth =                          $5,013,000

     Step 4

         To find equivalent annual  cost, multiply present worth  obtained
         above times the capital recovery factors @  7.0% for 20  years.   Thus:

         $5,013,000 (.09439) =                    $   474.000

         is the average annual equivalent cost of the plant over 20 years.

6.5  Example 2:  Varying 0 & M Costs

     GIVEN:

         sewage treatment plant #2
         capacity:   10 mgd
         average flow through plant:  increase linearly  from 2 mgd to
            10 mgd  over 20 years
         planning period:  20 years
         salvage value at end of 20 years:   $0
         initial cost of plant:  $3,000,000
         constant annual  operation and maintenance cost:  $126,000
         variable annual  operation and maintenance cost:  increases
            linearly from $0 to $68,000 in year 20
         interest rate:  7.0 percent

     DETERMINE:  Present worth and average annual  equivalent cost of this
                 plant over 20 years.

     METHOD:   Present worth equals the sum of initial  cost,  present worth
                 of constant 0 & M cost, and the present worth of the
                 gradient series of the variable 0 & M cost.  Equivalent
                 annual cost is derived as in the first  case.

     Step 1

         Initial cost =                           $3.000,000

     Step 2

         To find the present worth of  operating costs, it will be necessary
         to calculate the present worths of  the constant costs and the
         variable costs separately.

-------
                               21

         a.    Present worth of constant annual  costs  equals  that cost  times
         the uniform series present  worth  factor  @  7.0%  for  20 years.  Thus:

         $126,000 (10.594)  =                     $1.335.000

         b.    Present worth of a  variable  cost  increasing  linearly  is  found
         by  first finding the amount of increase  per  year.   This amount  is
         $68,000/20 years or $3,400  per year.   This increase is known  as  a
         gradient series.  This series  times  the  correct gradient series
         present worth factor @ 7.0% for 20 years yields the present worth
         of  the variable cost.  Thus:

         $3,400 (77.5091) =                      $   264.000

     Step 3

         Sum of numbers obtained  in  the steps above yields present  worth:

         initial cost =                          $3,000,000
         present worth of constant 0 &  M costs    $1,335,000
         present worth of variable 0 &  M costs    $   264.000
         present worth =                         $4,599,000

     Step 4

         As  before, the present worth just derived  times the capital recovery
         factor @ 7.0% for 20 years  will yield  the  average annual equivalent
         cost.  Thus:

         $4,599,000 (.09439) =                   $   434.100

         which is the average annual equivalent cost  of  the  plant for  20
         years.

6.6  Example 3:  Varying 0 & M Costs. Phased  Construction, and  Salvage Value

     GIVEN:

         sewage treatment plant #3
         capacity:  years 1-10, 5 mgd;  years  11-20, 10 mgd
         average flow through plant:  increases linearly from 2 mgd to 10
            mgd over 20 years
         planning period:  20 years
         salvage value at the end of 20 years:  $750,000
         initial cost of plant (5 mgd):  $2,000,000
         cost to upgrade at year 10  to  10  mgd:  $1,500,000
         operation and maintenance costs:

-------
                             22

     a.    constant annual  0 & M cost,  years  1-10:    $84,000

     b.    variable annual  0 & M cost,  years  1-10:   increases  linearly
     from 0 - $29,000 in year 10
     c.    constant annual  0 & M cost,  years  11-20:

     d.    variable annual  0 & M cost,  years  11-20:
     from 0 to $29,000 in  year 20

interest rate:  7.0 percent
      $165,000

      increases linearly
  DETERMINE:   Present worth and annual  equivalent cost  of this  plant
              over 20 years.

  METHOD:   Present worth is derived as  in  the previous  example;  however,
              this time calculate 0 & M costs from year 1 to  10  and 0  & M
              costs from year 11-20 separately.   It  is  necessary also  to
              add the present worth of  the expansion and subtract the
              present worth of the salvage value  from the present worth
              of the costs.  Average annual  equivalent  costs  are
              calculated as before.
  Step 1

      Initial  cost =

  Step 2
 $2.000.000
      Calculate the present worth of the 0 & M costs  as  follows:

      a.   Present worth of constant annual  cost years 1-10 equals  given
      cost times uniform series present worth factors @  7.0% for  10
      years.   Thus:
         ,000 (7.024) =
$   590.000
      b.  Present worth of the variable 0 & M costs  years 1-10 equals
      the gradient series ($2900)  times the present  worth factor of a
      gradient series @ 7.0% for 10 years.   Thus:
      $2,900 (27.7156) =
$    80,400
      c.   The present worth of the constant 0 & M costs year 11-20
      are first calculated as in (a) above using the given cost for
      years 11-20.  This, however,  yields present, worth in year 11  which
      must be converted to present  worth in year 1.  This is accomplished
      by multiplying the present worth (year 11) times the single payment
      present worth factor @ 7.Q% for 10 years (.5083).  Thus, present
      worth in year 1 equals:
      $165,000 (7.024)(.5083) =
 $  589,100

-------
                          23

    d.  The present worth of the variable 0 & M costs  years  11-20
    are first calculated as in (b) above using the gradient  series  for
    years 11-20 which is $2900.   This yields the present worth  in year
    11 which again must be converted to present worth  in year 1  by
    multiplying the present worth (year 11) times the  single payment
    present worth factor @ 7.0% for 10 years (.5083).   Thus:

    $2,000 (27.7156)(.5083) =                $  40.900

Step 3

    To determine the present worth of the upgrade cost which occurs
    at year 10, multiply the upgrade cost times the single payment
    present worth factors @ 7.0% for 10 years.  Thus:

    $1,500,000 (.5083) =                     $  763,000

Step 4

    The present worth of the salvage value at the end  of 20  years
    equals that value times the single payment present worth factor
    @ 7.0% for 20 years.  Thus:

    $750,000 (.2584) =                       $  194.000

Step 5

    The sums of the values obtained in Steps 1, 2, and 3 minus  the
    value obtained in Step 4 will equal the present worth of the
    plan.  Thus:

    initial cost =                          $2,000,000
    present worth of constant 0 & M year
      1-10                                     590,000
    present worth of variable 0 & M year
      1-10 =                                $   80,400
    present worth of constant 0 & M year
      11-20 =                               $  589,100
    present worth of variable 0 & M year
      11-20 =                                   40,900
    present worth of upgrade at year 10 =   $  763,000

                         TOTAL              $4,063,400

    Subtract from the total the present worth of salvage value

    present worth of salvage value =      - $  194,000
    present worth of plant =                $3,869,400

-------
                                     24

          Step 6

              As before, the present worth just derived times the capital
              recovery factor @ 7.0% for 20 years will  yield the average
              annual  equivalent cost.  Thus:

              $3,869,400 (.09439) =                    $  365,200

              which is the average annual  equivalent cost of the plant over
              20 years.


7.    ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION

     7.1   purpose

          This part summarizes the requirements for evaluation of environmental
     impacts in the facility planning process and describes  the reasons for
     these requirements.

          The environmental  evaluation serves two purposes:

          a.   to provide comparative data to assist selection of the best
          alternative plan.

          b.   to meet the requirements for an environmental  assessment in the
          regulation  published by EPA, "Preparation of  Environmental  Impact
          Statements" (reference a).

     7.2   Facility Planning  and the Environmental  Assessment

          The facility plan  should contain sufficient information to  meet  the
     requirements for an environmental assessment in reference a.  Environmental
     considerations should be addressed during each step of  the facility planning
     process.  A separate section of the plan, however,  should summarize environ-
     mental  considerations.

     7.3   Environmental  Impact Statements

          The Regional Administrator may determine while the facility plan is
     in  preparation or after it is completed and  submitted to EPA for approval
     that the project is highly controversial  or  may have significant adverse
     environmental  effects.   EPA will  prepare an  environmental  impact statement
     in  these cases in accordance with the regulation,  "Preparation of Environ-
     mental  Impact Statements" (reference  a).   The applicant may be asked  to
     provide supplemental  information on the project to  assist with preparation
     of  the  Environmental  Impact Statement.

-------
                                    25

     7.4  Environmental  Considerations

          The facility plan should contain a summary of environmental
     considerations.   The summary should include references to  other portions
     of the plan where these considerations are discussed in more detail.

          The following are the major topics to be discussed in the summary:

          a.    Description of the existing environment without  the project
          (see Section 4.2.2 in this Guidance).

          b.    Description of the future environment without the project
          (see Section 4.3.5).

          c.    Evaluation of alternatives (see Section 4.4.4).

          d.    Environmental impacts of the proposed action, including steps
          to minimize adverse effects (see Section 4.5.2).
8.   PLAN SELECTION

     8.1  Introduction

          This chapter discusses the principal  considerations for selecting
     a plan.  It assumes that each of the alternatives being compared would,
     if implemented, result in compliance with all  the applicable regulatory
     requirements (i.e., effluent limitations,  load allocations, compliance
     schedules, and so forth).

     8.2  Comparison and Ranking of Proposals

          Plan selection will involve making choices among alternatives based
     on a display of the significant costs, effects and benefits of each.
     Common units are lacking for measuring environmental, social, economic
     and other costs, and therefore selection of the most cost-effective
     alternative requires careful judgment.

-------
                               26

     Figure 1  provides an example of how costs and effects  may be dis-
played.  The effects should be listed,  wherever possible,  in quantitative
terms, and be based on the supporting analysis elsewhere in the plan.
Where quantification is not possible, the comparison should be made by
brief narrative description.

     The alternatives may be  ranked after they are displayed to aid final
selection of a plan.

     The following are suggestions on the ranking procedure:

     a.   Environmental effects:   All significant primary and secondary
     effects should be weighed to derive a value judgment as to the net
     overall effect of each alternative relative to other plans.   Alter-
     natives which have secondary effects with a high potential for con-
     travening an environmental  or land-use statute or regulation, or
     plan imposed by such statute or regulation should be ranked below
     those which do not.

     b.   Monetary costs:  Total  costs  should be the primary factor in
     determining the cost-effectiveness of the plan.

     c.   Implementation  capability:  The ability of and agreement among
     the State, regional  and  local  governmental  units or management
     agencies  to implement the alternatives should be weighed carefully.
     The necessary institutions  must exist or be created in time to carry
     out the plan, and the local  governmental  unit must be  capable of
     bearing the local share  of  the costs.

     d.   Other considerations:   Each plan must meet applicable regulatory
     requirements, and design and reliability criteria.   Performance
     better than these minimal  standards should not be taken into account
     when selecting an alternative unless environmental  and monetary costs
     and benefits, and the feasibility of implementing the  alternatives
     are roughly equal.  Other considerations, in other words, may be  used
     to break  ties.

          These other considerations include the contribution to water
     quality objectives beyond regulatory requirements,  reliability,
     use of resources and energy, and public acceptability.

-------
                                 27

                             Figure 1

            COSTS AND BENEFITS OF ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS

                                                   PROPOSALS

                                         A         i

Environmental Effects

a.  Primary
b.  Secondary

Monetary Costs

a.  Capital costs

    1.  public
    2.  total

b.  0 & M costs

    1.  public
    2.  total

c.  Net revenue  (public)
d.  Average annual  costs

    1.  public
    2.  total

Implementation Capability

a.  Institutional
b.  Financial
c.  Legal

Other considerations

a.  Contributions to Water Quality
    Objectives and Other Water Management Goals

b.  Energy and Resources Use

    1.  Energy (power)
    2.  Chemicals
    3.  Land commitment for planned features

c.  Reliability

    1.  Frequency of plant upsets
    2.  Frequency of spills
    3.  Frequency of effects of combined
        sewer overflows

-------
                                    28

9.    FORMAT FOR SUBMISSION OF PLAN

     9.1   Outline of Plan

          The following outline for the plan is suggested.   It meets the require-
     ments of the Construction Grants regulation (Appendix  B) and follows the
     planning steps presented in this guidance.  Items inapplicable to a
     specific case may be deleted.

     1.    SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

     2.    INTRODUCTION

          2.1  Study Purpose and Scope
          2.2  Planning Area (Map)

     3.    EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS (Section 4.1)

     4.    CURRENT SITUATION (Section 4.2)

          4.1  Conditions in Planning Area

               4.1.1  Planning area description
               4.1.2  Organizational context
               4.1.3  Demographic and land-use data
               4.1.4  Water quality and uses
               4.1.5  Other environmental conditions

          4.2  Existing Wastewater Flows and Treatment Systems
          4.3  Infiltration and Inflow
          4.4  Performance of Existing System

     5.    FUTURE SITUATION (Section 4.3)

          5.1  Land Use
          5.2  Demographic and Economic Projections
          5.3  Forecast of Flow and Waste Load
          5.4  Future Environment of the Planning Area Without the Project

     6.    ALTERNATIVES (Section 4.4)

          6.1  Optimum Operation of Existing Facilities
          6.2  Regional Solutions
          6.3  Waste Treatment Systems
          6.4  Evaluation (monetary, environmental, implementation)

     7.    PLAN SELECTION (Section 4.5)

          7.1  Views of Public and Concerned Interests on Alternatives
          7.2  Evaluation and Ranking of Proposals
          7.3  Selected Plan (major feature summary) and Reasons for Selection
          7.4  Environmental Impacts of Selected Plan

-------
                                29

 8.    COST ESTIMATES,  PRELIMINARY DESIGNS  (Section  4.6)

      8.1   Description of Design, with  Maps
      8.2   Summary of  Cost Estimates

 9.    ARRANGEMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION  (Section  4.7)

      9.1   Institutional  Responsibilities
      9.2   Implementation Steps
      9.3   Operation and  Maintenance
      9.4   Financial Requirements

10.    SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS (Section  7)

      10.1  Existing Environmental  Conditions
      10.2  Future Environment Without  the Project
      10.3  Evaluation of Alternatives
      10.4  Environmental Effects of  Selected Plan

 9.2  Appendices

      The  following information, cross-referenced in the text of the
 plan, may be placed in appendices:

      a.    Preliminary designs,  technical  data  and  cost estimates for
      alternatives.

      b.    Agreements, resolutions  and  comments.

      c.    Supplemental engineering feasibility data on the  details  of
      the  adopted plan.

      d.    Infiltration/inflow analyses.

      e.    Sewer evaluation surveys.

      f.    Copy of the permit for the  facility.

      For  a simple planning situation,  the information  included  in items
 (a) and  (c) may be incorporated in the main report.

      The  technical appendices (item  c  above) should include, but not
 necessarily be limited to:

      a.    description of the configuration  of  collector and interceptor
      systems, profiles,  sizes and  cost breakdowns.

      b.    treatment plant data, including site plan,  layouts of unit
      processes, flow  charts, design  and performance data.

-------
10.   REVIEW, CERTIFICATION AND APPROVAL OF PLANS

     10.1   Purpose

          This chapter describes the administrative procedures  and requirements
     for submission of a facility plan (and revisions thereof)  to State receiving
     agencies and to EPA.  It also describes the actions  States and EPA take on
     the plan.

     10.2  Three Levels of Review

          The three levels of review of a facility plan are as  follows:

          a.   review by a clearinghouse of interested agencies at the local
          level as required by Circular A-95, "Federal and Federally Assisted
          Programs and Projects", of the Federal Office of Management and
          Budget (reference z).

          b.   review by the State for compliance with State requirements, and
          Federal statutory and regulatory requirements.

          c.   review by EPA for compliance with Federal  requirements.

     10.3  Compliance with OMB Circular A-95

          EPA will not conduct a final review of an application for a grant to
     conduct facility planning or completed facility plans for  approval unless
     the agency submitting the grant application or plan to the State and EPA
     has first complied with all applicable requirements of OMB Circular A-95
     (reference z).

     10.4  Submission to State

          The agency desiring review and approval of a facility plan shall
     submit the following documents to the State Water Pollution Control
     Authority or its equivalent:

          a.   Four (4) copies of the facility plan

          b.   Two  (2) copies of all relevant documents required by OMB
          Circular A-95

          c.   One  (1) original and one  (1) copy of a letter from the chief
          official of the agency preparing the plan.  The letter should request
          review and approval and state:

               1.   that the agency has met all requirements for public
               participation relating to the plan;

               2.   the names of all jurisdictions within the planning area
               which either oppose the plan or have failed to approve the plan.

-------
                                31

10.5  Submission to EPA

     EPA will review for approval only those facility plans which have
received State approval and are properly submitted to the appropriate
regional office by the chief official of the State Water Pollution Control
Authority having jurisdiction over the planning area.  The following docu-
ments should be submitted to EPA by the State:

     a.   a letter signed by the chief official of the State Water Pollu-
     tion Control Authority requesting review and approval, and certifying
     that:

          1.   the plan conforms with the requirements of the construction.
          grants regulation (Appendix B)

          2.   the plan conforms with the applicable basin plan prepared
          or being prepared in accordance with reference i.

          3.   the concerned areawide planning agency, if any, has been
          afforded the opportunity to comment on the plan, and the plan
          conforms with any completed areawide plan which has been approved
          in accordance with the requirements of section 208 of FWPCA.

     b.   Two (2) copies of the plan

     c.   One (1) copy of the letter from the local agency to the State
     required under paragraph 10.4 above.

10.6  Revisions to Plans

     Facility plan should be reviewed regularly and brought up to date
as required by changing conditions.   As a minimum, a facility plan which
has served as the basis for award of a Step 2 or 3 grant shall be reviewed
by the State prior to application for any subsequent Step 2 or 3 grant to
determine if substantial changes have occurred which warrant revision or
amendment of the plan.  The plan should then be revised or amended as
necessary.

     Revisions to the plan should be accompanied by a statement on the
status of implementation of the plan as of the date of the revision.   The
appropriate EPA Regional Administrator, A-95 Clearinghouse, and State
should be notified at least 30 days  in advance of initiating a modification
to a plan.  Processing of revised plans will follow the procedures as
outlined above.

10.7  EPA Review

     The review by EPA will ascertain that the requirements of FWPCA and
applicable amendments are met, including specific determination that:

     a.   the plan is consistent with existing State and NPDES permits.

-------
                                32

     b.   the plan is consistent with the requirements of the applicable
     final plan prepared under reference i,  "Preparation of Water
     Quality Management Basin Plans."

     c.   the plan is consistent with any completed areawide plan approved
     in accordance with section 208 of FWPCA.

     d.   all requirements for public participation have been met.

     e.   the plan will provide for secondary  treatment, as a minimum,  as
     well as appropriate application of Best Practicable Waste Treatment
     Technology in accordance with technical  criteria established by EPA,
     or for more stringent treatment levels  required to meet water quality
     standards.

     f.   the plan is cost-effective and environmentally sound.

     g.   excessive infiltration/inflow does not exist, or that a detailed
     sewer evaluation survey and necessary sewer rehabilitation measures
     will be accomplished in accordance with the Construction Grants regu-
     lation (Appendix B).

     h.   implementation of the plan is institutionally feasible within
     the time period proposed.

     i.   the plan is compatible with facility plans and completed and
     approved areawide plans developed for contiguous areas of other States.

     j.   the plan includes an  adequate environmental assessment.

     k.   the treatment works will comply with applicable requirements  of
     the Clean Air Act and other applicable  environmental  laws and
     regulations.

10.8  EPA Approval

     The EPA Regional Administrator has authority to approve any facility
plan submitted to him by a State within his  region.

     After review of a properly submitted plan or amendment and compliance
with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (see
reference a), the EPA Regional Administrator will  notify the chief official
of the appropriate State Water Pollution Control Authority of his concurrence
and approval, or the EPA regional  office will  work closely with the State to
provide advice to the municipality on how the plan may be improved so that
approval will be possible.

-------
APPENDIX A - REFERENCES

-------
                          APPENDIX A -  REFERENCES
A.I  FEDERAL REGULATIONS

     a.    40 CFR Part 6, "Preparation of Environmental  Impact Statements,"
     Federal Register. Vol.  40,  No.  72,  April  14,  1975,  pp.  16811-16827

     b.    40 CFR Part 35, Subpart B,  "State and  Local Assistance", Federal
     Register. Vol.  38, No.  125, June 29, 1973,  pp.  17219-27225

     c.    40 CFR Part 35, Subpart E,  "Grants for Construction of Treatment
     Works—Federal  Water Pollution  Control  Act  Amendments of 1972", Federal
     Register, Vol.  39, No.  29,  February 11, 1974,  pp.  5252-5270

     d.    40 CFR Part 35, Subpart E,  Appendix A  "Cost Effectiveness Analysis
     Guidelines", Federal Register,  Vol.  38, No.  174, September 10, 1973, pp.
     24639-24640

     e.    40 CFR Part 35, Subpart E,  Appendix B  "User Charges and  Industrial
     Cost Recovery", Federal  Register. Vol.  38,  No.  161, August 21, 1973, pp
     22524-22527

     f.    40 CFR Part 105, "Public Participation in  Water Pollution Control",
     Federal Register, Vol.  38,  No.  163,  August  23,  1973, pp. 22756-22758

     g.    40 CFR Part 128, "Pretreatment Standards", Federal Register, Vol. 38,
     No. 215, November 8, 1973,  pp.  30982-30984

     h.    40 CFR Part 130, "Policies  and Procedures  for  State Continuing
     Planning Process", Federal  Register, Vol. 39,  No.  107,  June 3, 1974, pp.
     19634-19639

     i.    40 CFR Part 131, "Preparation  of Water Quality Management Basin
     Plans", Federal Register.  Vol.  39,  No.  107, June 3, 1974, pp. 19639-19644

     j.    40 CFR Part 133, "Secondary Treatment  Information", Federal Register.
     Vol. 38, No. 159, August 17, 1973,  pp.  22298-22299.

     k.    40 CFR Part 220-227,  "Ocean Dumping, Final Regulations and Criteria",
     Federal Register, Vol.  38,  No.  198,  October 15, 1973, pp. 28609-28621.

     1.    18 CFR 704.39, "Discount Rate", Federal  Register,  Vol. 39, No. 158,
     August 14, 1974, p. 29242.   (Published annually under this title by U.S.
     Water Resources Council)

     m.    50 CFR Part 17, "Conservation  of Endangered Species and  Other Fish
     or  Wildlife", Federal Register,  Vol. 39,  No.  3., January 4, 1974,
     pp. 1171-1177

-------
A.2  EPA DOCUMENTS

      o.  "Alternative Waste Management Techniques  for Best Practicable
      Waste Treatment", Technical  Information Report,  U.S.  EPA,  March 1974

      p.  "Design Criteria for Mechanical,  Electric, and Fluid System and
      Component Reliability, Technical  Bulletin,  EPA-430-99-74-001

      q.  "Design, Operation and Maintenance of Wastewater  Treatment Faci-
      lities", Technical  Bulletin, U.S. EPA, September 1970

      r.  "EPA Policy to Protect the Nation's Wetlands", Administrators
      Decision Statement No. 4, Federal Register.  Vol. 38,  No. 84,  p. 10834

      s.  "Evaluation of Land Application Systems", Technical  Bulletin,
      EPA-430/9-75-001, March 1975

      t.  "Guidance for Sewer System Evaluation",  U.S. EPA, March 1974

      u.  "Guidelines for the Preparation of Water  Quality  Management Plans",
      EPA, September 1974

      v.  "Manual for Preparation of Environmental  Impact Statements for
      Wastewater Treatment Works, Facilities Plans, and 208 Areawide Waste
      Treatment Management Plans", U.S. EPA, July  1974

      w.  "Survey of Facilities Using Land Application of Wastewater", EPA-
      430/9-73-006, July 1973

      x.  Water Quality Strategy Paper, second edition, "A  Statement of
      Policy for Implementing the Requirements of  the  1972  Federal  Water
      Pollution Control Act Amendments and Certain  Requirements of the 1972
      Marine Protection,  Research and Sanctuaries  Act", U.S. EPA, March 1974

      y.  "Protection of Shellfish Waters," Technical  Bulletin, EPA 430/9-74-010,
      July 1974.

NOTE:   A copy of the references listed in A.I and  A.2 may  be obtained from
        the Regional Offices listed in Appendix C.

A.3   CIRCULARS, AND MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATIONS

      z.  OMB Circular A-95, "Federal and Federally Assisted Programs and
      Projects, " Federal Register, Vol 38., No.  228,  November 28, 1973

      aa.  Grant, E.L. and Ireson, W.G., Principles of Engineering Economy,
      5th Edition, New York:  Ronald Press, 1970.

      bb.  James, L.D., and Lee, R., Economics of  Water Resources, New York:
      McGraw-Hill, 1971

-------
APPENDIX B - CONSTRUCTION GRANT REGULATION"

-------
                 MONDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1974

                 WASHINGTON. D.C.

                 Volum* 39 • Numtor 29


                 PART IR
                  ENVIRONMENTAL
                    PROTECTION
                      AGENCY
                   WATER POLLUTION
                       CONTROL
                           i wfcuits
                    for Waste Treatment Works
Mo. 90—Pt. m	1

-------
5252
AMD tlOULATJONS
   TKte 40—Protection of Envlronmont
    CHAPTER t~€NVIRONMENTAI.
        PHOTECTION AGENCY
        MMCHAPTEII •—WANTS
     PART 35—STATE AND LOCAL
             ASSISTANCE
   Final ComtrueHon dm* Regulations
  Tltl* n of the Federal Water Pollution
control Act Amendments of 1972  (Pub.
L, 92-600, 39 U.8.C.  12S1 et seq.) au-
thorizes the award of construction grants
for waste treatment  works. The award
of these  grants creates  a contractual
obligation of the United States for pay-
ment  of the Federal  share of the con-
struction costs of such projects.
  Interim regulations were published In
the FIMRAL RIOXSTER for  this program
on  February 28, 1978 (3ft  PR 0329).
Written comments receive* from Inter-
ested  parties are on file with th»  Envi-
ronmental   Protection  Agency.   The
agency has carefully considered all com-
ments submitted by the public, as well
as comments made by EPA and  State
Agency personnel on the basis  of their
experience under the Interim construc-
tion grant regulations. A number of these
comments have been adopted  or sub-
stantially satisfied by editorial  changes
In,  deletions from, or additions to this
subpart. An effort has baen made to con-
form the procedures and requirements of
the new grant system to the construction
grants program established under sec-
tion 8 of the prior Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act, as well as to ensure that
new statutory requirements will be met.
  Major changes In this subpart are the
following:
  (1) The three-step grant process has
been clarified to reflect that a basic grant
application Is  submitted  for the  initial
award of grant assistance, and that sub-
sequent related projects will be funded
through amendment of  this grant. In
addition, in accordance with section 2 of
Pub.  L. 93-243, enacted December 28,
1973,  the requirement that a Step 3 proj-
ect had to result In an "operable"  treat-
ment works has been deleted. A project
may be awarded for any "segment" of
treatment  works construction  as that
term  is defined in new 9 35.905-24,  which
provides that a segment may consist of
any portion of the treatment works con-
struction associated with a discrete con-
tract or subcontract to be awarded for
Step  1, 2, or 3 project work.
   (2)  Section  35.915 has been revised
and expanded  to explain more clearly
EPA requirements under Applicable stat-
utory provisions for  State priority sys-
tems  and the Interrelationship between
this subpart and regulations which have
been Issued under section 106 and 303(e)
of the Act. Each State will develop and
submit a single project priority list which
will remain In  effect until a new list Is
approved as a  part of the annual sec-
tion  106   State  program  submission;
once  priority has been established for a
project,  the project  will  retain this
priority until funded,  unless the State
otherwise provides through Its priority
system, "ftro new provisions  have also
been added. Section 35.815 (g)  requires
that each State reserve not less than 5
percent of fiscal year 1975 and subse-
quent State allotments of contract au-
thority in order to adequately provide for
cost overruns 'which are being experi-
enced under the construction grant pro-
gram. .Section  35.915(1) permits  (but
does not require) the State to establish a
separate reserve for grant assistance for
Step 1 and Step 2 projects whose selec-
tion for funding will be determined  by
the State agency subsequent to approval
of the project Hat, since experience has
demonstrated that States  require more
flexibility than is permitted by an an-
nual priority determination.
'   (3)  Facilities planning  requirements
are set forth in new 8t 35.917 through
35.917-9. In order to permit a transition
into these'new requirements, full  com-
pliance with substatutory requirements
will not be required except with reepect
to Step 1 work which is Initiated  alter
April 80, 1974. After October 31, 1974, a
"plan of study!' must be approved  prior
to the Initiation of Step 1 work. These
new procedures are designed  to assure
better accomplishment of the objectives
of the new Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act  and  collateral statutory re-
quirements  (such as  the National En-
vironmental Policy Act of 1969). These
statutory requirements must  be ad-
dressed  by  the applicant during the
facilities planning process.
   (4) New procedures have been estab-
lished in revised I 85.927-5 to assure that
the Infiltration/Inflow  requirements de-
rived from  section  201 (g) (3)  and (4)
of  the 1872 FWPCA Amendments are
met without unnecessary documentation
and expense.                  t
   (5) New provisions in §5 35.925-18 and
85.905-4 delineate the Agency's position
with respect to the initiation of project
construction prior to the award of grant
assistance for Steps 1,2, or 3. Section 206
of  the FWPCA  Amendments of  1872
clearly precludes the type of reimburse-
ment previously authorized under section
8 of the former FWPCA with respect to
projects (as defined under the program
authorized  by the  prior  statute)  on
which  construction was initiated  after
June 30, 1972. Due to  the institution of
the three-step grant  process under the
new FWPCA, it has  become necessary
to address  the issue  of reimbursement
with respect to "initiation of construc-
tion" (as defined in 35.905-4)  for  Steps
1 and 2. For this reason, and to permit
better program management by EPA and
State agencies, and to permit better ac-
complishment  of  statutory  objectives,
procedures  are set forth In 135.925-18
which will phase out the possibility of a
reimbursement claim. Eligible'Stop 1 or
Stop 2 project work initiated prior to
November 1,  1974, will be fully reim-
bursed in conjunction with  the  next
award of grant assistance, if reimburse-
ment  to requested  (see J36.945(a)).
Prior approval will be required with  re-
spect to Step 1 and Step  2 work which
                          is initiated after October 31, 1974. Step
                          1 or Step 2 work initiated after June 30,
                          1875. must  be  preceded by award of
                          •rant assistance or, in the  case of Step
                          1 work, prior approval of a plan of study
                          accompanied by reservation of funds for
                          the grant award.
                            'State agencies are requested to  fur-
                          nish  detailed  comment through  EPA
                          Regional Administrators with respect to
                          any difficulties which  may be encoun-
                          tered In the application of { 35.925-18.
                          This section will be revised, if necessary,
                          to permit an orderly  transition into a
                          fully nonreimbursable program  and at
                          the same time to assure that the develop-
                          ment of projects necessary to  comply
                          with applicable effluent and water quality
                          related requirements will not be hindered.
                             («) Section 35J80-4 has been added to
                          clarify the extent of the Federal  Gov-
                          ernment's obligation to pay 75 percent
                          of approved  project costs.  The Section
                          emphasizes the grantee's obligation to
                          notify EPA and the State of unavoidable
                          cost overruns and to  avoid the incur-
                          rence of costs in excess^of the approved
                          grant amount,  which operates as a cell-
                          ing upon Federal participation until and
                          unless revised through funding of grant
                          amendments from State allotments, for
                          project changes for which timely notifi-
                          cation has been received. The statutory
                          provision for funding of  this program
                          solely through  a system of  8tate-by-
                          Btate  allotments operates  to limit  the
                          possibility of funding  for cost overruns
                          incurred under these grants In a  more
                          rigid manner than cost overrun fund-
                          Ing under Federal contracts; cost  over-
                          runs under these grants must be funded
                          from State  allotment*, In  addition to
                          the funding ot new projects.
                             (7) Section 39.908 has been restated to
                          encourage more explicitly the use of ad-
                          vanced technology and accelerated con-
                          struction techniques. The  section  now
                          provides that"* * * processes or methods
                          which have  been successfully demon-
                          strated under lees than full scale condi-
                          tions may be utilized In the construc-
                          tion of treatment works • *  »." Under the
                          interim regulations, only processes which
                          had been demonstrated under "compa-
                          rable" conditions could be used.
                             (8)  New 180,938 codifies EPA proce-
                          dures  pertaining to the award of  con-
                          struction contracts by grantees during
                          Step 3. The baste intent of these proce-
                          dures  is to assure free and open  com-
                          petition  among bidders and  to assure
                          compliance with the nonrestrfctlve speci-
                          fication  requirement of section 204 (a)
                           (6)  of the  Act Section  35.937  which
                          would address  procurement by grantees
                          of professional and personal services, is
                          being  separately Issued as a proposed
                          regulation, which will not be effective
                          until an interim or final  regulation is
                          adopted.
                             In addition, a considerable number of
                          technical  revisions  have   been   made
                          throughout the subpart. Accordingly, for
                          the convenience of  users, the  entire
                          subpart is being republished.
                             Construction grant regulations adopt-
                          ed under See&m 8 at the former FWPCA
                                     UOISTU. VOL )•, NO. 2»—MONDAY, MHUAIY  II, 1974

-------
                                                             REGULATIONS
 (135.800 et sea. of this part) remain In.
 effect and are  applicable to  construc-
 tion grants awarded prior to January 1,
 1973. under the authority of  section 8.
 This Subpart E establishes policies and
 procedures applicable only to construc-
 tion grant awards from fiscal year 1973
 and later contractual obligation author-
 ity  allotments  under  Title  H of  tb»
 FWPCA Amendments of 1972.
  Regulations  have  been  promulgated
 separately as Subpart D of  this part to
 Implement the reimbursement provisions
 of  section  206 of  the 1972 FWPCA
 Amendments.
  This subpart is promulgated as a final
 regulation and will replace  the interim
 regulations   previously   promulgated.
 However,  because  of  the   numerous
 changes and additions which have been
 made throughout this  subpart,  public
 comment is  again  Invited. In particular,
 comment is  invited upon the new provi-
 sions of  the following sections:  35.903,
 86.908, 36.91S, 36.917 to 35.917-9, 35.930-6,
 35.938,  35.939,  and  36.960.  Interested
 parties are encouraged to submit written
 comments, views, or data concerning tola
 subpart  to the Director, Grants Admin-
 istration Division, Environmental Pro-
 tection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460.
 All such  submissions  received  on or be-
fore April 16,  1974,  wffl be  considered
 with respect to the need for amendment
 of this subpart.
  Effective date. This subpart shall  be-
 come effective February 11,1974. All EPA'
 construction grants awarded pursuant to
sections  109(b)  and 201 (g)(l) shall be
subject to this subpart. It la  necessary
 that this subpart take effect Immediately
in order to accomplish the objectives of
 the Act and to assure optimum achieve-
ment of  the efiuent  and water quality
 objectives established pursuant to  the
 Act.
  Dated: February 4, 1974.
                  RUSSXLL E. TRAIN,
Sec.
15.006-33
aftJMB-iS
86J06-44
3&B08-36
85406-3M
85,908.

36.010
86.910-1
85*10-2
35410-*

30.910-1
35.012
36.015

35.017
88.017-1
35.917-2
35.017-3
36.017-4
38.917-8
35.017-6

36.017-7

35.917-6

35.917-0

36.920
36.920-1
35.020-2
36.920-3
36.925
36.935-1
36.926-2
36.926-3
36.926-4
36.026-6
36.926-«
85.025-7
85.926-4
3A.926-8
85.095-10

36.925-11
88.026-13
80.928-18
35.025-14

36.926-18
36.025-10
96.926-17
Bluriu seiM
Treatment
                                 35.935-0
                       Administrator.    36.925-16
Bubpurt E—Brant* for Conttruetton of Treatment
  Work*—Federal  Water FDdutlofl Control Act
  Amendment* of 1972
Bee.
86.90ft.    Purpose.
86.003    Summary of construction grant
            program.
86.008    Definitions.
85.006-1   The Act.
88.906-2   Combined eewer.
38.906-3   Complete waste treatment system.
36.906-4   Construction.
85.906-8   Excessive Infiltration/Inflow.
86.005-6   Industrial  cost recovery.
86.906-7   Industrial coot recovery period.
86.008-8   Industrial user.
36.906-0   Infiltration.
86.905-10  Infiltration/Inflow.
86.008-11  Inflow.
35.906-12  Interceptor sewer.
86.006-18  Interstate agency.
86.008-14  Municipality.
86.006-16  Operable  treatment works.
85.006-16  Project.
36.906-17  Replacement.
36.005-18  Sanitary sewer.
88.S06-10  Sewage collection system
85*06-80  State.
S6.M6-8I  State agency.
86.026-10
38.027

36.927-1
36.927-2
35.027-8
36.927-4
35.037-6
35.918
36.928-1
86.928-3
35.930
36.030-1
35.930-4
36.030-8
36.980-4
36.930-t
86.930-6
36.936
35.036-1
36.096-1

S8.936-4
86.086-4
38,986-8
86.998-6
80.936-7
»«.0*6-B
 User charge.
 Advanced technology and
  ated construction
 Allocation of funds.
 Allotment.
 Beallotment.
 Fiscal Tears 1078 and 1074 allot-
  ments.
 Fiscal year 1078 allotments.
 Delegation to State Ag«an«<«^
 State determination  of project
  priority list.
 Facility planning (Step 1).
 Content of faculties plan.
 State responsibilities.
 Federal assistance.
 Planning scope and detail.
 Public participation.
 Acceptance by implementing gov-
  ernmental unite,
 State review and certtftcatton of
  facilities plan.
 Submission and approval of facfl-
  ttlesptan.
 Revision or amendment of facul-
  ties plan.
 Grant application.
 Eligibility.
 Procedure.
 Contents of application.
 Limitations on  award.
 Facilities  planning.
 Basin plan.
 Priority determination.
 State allocation.
 Funding and other capabilities.
 Permits.
 Design.
 Environmental  review.
 Civil Rights.
 Operation and  maintenance pro-
  gram.
 User cbargee.
 Industrial coat  recovery.
 Sewage collection system.
 Compliance  with Environmental
  Laws.
 Treatment of Industrial•
 Federal  activities.
 Retained amounts for n
  tlon and expansion.
 Limitation upon project costs in-
  curred prior to award.
 Section 206: Agencies aad plane.
 Sewer system evaluation and re-
  habilitation.
 Infiltration/Inflow  analj»!s.
 Sewer eyglein evaluation survey.
 Rehabilitation.
 Sewer use ordinance.
 Project procedures.
 Industrial cost  recovery.
 Recovered amounts.
 Retained amounts.
 Award of  grant assistance.
 Types of projects.
Orant amount.
 Orant term.
 Project scope.
 Federal share.
 Limitation on Federal share.
 Orant conditions.
 Non-Federal construction costs.
 Procurement; nonrestrietri* spso-
  incations.
 Bonding and insurance.
 State and local laws.
 Davis-Bacon and related statutes.
 Bqual employment oppovfeuUty.
          Supervision.
          Project completion.
          Copies of ooatraet documents,
86486-U  Project changes.
dtt»93sV~lft  OpOTfttiOU yfMJ &a»fcil*4t6vtMsll06.
35.936-13  User charges and Industrial cost
            recovery.
86.086-14  Final Inspection.
86.036-16  Utilisation of small and minority
            businesses.
86.936-16  Sewer use. ordinance and evalu-
            ation/rehabilitation program.
86.085-17  Training faculty.
35.087    Contracts for personal and pro-
            fessional services [Reserved].
88.038    Construction contracts of grant-
            ees.
38.936-1   Applicability.
36.988-2   Performance by contract.
86.93B-8   Type of contract.
36.038-4   Formal advertising.
35.938-6   Negotiation.
38.939    Compliance with procurement re-
            quirements.
36.040    Determination of allowable costs.
36.040-1   Allowable project costs.
35.040-3   Unallowable costs.
36.040-8   Costa allowable. If approved.
38.940-4   Indirect caste.
36.040-6   Disputes  concerning  allowable
            costs.
36.045    Grant payments.
36.960    Suspension  or termination of
            grants.
36.966    Grant  amendments  to Increase
            grant amounts.
36.000    Disputes.
  AUTHOBXTT: Sees. 100(b), 201 through 206,
207, 210 through ua, and 5O1(»), 809, and
511 of Pub. Lr92-600 (86 Btat. H* 88 UJS.C.
1261) as amended by Pub. L. 96-348.

8 35.900   Purpose.

  This subpart supplements  the  EPA
general grant regulations and procedures
(Part 30 of this chapter) and establishes
policies and procedures for grants to as-
sist the construction of publicly owned
waste treatment works in compliance
with the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act

S 35.903   Summary of construction grant
     program.

  (a)  The  construction of  Federally fi-
nanced waste treatment works is gener-
ally accomplished In three steps:  Step
1 facilities  plans  and related elements;
Step  2  preparation  of   construction
drawings and specifications;  and  Step
3 fabrication  and building of  a treat-
ment works.
  (b)  The  Regional Administrator may
award grant assistance for a Step 1, Step
2, or Step  3 project,  or, under  special
conditions,  for a project involving a com-
bination of Steps  2 and 3. A "project"
(see { 35.905-16) may consist of an en-
tire step or any "segment" (see I 35.905-
24) of construction within a step.
  (c) Grants an awarded from State al-
locations (see 135.910) pursuant to stat-
ute. No grant assistance may be awarded
unless priority for a project has been de-
termined In accordance with an approved
State priority system pursuant  to ( 35.-
915. The State is responsible for deter-
mining the wnount and timing of BWeral
assistant to each municipality for which
treatment worts funding it needed.
                                FEDERAL  REGISTER, VOL 39, NO. 29—MONDAY, HMUAXY 11, 1974

-------
                                            RULES AND REGULATIONS
  (d) The scope of a project will be ini-
tially defined by a prospective applicant.
This initial project scope may be revised
by the State when priority for the project
Is established. The final determination of
project  scope will be made by the Re-
gional Administrator when grant assist-
ance is awarded (see 8 35.930-4).
  (e) An application must first be sub-
mitted to the State agency for each pro-
posed grant. The basic grant application
must meet the requirements for the proj-
ect set forth in 8 35.920-3. Submissions
required for grant assistance for subse-
quent related projects shall be provided
in the form of amendments to the basic
application. The State agency will for-
ward to the  appropriate EPA Regional
Administrator complete project applica-
tions or amendments thereto for which
priority has been determined by the State
agency.  The  grant will consist of the
grant agreement resulting from the basic
application   and  grant  amendments
awarded for subsequent related projects.
  (f) Generally,  grant assistance for
projects Involving Steps 2 or 3 will not
be awarded unless the Regional Admin-
istrator first  determines that  the facil-
ities planning requirements of {8 35.917
to 35.917-9 of this subpart have been met.
After October 31, 1974, written approval
of a "plan of study" (see J35.920-3(a)
(1)) must be obtained prior to initiation
of facilities planning. After June 30,1975,
facilities planning may not be initiated
prior to approval of a Step 1 grant (see
58 35.925-18 and 35.905-4).
  (g) If initiation of Step 1, 2, or 3 con-
struction  (see 8 35.905-4) has occurred
prior to award of grant assistance, costs
Incurred prior to the approved  date of
Initiation of construction will not be paid
and  award will not be made except
under the circumstances set forth In
6 35.925-18.
  Ch) The Regional Administrator may
not  award grant  assistance unless the
project application requirements of § 35.-
920-3 have been met and he  has  made
the determinations required by  5 35.925
et seq.
  (1) A  grant or  grant  amendment
awarded for a project under this subpart
shall constitute  a contractual  obligation
of the United States to pay the  Federal
share of allowable project coste up to the
amount approved in the grant agreement
(Including amendments) in accordance
with ! 35.930-6  of this  subpart, subject
to the grantee's compliance with the con-
ditions of the grant (see 8 35.936 et seq.)
and other applicable requirements of this
subpart.
   
-------
                                            Mfli» ANB
6 35.905-7  Industrial  Coot  Recovery
    Period.
  That period during which the grant
amount allocable  to  the treatment of
wastes from Industrial users is recovered
from the Industrial users of such works.
§ 35.905-8  Industrial uter.
  Any nongovernmental user of publicly
owned treatment works Identified in the
Standard Industrial Classification Man-
ual,  1972,  Office of  Management  and
Budget, as amended and supplemented,
under the following divisions:
  (a) Division A. Agriculture, Forestry,
and Fishing.
  (b) Division B. Mining.
  (c) Division D. Manufacturing.
  (d) Division E. Transportation, Com-
munications, Electric, Gas,  and Sanitary
Services.
  (e) Division I. Services.  A user in ttie
Divisions listed may be excluded If It is
determined that It will  introduce  pri-
marily  segregated  domestic wastes or
wastes from sanitary conveniences.

§ 35.905-9  Infiltration.
  The water entering a sewer  system,
Including   sewer  service   connections,
from the ground, through such means as,
but not limited  to, defective pipes,  pipe
Joints, connections, or manhole walls. In-
filtration  doe* not Include, and is dis-
tinguished from, Inflow.
g 95.905-10  Infiltration/inflow.
  The total quantity of water from  both
infiltration and Inflow without distin-
guishing the source.
§ 35.905-11  Inflow.
  The water  discharged  into a sewer
system,  Including  service connections
from such sources as, but not limited to,
roof  leaders, cellar,  yard, and  area
drains, foundation  drains,  cooling water
discharges, drains  from  springs  and
swampy areas,  manhole  covers,   cross
connections from storm sewers and  com-
bined sewers, catch basine,  storm waters,
surface run-off, street wash waters,  or
drainage. Inflow does not  include, and
Is distinguished from, Infiltration.
8 35.905-12  Interceptor sewer.
  A sewer whose primary .purpose  is to
transport  wastewaters   from  collector
sewers to a treatment facility.
§ 35.905-13  Interstate agency.
  An agency .of two or more States es-
tablished by or pursuant to an agreement
or compact approved  by the Congress, or
any other agency of two or more States,
having substantial powers  or duties per-
taining to the control of  water pollution.

§35.905-14  Municipality.
  A city, town,  borough, county, parish,
district, association, or other public body
 (including an Intel-municipal agency of
two or more of the  foregoing entitles)
         created by or pursuant to State law, or
         an Indian tribe or an authorized Indian
         tribal organization, having  Jurisdiction
         over disposal of sewage, Industrial wastes,
         or other wastes, or a designated and ap-
         proved management agency under sec-
         tion 308 of the Act. This definition ex-
         cludes ft special district, such as a school
         district, which does not have  as one of
         Its  principal responsibilities  the treat-
         ment, transport, or  disposal  of liquid
         wastes.
         8 35.905-15  Operable treatment work*.
           An operable treatment works is a treat-
         ment works that:
           (a) Upon completion of construction
         will treat wastewater, transport waste-
         wafer to or from treatment, or transport
         and dispose of wastewater in  a manner
         which will significantly Improve an ob-
         jectionable water Quality related situa-
         tion or health hazard In existence prior
         to construction of the treatment works,
         and
           (b) Is a component part of  a com-
         plete waste  treatment  system  which,
         upon completion of construction for the
         complete  waste treatment  system  (or
         completion  of  construction  of  other
         treatment works In the "system  In ac-
         cordance with  a schedule approved by
         the Regional Administrator)  wiH com-
         ply  with  all  applicable statutory and
         regulatory requirements.

         § 35.903-16  Project.
           The scope of  work for which  Federal
         assistance  is  awarded  by  a  grant or
         grant amendment pursuant to this sub-
         part. For the purposes of this subpart,
         the scope of work is defined as Step 1,
         Step  2, or Step 3  of treatment works
         construction or segments thereof (see
         8 35.905-24 and S 35.930-4).
         g 35.905-17   Replacement.
           Expenditures  for  obtaining and  in-
         stalling equipment,  accessories, or ap-
         purtenances which are necessary during
         the service life  of the treatment works
         to maintain  the capacity and perform-
         ance for which such works were designed
         and constructed. The term "operation
         and maintenance" includes replacement.
         § 35.905-18   Sanitary sewer.
           A sewer Intended to carry only sani-
         tary  or  sanitary and industrial  waste
         waters   from   residences,  commercial
         buildings, industrial plants,  and Institu-
         tions.
         § 35.905-19   Sewage collection system.
           For the purpose of § 35.925-13 of this
         subpart, each, and all, of the common
         lateral sewers, within a publicly-owned
         treatment system, which are primarily
         installed to receive wastewaters directly
         from facilities which convey wastewater
         from Individual structures or from priv-
         ate property, and which Include service
         connection " Y" fittings designed for con-
nection with those faculties. The facilities
which convey wastewater from individual
structures or  from private property to
the public lateral sewer, or Its equivalent,
are specifically excluded from the defini-
tion, with the exception of pumping units,
and  pressurized lines,  for individual
structures or groups of structures when
such  units  are cost effective  and  are
owned and maintained by the grantee.
§ 35.905-20   State.
  A State, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Vir-
gin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and
the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.
§ 35.905-21   State agency.
  The  State water  pollution   control
agency designated by the Governor hav-
ing  responsibfifty  for enforcing State
laws  relating to the abatement of pollu-
tion.

§ 35.905-22   Storm sewer.
  A sewer Intended to carry only storm
waters,  surface run-off,  street wash
waters, and drainage.
§ 35.905-23  Treatment works.
  Any devices and systems used in the
storage, treatment, recycling, and recla-
mation of municipal sewage or industrial
wastes of a liquid  nature  to Implement
section 201 of the act, or necessary to re-
cycle or reuse water  at the most eco-
nomical cost over the useful life of the
works. Including Intercepting sewers, out-
fall sewers,  sewage collection systems,
pumping, power, and other equipment
and their appurtenances; extensions, im-
provement,  remodeling, additions,  and
alterations thereof: elements essential to
provide a reliable recycled supply such as
standby treatment units and clear  well
facilities; and any works,  including site
acquisition  of the  land that will be an
Integral part .of the treatment process or
is, used Tor ultimate disposal or residues
resulting from  such  treatment:  or  any
other method or system for preventing,
abating, reducing, storing, treating, sepa-
rating, or disposing of municipal waste.
Including storm water run-off, or indus-
trial  waste, including waste in combined
storm water and sanitary sewer systems.
§ 35.905-24 Treatment Work* Segment.
  A  treatment  works segment may be
any  portion of an operable treatment
works described in an approved facilities
plan, pursuant to I 35.917. and which can
be  identified as a discrete contract or
 subcontract for Step 1,2, or 3 work. Com-
pletion of construction of a treatment
works segment may, but need not, result
in an operable treatment works.

 § 35.905-25  Useful life.
  Estimated period during which a treat-
 ment works will be operated.
HBUM
                                              VOC 39, NO. 29— MONDAY. KMUARY 11, 1974

-------
5256

§ 35.905-26  User charge.
  A charge levied on users of a treatment
work* for the cost of operation and main-
tenance of such works, pursuant to Sec-
tion 304 (b) of the Act and this subpart.
g 35.908  Advanced technology and  ac-
     celerated construction techniques.
  It la the policy of the Environmental
Protection Agency  to  encourage and,
where possible, to assist in the develop-
ment  of accelerated construction tech-
niques and  new  or advanced  processes,
methods,  and  technology for the con-
struction of waste treatment works. New
or advanced processes or methods may be
utilized in the construction of treatment
works  under  this  subpftrt.  New  tech-
nclogy or processes may be  developed or
demonstrated with the assistance of EPA
research   or   demonstration   grants
awarded under Title  I of the Act. New
processes or methods which have been
successfully  demonstrated   under   less
than full scale conditions may be utilized
to  the construction of treatment works
under this subpart.
 § 35;910  Allocation of fund..
 § 35.910-1   Allotment.
   Allotments shall be made  among the
 States from funds  authorized to be ap-
 propriated pursuant to section 207 in the
 ratio  that  the  most recent congres-
 slonally approved estimate of the cost of
 constructing all  needed publicly owned
 treatment works In each State bean to
 the most recent congresslonally approved
 estimate  of the cost of construction  of
 all needed  publicly  owned  treatment
 works In all of the States.  Computation
 of a State's ratio shall be carried out to
 the  nearest   ten  thousandth percent
  (0.0001 percent)  and  allotted amounts
 wiU be rounded to the nearest thousand
 dollars except for Fiscal Year 1975 which
 will be rounded to the nearest fifty dol-
 lars.
  § 35.910-2  Reallotment.

    (a)  Bums  allotted to a  State under
  I 35.810-1 shall be available for obliga-
  tion on and after the date of such allot-
  ment and shall continue to be available
  to such State for a  period of one  year
  after the close of the  fiscal year for which
  such sums are authorized. Funds remain-
  Ing unobligated  at the end of the allot-
  ment period will be immediately reallot-
  ted by the Administrator,  on the  basis
  of the most  recent  allotment ratio to
  those States which have used their full
  allotment.
    (b)  ReaUotted sums shall be added to
  the last allotments  made  to  the States
  and shall  be in addition  to  any other
      RULES AND  REGULATIONS

funds otherwise allotted,  and be avail-
able for obligation In the same manner
and  to  the same  extent  as such last
allotment.
   (c)  Any sums which have been obli-
gated under this subpart which remain
after  final payment,  or after  termina-
tion of a project, shall be credited to the
State to which  such sums were last al-
lotted. Such released sums shall be added
to the amounts last allotted to such State
and shall be available for obligation in
the same manner and to the  same extent
as such last allotment.
§ 35.910-3  Fiscal Yean 1973 and 1974
      Allotments.
   (a) For Fiscal Years ending June 30,
 1973 and June  30, 1974, sums  of $2 bil-
lion  and $3  billion,  respectively,  have
been  allotted on  the basis of  Table in
of Bouse Public Works Committee Print
No. 92-60.
   tt>) The percentages used m comput-
 ing  the State  allotments  set  forth in
 paragraph (c)  of  this section  for Fiscal
 Years 1973 and 1974 are as follows:
                                      StaU
                                                      o»l year
                                                      1973
                                                                1874
   State
 Alabama —
 Alaska  	
 Arizona ...
 Arkansas ._
 California .
 Colorado ,-
 Connecti-
   cut —,	
 District of
   Columbia
 Delaware ..
 Florida	
 Oeokgla ...
 Hawaii	
 Idaho	
 Illinois	
 Indiana	
 Iowa	
 Kansas .__
 Kentucky  -
 Louisiana  .
 Maine	
 Maryland —
 Massachu-
   setts 	
 Michigan ..
 Minnesota .
 Mississippi -
 Missouri ...
 Montana ..
 Nebraska -.
 Nevada 	
  New Hamp-
    shire 	
  New Jersey.
  New Mex-
    ico 	
  New York—
 Per-
centage
 0.3013
  .3383
  .1846
  .3636
 9.8176
  .3166
 1. 6810

   .7114
   .6666
 3.6364
   .0730
   .3303
   .3177
 6.3480
 3.8669
 1.1087
   .3743
   .6699
   .9438
 0.8675
 4.3683

 8.7676
 7. 9814
 3.0310
   .3936
  1.6666
   .1663
   .3708
   .3877

   .8309
  7.7040

   .3108
 11.0678
  State
North Car-
  olina 	
North Da-
  kota 	
Ohio 	
Oklahoma' .
Oregon	
pennsylr
  vania ..
Rhode
  Island ...
South Car-
  olina 	
South Da-
  kota 	
Tennessee .
Texas  	
Utah	
Vermont _—
Virginia	
Washing-
  ton 	
West Vir-
  ginia 	
Wisconsin .
Wyoming ..
 Guam  ....
Puerto
  Rico	
Virgin
  Islands ..
 American
  Samoa...
Trust Ter-
   ritory of
   Pacific
   Islands .-
                                  Per-
                                 centage

                                   .0339

                                   .0467
                                  6.7737
                                   .4608
                                   .8494

                                  6.4314

                                   .4889

                                   .0406

                                   .0048
                                  1.160&
                                  9.7694
                                   .1403
                                   .2318
                                  3.9143

                                    .8906

                                    .4999
                                  1.7416
                                    .0368
                                   .0873

                                    .8846

                                    .0893

                                    .0048
Alabama	
Alaska	
Arizona	
Arkaiuu	—
California	
Colorado	
Connecticut	
Dels ware.	....
District ot Columbia	
Florid*	
Georgia	
Hawaii	
Idaho	_•.	
Illinois	
Indiana	-	
Iowa	_
Kansas	
Kentucky	.	
Louisiana	—	
Maine	.	
Maryland	
Massachusetts..		
Michigan	
Minnesota	
Mlsslssipj*	
Missouri	
Montana....	-	
Nebraska		
Nevada	
New Hampshire.—	
New Jersey—	
New Mexioo.ai	
New York	
North Carolina.	
North Dakota.	
Ohio	
Oklahoma	
 Oregon	
 Pennsylvania.	
 Rhode Island		
 South Carolina.........—
 South Dakota	...
 Tennessee....	...L	
 Texas	..	..
 Utah	
 Vermont...	.	j..
 Virginia 		,.
 Washington	.-.	
 Wert Virginia.	
 Wisconsin	
 Wyoming.	
 Guam.	............	
 Puerto Bloo	
 Virgin Island!	
 American Samoa .....	
 Trust Territory  el Pacific
 17,224,000
 4,604,000
 2,092,000
 7,072,000
106,861,000
 «, 132,000
 88,020,000
 11,180,000
 14,228,000
 72,628,000
 19, MO, 000
 «, 806,000
 4,864,000
 124,978,000
 67,824,000
 28,114,000
 7,484,000
 IS, 198,000
 18,866,000
 19,860,000
 85,164,000
 76,162,000
 160,628,000
 40,638,000
  7,670,000
 8s.ua, ooo
  8,824,000
  7,416,000
  6,764,000
 16,618,000
 164,080,000
  4,216,000
 221,166,000
 18,468,000
   934,000
 116,471,000
  9,216,000
 16,988,000
 108,428,000
  9,778,000
 12,910,000
  1,826,000
 28.210,000
 66,888,000
  2,816,000
  4,486,000
 68,286,000
 17,812,000
  9,998,000
 11,830,000
    686.000
   1,744,000
  17,680,000
   1,786,000
     96,000
110,886,000
 6,766,000
 4,088,000
 10,608,000
»4,628,000
 9,408.000
 60,430,000
 IB, 606.000
 21,842,000
108,792,000
 29,190,000
 9,000,000
 6,631,000
187,4*7,000
100,980,000
 34,671,000
 11,220,000
 19,797,000
 28,284,000
 20,026,000
127,746,000
112,728,000
289,442,000
 60,957,000
 11,906,000
 49,668,000
  4,986,000
 11,124,000
  8,631,000
 24,927,000
711,120,000
  6,324,000
381,734,000
 27,667,000
  1,401.000
178,211,000
 18,824,000
 26,432,000
 162,642,000
 14,667,000
 19,366,000
  2,844,000
 34,816,000
 81,062,000
  4,224,000
  6,664,000
 87,429,000
 26,718,000
 14,997,000
 62,246,000
    804,000
  1,616,00!)
 36.636,000
  2,679,000
    144,000
                                    .0378

                                 100.0000

  (c) Baaed  upon  the percentages, the
muns allotted to the States u ot July 1.
1073. for Fiscal Years 1978 and 1974 are
as follows:
                          766,000     1,134,000

      Total,	2,000,000,000  1,000,000,000


  § 35.910-4   Fiscal Year 1975 Allotments.

    (a) For  the   Fiscal  Tear   ending
  June  30,  1976. a sum of *4 billion has
  been  allotted based 50  percent  on ttae
  ratios of Table I and 60 percent of Table
  n  of House Public  Works Committee
  Print No. 93-28,  pursuant to  Pub.  L.
  93-243.
    (b) The percentages used In comput-
  ing the State allotments set forth in par-
  agraph (c)  of  this  section, for Fiscal
  Tear 1976 are as follows:
               Per-                  Per-
   State      centage    State      ventage
  Alabama...  0.8O16   Delaware ..  0.6348
  Alaska	-  0.3880   District of
  Arizona	  0.4066     Oolum-
  Arkansas  _.  0.6069     bla	  0.9724
  California .  11.4340   Florida	4.1838
  Colorado  „  0.7867   Georgia —  1.9369
  Connect-              Hawaii	  1.0488
    lout ......  1.7687   Idaho	  0.3009
                                   FEDERAL REOICTIR, VOL. 39, NO. 29—MONDAY, KMUARY W, 1*74

-------
   State
lUmoU .	
Indiana ...
Iowa ......
            Per-
Kentucky .
Louisiana..
Maine	
Maryland ..
Massachu-
  setts 	
Michigan „
Minnesota .
Mississippi .
Missouri	
Montana —
Nebraska ..
New Hamp-
  shire 	
New Jersey .
New
  Mexico —
New York ..
North Caro-
  lina 	
North
  Dakota —
Ohio	
Oklahoma .
Oregon	
 6.4178
 lifllM-
 1.0013
 1.0323
 1.6679
 0.7249
 0.6870
 1.8767

 3.2946
 4. 7978
 1. 6341
 0.6356
 1.8960
 0. 1421
 0. 5314
 0. 4755

 0. 8920
 6.4789

 0.1869
12. 4793

 1.7029
                     Mtute
                   P-Bnsyl
                                Per-
                               centage

                          	  8. MM
                                            lULES AND  REGULATIONS

                                       West Virginia ................. «S7.736,700
                               0.5308

                               1.
                               0.0807
                               1.2308
                               1.6634
            o.oaia
            4. 9184
            1.19B3
            0.8682
Rhode
  Island	
South
  Carolina.
South
  Dakota ..
Tennessee .
Texas .	
Utah	  0.4817
Vermont	0.3001
Virginia ...  2.5096
Washing-
  ton 	  1.6468
West
  Virginia. .
Wisconsin _
Wyoming „
Guam	  0. 0478
Puerto
  Rloo 	
Virgin
  Islands __
American
  Samoa —
Trust Terri-
  tory of the
  Pacific
  Islands ..  0.0133
                                             »co
                                       American 8iuw»
                                       Trurt   Territory
                                                        of   Pacffle
                                                                    a, ITS. ooo
                                                                   40,892,900

                                                                    *'_!£• SSX
                                                                      B7«,700
                               0.9698
                               1. 3317
                               0.0768
                                1.0380

                                0.0796
                                0. 0147
  (c)  Based upon the percentages set
forth  in paragraph (b> of this  section
and  allotment adjustments  the sums
allotted to the States as of January  1,
1874. are as follows:
                                         Allotment adjustment has been made
                                       for those States that would receive an al-
                                       lotment that would  be less than their
                                       Fiscal Year 1972 allotment. The allot-
                                       ment of those States which fall below
                                       their Fiscal Year 1972 allotment will be
                                       restored to their Fiscal Year 1972 allot-
                                       ment using funds from the total allot-
                                       ment. Remaining funds will be allocated
                                       to States   (excluding the  States  with
                                       allotment   adjustment)  based  on  ad-
                                       justed percentages. Minimum allotment
                                       amounts are determined on the basis 01
                                       Table rn  of House Public Works" Com-
                                       mittee Print 93-28.
                                       § 35.912  Delegation lo State agencies.
                                         It Is the policy of  the Environmental
                                       Protection Agency to utilize staff capa-
                                       bilities of  State agencies  to the maxi-
                                       mum  extent practicable through  opti-
                                       mum utilization of  available State and
                                       Federal resources and  to eliminate un-
                                       necessary  duplJcative reviews of docu-
                                       ments that are required as a part of tne
                                       construction grant process. Accordingly,
Alabama	--	$83,785,150  the Regional Administrator may enter
Alaska	-	  15,059.100  into-a written agreement, where appro-
Arizona 	—	  17,695,750  priate  with a State agency within his
Arkanas	  23,880,100  BeKlon  for certification by the State
California	-	-- *?!•*!?• H*  agency of the technical and/or admin-

I™ ;-;;:=;;  _£•.  EMK sstsx
District of Columbia	  38.233.800  grantee may request review by tne ue-
Fiorida 		— 164,496,400  gional Administrator of an adverse rec-
Oeorgia -	-		  78,153,000  ommendatlon by a State agency.
SSSo"	IlirHIIIIIIII  "io^Soo  §35.915  State aetenninaUo* ef project
nilnoBi 	262,3111.700      priority list.
Indian*	  ?£•£!?• 22?    Construction grants will  be  awarded
5J.L.-	-	  iom 600  *"»»  allotments available pursuant to
ieSy I III" IIIIIIIIIII  as! III'. ™  I 35.910 in accordance with the approved
Louisiana	~IH~  ssisBi.MO  State project priority list which is de-
Maine 			  28,227,000  rived  from the  approved  State priority
Maryland 	  M, 128, loo  system.
Massachusetts	  80,210,900    (ftj state priority system. The  State
Michigan 		128>!!!2>f£!  priority system  must  be  designed to
!£52££ 	  22" we' m  achieve optimum water quality Unprove-
ui_ao^i^		  74 Mfl loo  ment consistent with the goals and re-
_S£:"::::::::::::::::::   T.SJtSS  quirements of the Act. it shan be  sub-
NHwaska	  20,894,000  mitted and revised m accordance  with
Nevada  	  18,699.600  Subpart B of this part.
New Hampshire	...	  3«,072,95O    (laj state municipal discharge inven-
New Jersey—		284,656,200  f   pursuant to 1138.43 of this Chapter,
New Mexico	^.	  io. 670.600  ^  ^ ^      cy shall prepare a »unlci-
£* J"*SJ7"		^ 2J" 2W  PM discharge Inventory which sets forth
K Dai°oS!::::::::~:::::  I:™™  L the entire Stete a ranWngofanslg-
Ohio        -   	193,878,700  nlflcant municipal discharges (including,
Oklahoma 	  48.997.4oo  for example, eligible  municipal septic
Oregon	  84,136,700  systems).  Such list must be submitted as
Pennsylvania	223,744, loo  part of the annual State program for the
Rhode island	  20.864.000  ar)t)rOvai  of the Regional Administrator

S±£ r^SL**-	  "7 3*M m  «"<*«• * S6'557- ^ 8tate municti»J *"*-
Tenn^f™::::::::^.::: lalSnllM  <>*»***  inventory shall be updated an-
Texas	-	106,900,260  nually and submitted with the State pro-
Utah  I.I	  16.679.600  gram punraan* to I 35.555 of thte part.
Vermont .„....._........_.  11.800,800    (
-------
6258
     MILES  AND REGULATIONS
be utilized must be identified since proj-
ect* initially funded with fiscal year 1976
fundfl wffl be subject to beat practicable
waste  treatment  technology  require-
ments (aee 13B.930-4).
  (d) Submission, amendment  and" ap-
proval of project priority Hit. The proj-
ect not shall be submitted and approved
pnm^iiy M part of the State Program
and may be amended pursuant to i 35.655
and 135.557.
  (e) Application of additional funds. It
the State has submitted a project prior-
ity list  containing  more projects than
could be funded under the original allot-
ment,  upon allocation of  additional
funds, the Regional Administrator's ap-
proval of the project priority list will be
extended to the required number of proj-
ects. If there is an Insufficient number of
projects on the list, projects  may be
added to the list, pursuant to  II 35.655
and 36.567  to account for  additional
funds which are available.
  (f) Public participation. Hie Regional
Administrator may not approve a proj-
ect priority list or any significant amend-
ment thereto unless he determines that
a public hearing pursuant to { 35.556 of
this Part has been held on such list prior
to approval. This public hearing may be
conducted in conjunction with a regular
public meeting of the State agency, pro-
vided that adequate and timely  State-
wide notice of  the meeting, including
publication  of  the  proposed project
priority list Is given, and attendees at
the meeting are afforded adequate op-
portunity to express their views concern-
ing the  list. A public hearing is not re-
quired with respect to any amendment
of the list (including deletion of a proj-
ect) which the State agency  and the
Regional  Administrator  agree is  not
significant.
  (g) Reserve  for grant increases. In
developing the project  priority list the
State must make provision for grant in-
creases  for projects awarded grant as-
sistance under this subpart. A reason-
able portion, not less than five percent,
of each  allotment for fiscal year  1975 and
later years made  pursuant to { 35.910
shall be reserved for grant amendments
to Increase grant amounts pursuant to
IS 36.935-11  and  35.955.  A  statement
specifying the amount to be reserved for
grant amendments shall be submitted by
the State with the project priority list
The reserve period must be for not more
than eighteen months after  the date
of such  allotment. If any of the reserved
amount remains, this amount may be
utilized  for the funding  of  additional
projects, in accordance with the pro-
cedures set forth  in paragraph  (e) of
this section.
  (h)  Grant  increases. The Regional
Administrator may approve a grant In-
crease, upon application by the grantee,
and upon written confirmation by the
State lor each application, that the grant
Increase is justified. The grant Increases
will be made from the amount reserved,
by the State, for that purpose, from cur-
rently available  allotments pursuant to
paragraph  (g) of this section.
  (1)  Reserve lor Step  1 and  Step 2
Projects. In developing th* project pri-
ority list, the State may  (but need not)
make provision for an additional weam
for grant assistance for Step 1 and Step a
projects whose selection for funding win
be determined by the State agency sub-
sequent to approval of the project list. A
reasonable  portion, but not more than
ten percent, of each  allotment for fiscal
year 1975 and later years made pursuant
to  S 35.910  may be  reserved for  this
purpose. A  statement  specifying  the
amount to be reserved for such grant
assistance shall be submitted by the State
with the project priority list. The reserve
period may be for not more than eighteen
months after the date of such allotment
If any of the reserved amount remains,
this amount  may be utilized  for the
funding  of  additional projects, in ac-
cordance with the procedures set forth
in paragraph (e)  of this section.  The
funding of Step 1 and Step 2 projects
from this reserve  should be consistent
with  the approved State strategy  and
should be developed In conjunction with,
but need not rigidly follow, the rank-
Ing in the municipal discharge inven-
tory.
§35.917  Fadlitle* Planning (Step 1).
  (a) These regulations set forth the fa-
cilities planning required as an element
of the  construction of publicly owned
wastewater treatment works and supple-
ment other provisions of this subpart.
  (b)  Facilities  planning  consists  of
those necessary plans and studies which
are directly related to the construction
of treatment works, In compliance with
section 301 and 302 of the Act. Facilities
planning will demonstrate the need for
the proposed facilities and,  by a syste-
matic evaluation of feasible alternatives,
will also demonstrate that the proposed
measures represent the most cost-effec-
tive means of meeting established effluent
and water quality goals, recognizing en-
vironmental and social considerations.
  (c) Facilities planning, determined by
tfae Regional Administrator to have been
initiated prior to May 1.  1974, must be
in accordance with applicable statutory
requirements  (see SI 35.925-7 and  35.-
935-8), and such other requirements  of
this subpart as may be determined to be
appropriate by the  Regional Adminis-
trator.
  (d) Full compliance with the facilities
planning provisions of this subpart will
be required prior to award of grant as-
sistance for Step 2 or Step 3 where the
Regional Administrator determines such
planning was initiated (as  determined
pursuant to {8 35.905-4 and 35.926-18)
after April 30,1974.
Grant assistance for Step 2 or 3 may be
awarded prior to approval of a facilities
plan for the entire geographic area to be
served by the complete waste treatment
system of which the proposed treatment
works will  be an  integral part If the
Regional Administrator determines that
applicable statutory  requirements  have
been met (see 135.926-7  and 35.925-8);
that the .facilities  planning  relevant to
the proposed Step 2 or 3 project has been
substantially completed: and ttiat the
Step 2 or 3 project for which grant as-
sistance is made win not be significantly
affected by the completion of the facil-
ities plan and will be a component part
of the complete system: Provided, That
the  applicant  agrees  to  complete the
facilities plan on  a schedule the State
accepts  (subject  to approval  by the
Regional  Administrator), which sched-
ule shall be inserted as a special condi-
tion in the grant agreement
   (e) After October 31,1974, written ap-
proval of a plan of study (see { 35.920-3
(a)(l) must be obtained prior to initia-
tion of facilities planning. After June 30,
1975, facilities  planning may  not be
initiated prior to  approval of a Step  1
grant or approval of a plan of study ac-
companied by reservation of funds for  a
Step  i  grant  (see  {135.925-18 and
35.905-4).
   (f) Faculties planning guidelines pub-
lished by the Administrator are for ad-
visory Information only.
   (g) If the Information required to be
furnished as part of a facilities plan has
been developed separately, It should be
furnished and Incorporated by reference
in the facilities plan. Planning previously
or collaterally accomplished under local,
State or Federal programs will be utilized
(not duplicated).
§ 35.917-1  Content of Fadlitie* Flan.
  Facilities planning which is initiated
after April 30,1974, must encompass the
following to the extent deemed appro-
priate by the Regional Administrator:
   (a) A  description  of  the treatment
works for which construction drawings'
and specifications are to be prepared.
This  description shall Include prelimi-
nary engineering data, cost estimates for
design and construction of the treatment
works, and a schedule for completion of
design and construction. The preliminary
engineering data  may include,  to the
extent appropriate, such Information as
a schematic flow diagram, unit processes,
design data regarding detention  times,
flow rates, sizing of units, etc.
   (b) A description of the selected com-
plete waste treatment system (s) of which
the proposed treatment works Is a part
The description shall cover all elements
of the system, from the service area and-
collection sewers, through treatment, to
the ultimate discharge of treated waste-
waters and disposal of sludge.
   (c) Infiltration/Inflow  documentation
in accordance with S 35.927.
   (d)  A  cost-effectiveness  analysis of
alternatives for the treatment works and
for the waste  treatment system(s) of
which the treatment  works is  a part
The selection of the system(s) and the
choice of the treatment works on which
construction drawings and specifications
are to be based shall reflect the cost-
effectiveness analysis. This analysis shall
Include:
  (1) The relationship of  the size and
capacity of alternative works to the needs
to be served. Including reserve capacity;
  (2) An evaluation of alternative flow
and waste reduction measures;
                              FEDERAL REGISTER, VOt. 39, NO. 29—MONDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1974

-------
                                             KVLiS AND  REGULATIONS
                                                                         5259
   (3) An evaluation of Improved effluent
 Quality attainable by upgrading the op-
 eration and maintenance and efficiency
 of existing facilities as an alternative or
 supplement  to  construction  of  new
 faculties;
   (4) An evaluation of the capability of
 each alternative to meet applicable ef-
 fluent limitations. The treatment works
 design must be based upon not less than
 secondary treatment as denned by the
 Administrator pursuant to sections 301
 (a) (1) (B) and 304(d) (1) of the Act;
   (5) An identification of, and provision
 for,  applying the best practicable waste
 treatment technology (BFWTT) as de-
 nned by the Administrator, based upon
 an evaluation of  technologies included
 under each of ttie following waste treat-
 ment management techniques:
  (1)  Biological  or physical-chemical
 treatment and  discharge  to  receiving
 waters;
  (11) Treatment and reuse; and
  (ill) Land application techniques.
 All Step 2, Step 3 or combination Step
 2-3  projects for publicly-owned treat-
 ment works construction from funds au-
 thorized for any  fiscal  year  beginning
 after June 30, 1974, shall be based upon
 application of BWPTT,  as a minimum.
 Where application of BFWTT would not
 meet water quality standards, the facil-
 ities plan shall provide for attaining such
 standards. Such provision shall consider
 the  alternative of  treating  combined
 sewer overflows.
  (6) An evaluation of  the alternative
 means by which ultimate disposal can be
 effected  for  treated wastewnter  and
for sludge materials  resulting from  the
 treatment process, and a determination
 of the means chosen.
  (7) An adequate assessment of the ex-
 pected environmental impact  of alter-
 natives Including sites pursuant to Part
 6 of this Chapter.  This assessment shall
 be revised as necessary to Include Infor-
mation  developed  during  subsequent
 project steps.
  (e) An Identification  of effluent  dis-
 charge limitations, or where  a permit
 has been issued,  a copy of the permit for
 the proposed treatment works as required
by  the  National  Pollution  Discharge
 Elimination System.
  (f) Required  comments or  approvals
of relevant State, Interstate,  regional,
 and local agencies.
  (g) A brief summary of any public
meeting or hearing held during the plan-
ning process Including a summary of the
 views expressed.
  (h) A brief statement demonstrating
thai the  authorities which will be Imple-
menting  the plan have the necessary le-
 gal,  financial, institutional, and man-
agerial resources available to insure the
construction,  operation, and  mainte-
nance of the proposed treatment works.
  (1)  A  statement specifying that the
requirements of Title VI of  the  Clvfl
Rights Act of 1964 and of Part 7 of thU
chapter have been satisfied.
 fl 35.917-2  State ReqM>n). Alternatively, to the ex-
tent permitted by { 35.925-16, a grantee
may be reimbursed  for  facilities plan-
ning costs and other Step 1 elements for
which  reasonable costs  have been In-
curred in accordance with this eubpart,
in conjunction with the award of a grant
for the subsequent Step  2, Step 2-3, or
Step 3  projects.
  (2>  State  priority  determination hi
accordance  with  the approved  State'
priority system pursuant to } 35.915  la
required for  Step 1 project*, lust  as hi
the caw of Step 2 or Step 3 project*.
  (b) MUefbOttv.   Only   an  applicant
which to eligible to receive grant assist-
 ance for subsequent phases of construc-
 tion  (Steps 2 and 3)  and which has the
 legal authority to subsequently construct
 and manage the facility may apply for
 grant assistance for Step 1. If the area
 to be covered by the  facilities plan In-
 cludes more than one political jurisdic-
 tion, a grant may be awarded for a Step
 1 project,  as  appropriate,  (1)  to the
 jotat authority  representing such Jurls-
 tions, if  eligible;  (2)  to one qualified
 (lead agency)  applicant; or  (3) to two
 or more eligible jurisdictions.
   (c)  Payment. Where   a  grant  has
 been awarded for  the preparation of »
 facilities plan or other Step 1 elements,
 the  payment schedule  in  the  grant
 agreement  will  provide  for payment
 upon  completion of the Step 1 work or
 upon  completion  of  specified  tasks
 witfaln the  scope of the project.
   (d) Reports. Where a grant has been
 awarded  for  facilities  planning,  the
 completion  of which is  expected to re-
 quire  more than one  year, the grantee
 must submit a brief  progress report to
 the Regional Administrator at three-
 month intervals. The  progress report Is
 to contain a minimum of narrative de-
 scription, and is to describe progress In
 completing  the  approved  schedule  of
 specific tasks for the project.
 § 35.917-4  Planning  scope and detail.
   (a)  Initially, the geographic scope of
 all facilities  planning  Initiated  after
 October  31, 1974. or  facilities planning
 initiated after April SOi 1974, subsequent
 to  award of a  Step  1  grant therefor,
 shall be based upon the area delineated
 by the State pursuant to g 35.917-2, sub-
 ject to review by the Regional Adminis-
 trator. The  Regional Administrator may
 make the preliminary delineation of the
 boundaries of the planning area, if the
 State  has not done so, or  may revise
 boundaries  selected by  the  locality  or
 State agendy, after appropriate consul-'
 tation with. State  and local  officials.
   (b)  Facilities planning shall be  con-
 ducted only to the extent that the Re-
 gional Administrator  determines to be
 necessary to insure that facilities  for
 which grants are awarded will be cost-
 effective and environmentally sound and
 to permit reasonable evaluation of grant
 application* and subsequent preparation
 of designs,  eomtruotion  drawings  and
 specifications,
 § 35.917-5  Public participation.
   (a) Public participation in the facul-
 ties planning process shall be consistent
 with  Part 105 of this chapter. One or
 more public hearings or meetings should
 be held within the area to obtain public
 advice at the beginning of the planning
 process. All  governmental agencies  and
 other  parties  which are known to be
 concerned or may have an interest In the
 plan  shall be Invited  to participate.
  (b) A  public  hearing shall be  held
 prior  to  the adoption of the  facilities
 plan by the  Implementing governmental
units. This provision shall apply to all
facilities  planning initiated after April
30. 1074.  Tnta public  hearing for the
     No. 39—Pt. m-
                              FEDERAl UGUTfft, VOL 9t,  NO.  J9—MONDAY, FEBRUARY 17,  1974

-------
5260
      RUUS AND  REGULATIONS
facilities plan may satisfy the  grantee
hearing requirement  of  Part 6 of ttila
chapter. The  Regional Administrator
may require the planning entity to bold
additional public hearings, If needed, to
more fully discuss the plan and alterna-
tives or to afford  concerned interests
adequate opportunity to express their
views.
  (c) The time and place of the public
heaiing shall be conspicuously and ade-
quately announced, generally at least 30
days in advance. In addition, a descrip-
tion of the water quality problems and
the principal alternatives considered in
the planning process shall be displayed
at  a convenient local site  sufficiently
prior to the hearing  (approximately 15
days).
    Step  3. Building and erection of a
treatment works. Prior to the award of a
grant  or grant  amendment for a Step 3
project,  each of the items specified in
paragraph (b) of this section, and in ad-
dition (1) two sets of cbnstructlon draw-
Ings and specifications, suitable for bid-
ding purposes, and <2)  a schedule for or
evidence of compliance with 55 35.925-10
and 35.935-12 concerning an  operation
and maintenance program, must  have
been furnished.
   (d)  Step 2/3. Design/Construct  Proj-
ect. Prior to the award of a grant or
grant amendment for a design/construct
project the items in paragraphs  (b) and
 (c)  of this section must have  been fur-
nished, except that, in lieu of construc-
tion drawings and specifications, the pro-
posed performance  specifications  and  •
other  relevant  design/construct criteria
for the project must have been submitted.
   (e)  Training facility project. Ar appli-
cation for grant assistance for construc-
tion of  a training facility pursuant to
section 109 (b)  of the Act shall include
 (Da  statement concerning the suitabil-
ity  of the  treatment works facility for
                               FEDERAL REGISTER,  VOL. 39, NO. 29—MONDAY,  FEBRUARY 11, 1974

-------
                                            ROLES AND REGULATIONS
                                                                        5261
training operation and maintenance per-
sonnel for treatment works throughout
one or more States; (2)  a written com-
mitment from the State agency or agen-
cies  to carry  out at  such facility a
program of training approved by the Re-
gional Administrator; and (3)  an engi-
neering report. Including facility design
data, cost estimates for design and con-
struction of the faculty, and a schedule
for   completion    of    design   and
construction.
§ 35.925  Limitations on award.
  Before awarding Initial grant assist-
ance  for  any project for a treatment
works through a grant or grant amend-
ment, the Regional Administrator shall
determine that all of the applicable re-
quirements of { 35.920-3 have been met
and  shall further determine:
§ 35.925-1  Facilities planning.
  That the facilities planning require-
ments set forth In  {{ 35.917  through
35.917-9 have been met. Requirements
set forth  in {35.150-1  and {35.150-2
are not applicable.
§ 35.925-2  Basin plan.
  That such works are  In conformity
with any applicable final basin plan ap-
proved In accordance with section 303
(e) of the Act.
§ 35.925-3  Priority determination.
  That such works have been determined
to be entitled to priority in accordance
with  {35.915, and that  the award of
grant assistance for the proposed project
will not jeopardize the funding of any
treatment works of higher priority.
§ 35.925-4  State allocation.
  That the award of grant assistance for
the project  will not cause the total of
all grant  assistance awarded to appli-
cants within a State, including grant In-
creases, to exceed the total  of all allot-
ments and reallotments available to such
State pursuant to { 35.910.
§ 35.925—5  Funding and other  capabil-
    ities.
  That the applicant has:
  (a) Agreed to pay the non-Federal
project costs, and
  (b) Has the legal, institutional, man-
agerial, and financial capability to insure
adequate  construction,  operation,  and
maintenance of  the treatment works
throughout the applicant's jurisdiction.
§ 35.925-6  Permits.
  THAT if the  award is for a  Step 2,
Step 3, or  combination Step 2 and 3
project, the applicant has provided an
Identification of effluent  discharge limi-
tations or. If available, a copy of a permit
as required by  the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System.
§ 35.925-7  Design.
  That the treatment works design will
be (in  the case of projects  Involving
Step 2) or has been (in the case of proj-
ects for Step 3) based upon the follow-
ing:
  (a) The design, size,  and capacity of
such works are cost effective and relate
directly  to  the  needs to be served by
such works, including adequate reserve
capacity;
   (b) Such works will meet applicable
effluent limitations and  attain not less
than secondary treatment as denned by
the  Administrator pursuant to section
301 (b) (1) (B)  and 304(d) (1) of the Act
(See Part 133 of this chapter), subject
to the limitations set .forth in { 35.930-4;
   (c) The  Infiltration/inflow  require-
ments of { 35.927 have been met; and
   (d) If the Initial grant assistance for
the project is to be awarded from funds
authorized for any fiscal year beginning
after June 30,1974, subject to the limita-
tions set forth in {35.930-4; (1) alter-
native  waste  treatment management
techniques  have  been  studied   and
evaluated to provide for  the application
of the best practicable waste treatment
technology over the  life of the works
consistent with the purposes of Title n
of the Act, and (2) the design has, as ap-
propriate, taken  into  account and al-
lowed to the extent practicable for the
application of technology, at a later date,
which will provide for the reclaiming or
recycling of water or otherwise eliminate
the discharge of pollutants.
§ 35.925-8  Environmental review.

  That the NEPA requirements (Part 6
of this chapter), applicable to the proj-
ect step, have been met. Such compliance
Is a basic prerequisite for Step 2, Step 3.
and combination Step 2  and 3  projects.
An adequate assessment of expected en-
vironmental Impacts, consistent with the
requirements of  the National Environ-
mental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.), is required as an Integral part
of  facilities planning   Initiated after
April  30,  1974,  in  accordance  with
{ 35.917-1.
§ 35.925-9  Cvil rights.
  That If the award of grant assistance
is for a project Involving  Step 2 or 3. the
applicable requirements  of Title VI, of
the Clvfl Rights Act of  1964 (See Part
7 of this chapter) have been met.
§ 35.925—10 Operation and maintenance
     program.
  If the award of grant assistance Is for
a project Involving Step 3, that satisfac-
tory provision has been made by the ap-
plicant for assuring proper and efficient
operation and maintenance of the treat-
ment works. In accordance with  { 35.935-
12, and that the State will have an ef-
fective  operation  and  maintenance
monitoring program to assure that treat-
ment works assisted under this subpart,
comply with applicable permit and grant
conditions.
§ 35.925-11  User charges.
  That, In the case of grant assistance
awarded after  March 1,1973, for a proj-
ect Involving Step 2 or Step 3, an ap-
provable plan and schedule of Imple-
mentation  have been developed for  a
system  of user charges  to assure that
each recipient of waste treatment serv-
ices  within  the applicants service area
will  pay Its proportionate share of the
costs of operation and maintenance (In-
cluding  replacement  as  defined  in
{ 35.905-17) of all waste treatment serv-
ice provided by the  applicant and the
applicant must agree  that ouch  sys-
tem (s) will be maintained. See Appendix
B to this subpart.
§35.925-12   Industrial cost recovery.
  (a) That, hi the case of any grant as-
sistance awarded after March 1,1973, for
a project involving Step 2 or  Step  3,
signed letters of intent have been re-
ceived by the applicant from each sig-
nificant Industrial user to pay that por-
tion of the grant amount allocable to the
treatment of its wastes. Each such letter
shall also Include a statement of the In-
dustrial user's Intended period of use of
the treatment works. A significant In-
dustrial user is one that will contribute
greater  than  10 percent  of the design
flow or  design pollutant loading of the
treatment works. In addition, the appli-
cant must agree to require all Industrial
users to pay that portion of the grant
amount allocable to  the treatment of
wastes from such users.
  (b) Projects awarded  grant assistance
prior to March 2,1973 are subject to the
requirements  of  {35.835-5  In  lieu -of
paragraph (a) of this section.
§ 35.925-13  Sewage  Collection  System.
  That, If the project Is for,  or Includes,
sewage collection system work, such work
(a)  Is for replacement or major rehabili-
tation of an existing sewer system pur-
suant to § 35.927-3 (a)  and Is necessary to
the total Integrity and  performance of
the waste treatment works servicing such
community, or (b) is for a new sewer sys-
tem in a community in existence on Octo-
ber 18, 1972, with  sufficient existing or
planned  capacity  to  adequately  treat
such collected sewage. Replacement or
major rehabilitation of an existing sewer
system may be approved only If cost ef-
fective and must result In a sewer system
design capacity equivalent only to that of
the existing system plus  a reasonable
amount for future growth. A community,
for  purposes  of this section, would In-
clude any area with substantial human
habitation on October 18,1972. No award
may be made for a new sewer system in
a community In existence on October 18,
1972 unless it Is further determined by
the Regional Administrator that the bulk
(generally two-thirds) of the flow design
capacity through the  sewer  system will
be for waste waters originating from the
community (habitation) In existence on
October 18,1972.

§ 35.925-14   Compliance  with Environ-
    mental Laws.

  That the treatment works  will comply
with an pertinent requirements of the
Clean Air Act and other applicable  Fed-
eral, State and local environmental laws
and regulations.

§35.925-15   Treatment   of  industrial
    wastes.

  That the allowable project costs do not
include costs allocable to the treatment
                             FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 29—MONDAY, FEBRUARY II,  1974

-------
5262
     RUtii AND REGULATIONS
for control or removal of pollutants In
waste* Introduced  into  the treatment
works by Industrial users unless the ap-
plicant la required to remove such pol-
lutants introduced from non-industrial
sources; and that the project is included
in a waste treatment system, a principal
purpose of which project and system is
the treatment of domestic wastes of the
entire community, area, region or district
concerned. A "waste treatment system",
for purposes of this section, means one
or more treatment works which provide
Integrated but not necessarily intercon-
nected waste disposal for the community,
area, region or district. See the pretreat-
ment standards set forth in Part 128 of
this Chapter.
§ 35.925-16  Federal activities.
  That the allowable project costs do not
Include costs allocable to the treatment
of wastes from major activities  of the
Federal  Government,  which  another
Federal Agency has agreed to pay. Such
Federal agencies may  extend,  over a
period of years, their contributions to
support capital costs incurred by munic-
ipal treatment facilities which  provide
service to them.
§ 35.925—17  Retained amounts  for  re-
     construction and expansion.
  Thai the allowable project costs have
been reduced by an amount equal to the
unexpended balance of the, amounts re-
tained by the applicant for future recon-
struction  and  expansion  pursuant to
185.928-2, together with interest earned
thereon,
g 35.925-18  Limitation upon   project
     coiU Incurred prior to award.
  That project construction has not been
initiated prior to the approved  date  of
Initiation of construction (as defined in
i 36.906-4), except  as. otherwise pro-
vided in this section. Generally, payment
is not authorized for costs incurred prior
to the approved date of initiation of con-
struction, which shall be established  in
the grant agreement, in accordance with
paragraphs (a),  (b),  and  (c)  of this
section.
   (a) Steps lor 2:
   (1) No prior approval or prior grant
award is  required for Step 1 or Step  2
work initiated prior to November 1,1974;
payment for all such allowable costs in-
curred after the approved date of initia-
tion of  construction  1» authorized  in
conjunction with the first award of grant
assistance.
   (2) In  the  case  of Step 1  or Step 2
project work initiated after October 31,
1974, no payment is autborlnd for:
   (1) Step 1 costs Incurred prior to the
date of approval of a plan to study (see
(I 35.917 and 35.930-3(a) (1)); and
   (11)  Step 9 costs Incurred prior to the
date of approval of a facilities plan (see
 (8 35.917  and 36.930-3(b) (1)); payment
lor all Step  1 or Step  2 costs incurred
 after such dates of approval are  au-
thorized  in conjunction with the first
 award of grant assistance.
   (3) When  Step 1 or Step 2  project
work is initiated after AID* 80,1075, no
grant assistance for the Step 1 or Step 2
project work may be awarded unless such
award precedes Initiation of the proj-
ect work:  Provided, That in  Heu  of
award of a Step, 1 grant after June 30,
1975,  the State agency may request the
Regional Administrator to reserve funds
for Step 1 grant assistance (based upon
approval of the plan of study)  and  to
defer award of grant assistance for Step
1 work, which award, however, must  in
any event be made within the allotment
period for the reserved funds.
  (b) Step 3: Except as otherwise pro-
vided in this subparagrapb, no grant as-
sistance for  a Step 3  project may  be
awarded unless such award precedes Ini-
tiation of the. Step 3 construction. Ad-
vance acquisition .of major equipment
items requiring long lead times,  or ad-
vance construction of minor portions of
treatment works, in emergencies, or In-
stances where delay could result in sig-
nificant cost  increases, may be approved
by the Regional Administrator, but only
(1) If the applicant submits a written
and (adequately substantiated request for
approval, and (S) if written approval  by
the Regional Administrator is  obtained
prior  to initiation  of  the advance ac-
quisition or advance construction.
  (c)  The approval of a plan of study, a
facilities plan, or of advance acquisition
of  equipment or advance construction
will not constitute a commitment for ap-
proval of  grant assistance for a sub-
sequent treatment works project, but will
allow  payment for  the previously ap-
proved costs as allowable  project costs
upon subsequent award of grant asalst-
anee, If requested.prior to grant a*ard
(see  9 38.945(a)).  In Instances Wjwre
such  approval; is obtained, the applicant
proceeds at its own risk, since  payment
for such  costs cannot  be made unless
and until grant assistance for the proj-
ect is awarded.  '
§ 35.925-19   Section 208: Agencies and
     plans.
  , That, pursuant to section 208 (d) of the
Act,  after a waste  treatment  manage-
ment agency has been designated for  an
area,  and a final plan for such area has
been  approved, the applicant is the des-
ignated agency and the treatment works
project Is in  conformity with such plan.
§ 35.927   Sewer system evaluation and
     rehabilitation.
   (a) Afl.applicants for grant assistance
awarded after July 1.1973, must demon-
strate to the satisfaction,of the Regional
Administrator that each sewer .system
discharging  into  the treatment works
project for which  grant application is
made is. not or will not be subject to
excessive Infiltration/inflow. The deter-
mination  whether  excessive   Infiltra-
tion/inflow exists, may take into account,
in  addition  to flow and  related data,
other significant factors such as cost-
effectiveness (including the cost of sub-
stantial treatment  works  construction
delay, MB Appendix A  to this •ubpart).
public health emergencies, the affects of
plant bypassing or overloading, or rele-
vant economic or ehvirbHIMntal faetore.
  (b) The determination whether or not
excessive  infiltration/Inflow  exists will
generally  be  accomplished  through a
sewer system evaluation consisting of (1)
certification by the State agency, as ap-
propriate; and, when necessary (2) an
infiltration/Inflow analysis; and, if ap-
propriate, (3)  a sewer system evaluation
survey followed by rehabilitation of the
sewer system to  eliminate an excessive
infiltration/inflow defined  in the sewer
system  evaluation. .Information  sub-
mitted to the Regional Administrator for
such determination should be the mini-
mum necessary to enable a judgment to
be made.
  (c) Guidelines  on sewer system evalu-
ation published  by the Administrator
provide further advisory Information.
§ 35.927-1  Infiltration/Inflow analysis.
  (a)  The  infiltration/inflow  analysis
shall demonstrate the lion-existence or
possible existence of excessive infiltra-
tion/inflow in each sewer system  tribu-
tary  to  the  treatment  works.  The
analysis should  Identify  the presence,
flow rate, and type of Infiltration/Inflow
conditions, which exist In the sewer sys-
tems. Information to be obtained and
evaluated in the analysis should Include,
to the extent appropriate, the following:
  (1) Estimatecf flow data at the treat-
ment facility,  an < significant overflows
and bypasses,  and, if necessary,  flows at
key points within the sever system.
  (2) Relationship of existing  popula-
tion and Industrial 'contribution to flows
in the sewer system.
  (3) Geographical and geological con-
ditions which  may affect the  present and
future flow rates or correction costs for
the infiltration/inflow.
  (4) A discussion of age, length, type,
materials of  construction  and  known
physical condition of the sewer system.
  (b) For determination of the possible
existence  of excessive Infiltration/inflow,
the analysis shall include an estimate .of
the cost of eliminating the Infiltration/
inflow conditions. These costs shall be
compared with estimated total costs for
transportation and treatment  of  the
infiltration/inflow.   Cost-Effectiveness
Analysis Guidelines (Appendix A to this
subpart), which  contain advisory infor-
mation, should be consulted with respect
to  this  determination.
  (c) If the infiltration/inflow  analysis
demonstrate*  the existence  or  possible
existence of excessive infiltration/inflow
a detailed plan for a sewer system evalu-
ation survey  shall be Included  in the
analysis. The plan shall outline the tasks
to  be performed  in the survey and their
estimated costs.
§35.927-2  -Sever  system   evaluation
     survey.
   (a) The sewer system evaluation sur-
vey shall consist of a systematic exami-
nation of the sewer systems to determine
the specific location, estimated Sow rate,
method of rehabilitation and cost of re-
habilitation versus cost of transportation
and treatment for each defined aouroa-
of infiltration/inflow.
                               HDMAI MOIflW, W0L »», NO. J»—MONDAY, MftftUAtY 11, 1»M

-------
   (b) Th« results of the sewer system
 evaluation surrey shall be summarized
 In » report In addition, the report shall
 include:
   (1) A justification for each sewer sec-
 tion cleaned and internally inspected.
   (2) A proposed rehabilitation program
 for the sewer systems to eliminate all de-
 fined excessive infiltration/Inflow.

 §35.927-5  Rehabilitation, v
   (a) Hie scope of each treatment works
 project defined within the Facilities Plan
 as being required for implementation of
 the Plan,  and for which Federal assist-
 ance will  be requested, shall define  (1)
 any necessary new treatment works con-
 struction,  and  (2)  any  rehabilitation
 work determined by  the  sewer system
 evaluation to be necessary for the elimi-
 nation of  excessive Infiltration/inflow.
 However, rehabilitation which should be
 a part of the applicant's normal opera-
 tion and  maintenance responsibilities
 Bhall not  be Included within the scope
 of a Step  3 treatment works project.
   (b) Grant  assistance for  a Step 3
 project segment consisting of rehabilita-
 tion work  may be awarded concurrently
 with Step 2 work for the  design of the
 new treatment works construction.

 § S5.927-4  Sewer u«e ordinance.
   Each applicant for grant assistance for
 a- Step 3, Step 3, or combination Steps 3
 and a project shall demonstrate to the
 satisfaction of the Regional Administra-
 tor  that a sewer use ordinance  or other
 legally  binding requirement will be en-
 acted and enforced in each jurisdiction
 served by  the treatment works project
 before the completion "if  construction.
 The ordinance shall prohibit  any new
 connections from Inflow sources Into the
 sanitary aewer portions of the sewer sys-
 tem and shall ensure that new, sewers
i and connections to the sewer system are
 properly designed and constructed.
 g 35.927-5  Project procedure*.
   (a)  State  certification. The  State
 agency  may (but need not) certify that
 excessive infiltration/inflow does or does
 not  exist.  The Regional Administrator
 win determine that excessive infiltration/
 inflow does not exist on the basis of State
 certification, if he finds that the State
 had adequately established the basis for
 its certification through submission of
 only the minimum information necessary
 to enable a judgment  to be made. Such
 Information,could include a preliminary
 review by the applicant or State, for ex-
 ample, of such parameters as per capita
 design flow, fatlo of flow to design flow,
 flow raordiyjr flow estimates, bypasses
 or overfiowsfjor summary analysis of
 hydrologies!, geographical, and geologi-
 cal conditions, but this review would not
 usually be equivalent to  a  complete
 infiltration/inflow analysis. State  cer-
 tification must be on a project-h*»projeet'
 basis. If the Regional AdmmistMrtor de-
 termine* «» the basts of State certifica-
 tion that the treatment works is or may
 be  subject  to   excessive   infiltration/
      KUIIS AND  REGULATIONS

 inflow, no Step 2 or Step 3 grant assist-
 ance may be awarded except as provided
 in paragraph (c) of this section.
  ' (b) Pre-oward  tewer svftem  evalua-
 tion. Generally, except as otherwise pro-
 vided in paragraph (c) of this section, an
 adequate sewer system evaluation, con-
 stating of a sewer system analysis and, if
 required, an evaluation survey, is an es-
 sential element of Step 1 facilities plan-
 ning and is a prerequisite to the award of
 Step 2  or 9  grant  assistance.  If the
 Regional   Administrator   determines
 through State  Certification or  an in-
 filtration/inflow analysis that excessive
 infiltration/Inflow  does not  exist,  Step
 2 or 3 grant assistance may be awarded.
 If on the basis of  State certification or
 the Infiltration/inflow analysis, the Re-
 gional  Administrator determines  that
 possible excessive infiltration/inflow ex-
 ists, an adequate sewer system evaluation
 survey  and. If required, a rehabilitation
 program must be furnished, except as set
 forth in paragraph (c) of this  section
 before grant assistance for Step 2 or 3
 can be awarded. A Step 1 grant may be
 awarded for the completion of this seg-
 ment of Step  i work, and, upon comple-
 tion of Step 1, grant assistance for a Step
 2 or 3 project (for which priority has been
 determined pursuant to 13SM&)  may.
 be awarded,                 .^  ^
  (c) Exception. In the event it Is deter-
 mined  by the  Regional Administrator
 that the treatment works  would be re-
 garded  (hi the absence  of an acceptable
 program of correction)  as being 'subject
 to excessive or possible excessive infiltra-
 tion/Inflow,  grant assistance  may  be
 awarded provided that the applicant es-
 tablishes to the satisfaction  of the Re-
 gional Administrator that the treatment
 works project for which grant application
 is made will not be significantly changed
 by aw subsequent rehabilitation  pro-
 gram or will be a component part of any
 rehabilitated system: Provided, That the
 applicant agrees to complete the sewer
 system evaluation and any resulting re-
 habilitation   on   an  Implementation
 schedule the  State accepts  (subject to
 approval by the Regional Administra-
 tor) , which schedule shall be Inserted as
 a special condition In the  grant agree-
 ment.  Compliance  with this  schedule
 shall be accomplished pursuant to 188.-
 936-16 and { 80.304 of this chapter.
  (d) Municipalities may submit the in-
 filtration/inflow analysis and when ap-
 propriate the  sewer  system  evaluation
 survey, through the State agency, to the
 Regional Administrator for his review at
 any time prior to application for a treat-
 men^ works grant.  Based on such a re-
 view, the Regional Administrator shall
 provide the municipality with a written
 response indicating either his concur-
 rence of noneoncurrence. The Regional
Admmlttrator  must  concur  with the
 sewer system evaluation survey plan be-
fore the work is performed for1 th% survey
 to.be an allowable cost
 195.9ML  Industrial co*t recovery.
  Tin system for industrial east recovery
shall be ijjJiiinid by the Regional Ad-
                                  5263

 ministrator  and shall be implemented
 and maintained by the grantee in accord-
 ance with 138.935-13 and the following
 requirements.
 § 35.928-1  Recovered amounts.
   (a) Each  year during the industrial
 cost recovery period, each Industrial user
 of the treatment.works shall pay Its share
 of the total amount  of  the grant and
 any grant amendment awarded pursuant
 to this subpart, divided by the  recovery
 period.
   (b) The Industrial cost recovery period
 shall be equal to 30 years or the useful
 life  of the treatment works, whichever
 is less.
   (c)  Payments shall  be made by In-
 dustrial users no less often than annu-
 ally. The first payment by an industrial
 user shall be made not later than 1 year
 after such user begins use of the treat-
 ment works.
   (d)  An industrial  user's share  shall
 be based on all factors  which signifi-
 cantly influence the cost of the treatment
 works. Factors such as strength, volume,
 and  delivery flow rate  characteristics
 shall be considered and Included to In-
 sure  a proportional distribution of the
 grant assistance allocable to  Industrial
 use to all Industrial users of the treat-
 ment works. As a minimum, an Industry's
 share  shall be proportional to its flow,
 in  relation  to treatment  works  flow
 capacity.
   (e) If there is a substantial change in
 the strength, volume, or delivery flow rate
 characteristics introduced into the treat-
 ment works by an industrial user, such
 user's  share  shall be  adjusted  accord-
 ingly.  .,
   (f) If there is an expansion or 'upgrad-
 ing of the treatment works, each existing
 Industrial user's share shall be  adjusted
 accordingly.
   (g) An industrial user's share shall In-
 clude only that portion of the grant as-
 sistance allocable to its use or to capacity
 firmly committed for its use.
   (h)  All unallocated treatment works
 capacity must conform with the require-
 ments of section 204(a) (5) of  the Act.
 Cost-effectiveness guidelines are pub-
 lished as Appendix A to this subpart to.
 furnish additional advisory  Information
 concerning the  implementation of sec-
 tion 212(3) (C) of the Act.
  (1) An industrial user's share shall not
 include an Interest component.
 § 35.928-8   RetahMxTamonnu.
  (a)  The grantee shall retain  SO per-
 cent of the amounts recovered from In-
 dustrial  users. The remainder,  together
 with any interest earned thereon, shall
 be returned to the U.S. Treasury on an
 annual basis. ••-
  (b) A minimum of 80 percent of the
 retained amounts, together with interest
earned thereon,  shall be used solely for
the eligible costs 
-------
                                            RULES AMR AEGU1ATION&
rnent of  the  retained amounts for any
expansion and reconstruction. The re-
mainder of the retained amounts mar be
used as the grantee sees fit.
  (c) Pending use, the grantee shall In-
vest the retained amounts for reconstruc-
tion and expansion In: (1) Obligations of
the U.S. Government; or (2) obligations
guaranteed as to principal and Interest
by the UJB. Government or any agency
thereof;   or   (3)  shall  deposit  such
amount* In accounts fully collaterahzed
by obligations of the U.S. Government or
by  obligations fully guaranteed  as to
principal and interest by the U.S. Gov-
ernment or any agency thereof.
§ 35.930  Award of grant assistance.
  Approval by the Regional Administra-
tor of an application or  amendment*
thereto through  execution of  a grant
agreement (Including a grant amend-
ment) , In accordance with 8 30.305 of
this subchapter, shall constitute a con-
tractual obligation of the  United States
for the payment of the Federal share of
the allowable project costs, as determined
by the Regional Administrator, Informa-
tion concerning the approved project fur-
nished In accordance  with  {35.920-3
shall be deemed to be incorporated In the
grant agreement.
§ 35.930-1   Types of projects.
  (a) The Regional Administrator may
award grant  assistance for the following
types of projects pursuant to { 35.925;
  (1) Step 1. A facilities plan and/or re-
lated elements required to apply for Step
2 grant  assistance  (see 9 36.920-300)):
Provided, That he determines that the
applicant has  submitted the Items  re-
quired pursuant to t 36.920-3 (a);
  (2) Step 2. Preparation of construction
drawings and  specifications:  Provided,
That he determines that  the applicant
has submitted the Items required pursu-
ant to 5 35.920-3 (b);
  (3) Step 3. Building and erection of a
treatment works: Provided, That he de-
termines  that the applicant  has sub-
mitted the items required pursuant to
I 35.920-3 (c); or
  (4) Steps  2  and  3. A combination of
design (Step 2) and construction (Step
3) for a treatment works  in the case of
grants awarded after March 1,1973:
  (i) Where  the Regional Administrator
determines that compelling water quality
enforcement   considerations  or  public
health emergencies warrant  award of
such grant assistance to wsure expedi-
tious  construction of  nub  treatment
works, or
   (11) Where the Regional Administrator
determines that award of such grant as-
sistance win  minimize administrative re-
quirements in the case of project* not re-
quiring a substantial amount of Federal
assistance: Provided, Thai the award au-
thority provided by tWs subparagraph
 (4) Is subject to the following conditions:
that (A) the Regional  Administrator
determine* that the applicant baa  sub-
mitted the item* pursuant to 136.920-3
 ft); CB) the United States will be eon-
traetnaHyoWgated to p»T«Jly the Fed-
eral share of the approved dtep 2 work
and win not be contractually obligated to
pay the Federal share of Step 3 project
costs unlesB and until the plans and spec-
ifications developed  during Step 2  are
approved; and  (C) funds  fiscally obli-
gated for Step 3 will be deobligated unless
two sets of construction drawings and
specifications suitable for bidding pur-
poses are submitted to the Regional Ad-
ministrator and approved prior to initia-
tion of construction for the building and
erection of the treatment works.
  (S)  Step  2/3: Design/construction of
treatment works (Steps 2 and 3): Pro-
vided., That he determines that the ap-
plicant has submitted the items required
pursuant to $ 36.920-3 (d): And further
provided.  That such grant  assistance
must be awarded pursuant to EPA guide-
lines for the award of design/construct
projects, and that the requirements of
such guidelines are met.
  (b) The  Regional  Administrator may
award Federal  assistance by  a grant or
grant amendment from any allotment or
reanotment available to a State pursuant
to {35.910 for payment of 100 percent of
any cost of construction of a treatment
works (for  not more than one fadnty in
any State)  required to train and upgrade
waste treatment works  operation and
maintenance personnel, from one or more
States, pursuant to section 1090» of the
Act: Provided,  That the Federal cost of
any such training facility shall not ex-
ceed $259,000.
§ 35^30—2  Grant amount.
  The amount of grant assistance shall
be set forth In the grant agreement. The
grant amount may not exceed the amount
of funds available from the State allot-
ment*  »nd  reallotments  pursuant  to
135.910. Grant payments wffl be limited
to the Federal share of allowable project
costs incurred within the grant amount
or any Increases in such amount effected
through grant  amendments  in  ac-
cordance with  135.956,  pursuant to the
negotiated payment  schedule  included
in thftgnmt agreement.
§ 35.930-3  Grant term.
  The grant agreement shall establish
the period within which the project must
be completed, in accordance with 130.-
305-1 of this chapter, subject to excus-
able delay.
§ 35.930-4  Project scope.
  The grant agreement must define the
scope of the project for which Federal
assistance  la awarded under the grant.
The project scope must include a stop or
an Identified segment thereof. With re-
spect to any grant assistance  for a treat-
ment works project which  is initially
funded frosa funds allocated  for any fis-
cal year beginning after  June 30, 1974.
provision must be made for the applica-
tion at best practicable waste treatment
technology ever the life of the treatment
works. However, a grant may be made for
a segment of  Step  3 treatment works
construction, when that segment m and
of  tlsetf dees  not provide fer achieve-
ment of  applicable effluent discharge
limitations (secondary treatment, best
practicable waste treatment technology,
or water  quality  effluent  limitations),
provided that: (a) The segment is to be
a component of an operable treatment
works which will  provide  for achieve-
ment of the applicable effluent discharge
limitations, and (b) a commitment for
completion of the complete treatment
works is submitted to the Regional Ad-
ministrator and Is incorporated as a spe-
cial condition In the grant agreement.
§ 35.930-5  Federal share.
  The grant  siiall be 76  percent  of the
estimated total cost of construction of
the  project Approved  by the Regional
Administrator  in  the  grant   agree-
ment, except as  otherwise provided in
8 §35.925-16,  35.925-10,  36-926-17, and
35.930-1 (b).

§ 35.930-6  Limitation on Federal share.
  The grantee must exert its best  efforts
to perform the project work M specified
in the grant agreement  within the ap-
proved  cost celling. If at any time tbe
grantee has reason to believe that the
costs which It expects to incur in the per-
formance of the project will exceed or be
substantially less than the then approved.
estimated total project cost, the grantee
must notify the Regional Administrator
and the State agency promptly in writ-
ing to that effect, giving the revised esti-
mate of such total cost for the perform-
ance of the project then or  as soon
thereafter as practicable, pursuant to 40
CFB 30.900. Delay in submission of such
notice and excess cost Information may
prejudice appro**! of an increase in the
grant amount. The United States shall
not be obligated, to pay for costs incurred
in excess  of tbe approved grant amount
or  any amendment thereof until the
State ha* approved an Increase  in the
grant amount from available allotments
and the Regional Administrator has ap-
proved such increase through Issuance of
a written grant amendment pursuant to
1135.915  and 39.966.  Grant payments
will be  made pursuant to ( 35.946.
§ 35.935  Grant conditions.
  In addition to the EPA General Grant
Conditions (Subpart C of Part 30 and
Appendix A to this subchapter), each,
treatment works grant shall be subject
to the following conditions:
 g 35.935-4
     cost*.
Maw-Federal   eomtructlMr
   The grantee agrees to pay/, pursuant to
 section 204 (a) (4)  of the Act, the non-
 Federal  costs of treatment works con-
 struction associated with the  project
 and commits Itself to complete the con-
 struction  of  the  operable  treatment
 works (see (36.905-15)  and fnmtff**
 waste treatment system (see  ( 36.805-4)
 of which tiie project is a part

 § 35.935—2  Procurement; nonrtMrictiva
     •pwjfieasknu.
   (a) General. The grantee  must com-
 oly with | SM88 of this subpart to  the
                              FEDERAL uotSTH. VOL. 39,  NO. 29—MONDAY, MBIUA«Y 11, 1974

-------
                                           RUUB ANfr flOUlATlOW
                                                                       5263
construction of any Step 3 or Step 2+3
project. Performance of Step 2 and Step
3 project work may not be accomplished
by force account except for (1)  Step 1
or Step 2  Infiltration/Inflow work  for
which  prior-written  approval has been
obtained in accordance with II 35.927 to
35.927-6 and  (2)  segments of Step  3
work, the cost of which is estimated to be
under $25.000. The Regional Administra-
tor will cause  appropriate review  of
grantee procurement methods to be made
from time to time.
  (b)  Nonrestrlctive specifications.  No
specification for bids or statement  of
work in connection with such works shall
be written In such  a manner as to con-
tain proprietary, exclusionary,  or dis-
criminatory requirements  other than
those based upon  performance, unless
such requirements  are necessary to test
or demonstrate a specific thing or to pro-
vide for necessary  Intel-changeability of
parts and  equipment, or  at least two
brand  names or trade names of com-
parable quality or  utility are listed and
are followed by the  words "or equal." The
single base bid method of solicitation for
equipment and parts for determination
of a low, responsive bidder may not be
utilized. With  regard to materials. If a
single material Is specified, the grantee
must  be prepared to substantiate  the
basis for the selection of the material.
§ 35.935-3   Bonding and Insurance.
  On contracts for the building and erec-
tion of treatment works (Step 3) exceed-
ing $100,000, each  bidder must furnish
a bid guarantee equivalent  to 5 percent
of the bid price. In  addition the contrac-
tor awarded either  a design/construct
contract or  a  construction  contract for
Step 3  must furnish performance and
payment bonds, each of which shall be in
an amount not less than 100 percent of
the contract price.  Construction  con-
tracts lets than $100,000 shall be subject
to State and local  requirements relating
to bid guarantees, performance and pay-
ment bonds. Contractors should obtain
such  construction  insurance (e.g.,  fire
and extended coverage, workmen's com-
pensation,  public liability and property
damage, and "all risk" builders  risk) as
is customary and  appropriate.
§ 35.995*4  State and local law*.
  The construction of the project, in-
cluding the letting of contracts in con-
nection therewith, shall conform to the
applicable requirements of State, terri-
torial, and local laws and ordinances to
the extent that such requirements do not
conflict with Federal laws and this sub-
chapter.
J35.935-5  Davit-Bacon   and   related
     statute*.
   In the case of  any project Involving
Step 3, the grantee must consult with the
Regional Administrator pmr to issuance
of invitation for bids cbnoaHring «mpii-
«ooe with DMfe-BMon MdrWsMdsta-
tutes l-ettdretftinuant to 180.103  (a),
§35.935*6  Iqnal  employment  oppor-
    tnniijr.
  Generally, contracts .Involving Step 3.
of $10,000 and above,*** subject to equal
employment  opportunity  requirements
under Executive Order 11244, including
rules,  regulations  and  orders  issued
thereunder (see Put 8 of this chapter).
The grantee must consult with the Re-
gional  Administrator concerning equal
employment  opportunity  requirements
prior to Issuance of invitation for bids
where  the cost of construction work is
estimated to be more than $1,000,000. or
where required by the grant agreement.
§ 35.935-7  Access.
  Any contract for Step 1, Step 2 or Step
3 work must provide that representatives
of the Environmental Protection Agency
and the  State  will  have access  to  the
work whenever It is in preparation or
progress and that the contractor will pro-
vide proper facilities for such access and
inspection. Such contract must also pro-
vide that the Regional Administrator, the
Comptroller  General  of  the  United
States, or any authorized representative
shall have access to any books, docu-
ments,  papers, and  records of the con-
tractor which are pertinent to the project
for  the purpose of making audit,  exami-
nation,   excerpts,  and  transcriptions
thereof.
§ 35.935-8  Supervision.
  In the case of any project  involving
Step 3,  the grantee will provide and main-
tain competent and adequate engineer-
ing supervision  and  inspection  of  the
project to Insure that the construction
conforms with  the  approved plans and
specifications.

§ 35.935-9  Project completion.
  The  grantee agrees to expeditiously
Initiate and complete the project or cause
it to be  constructed and completed in
accordance  with the grant agreement
and application  approved by the Re-
gional  Administrator. The Regional Ad-
ministrator must terminate the grant if
Initiation of construction for  a  Step 3
project has not occurred within one year
after award of grant assistance for such
project: Provided. That the Regional Ad-
ministrator may defer such termination
for not more than six additional months
if he determines that there is good.cause
for the  delay  In Initiation of  project
construction.
§ 35.935—10 • Copies  of  contract docu-
     ments.
  In addition to the notification of proj-
ect changes pursuant to I 30.900-1 of this
chapter,, a copy of any prime contract or
modification thereof and of revisions to
plans   and   specifications  must   be
promptly submitted to  the  Regional
Administrator.
§ 35.935-11   Project change*.
     addition to the notification of proj-
    chaffis* retftttred pursuant to 130.-
             chapter, prior approval by
the  Regional  Administrator and the
State agency  is  required  for  project
changes  which may  (a)  substantially
alter the design and scope of the project,
(b) alter  the  type of  treatment  to be
provided, (c) substantially alter the lo-
cation, slse, capacity, or quality of any
major item of equipment; or (d)  increase
the amount of Federal funds needed to
complete  the  project: Provided,  That
prior EPA approval is  not  required for
changes to correct minor errors, minor
changes, or emergency changes. No ap-
proval of a project change pursuant to
i 35.900 of this chapter shall commit or
obligate the United States to  any  in-
crease in the amount of the grant of pay-
ments thereunder unless a grant  increase
Is approved pursuant  to  I 35.955. The
preceding sentence shall  not preclude
submission or consideration of t. request
for a  grant amendment pursuant  to
130.901 of this chapter.
  (a) The grantee must make adequate
provisions satisfactory  to  the Regional
Administrator for assuring  economic,
effective,  and efficient operation and
maintenance of such  works ir.  accord-
ance with a plan of operation approved
by  the State water  pollution  control
agency or, as appropriate, the interstate
agency, after construction thereof.
  (b) As  a minimum, such plan shall
include provision for:  (1)  An operation
and maintenance manual for each facil-
ity, (2) an emergency operating and re-
sponse program.  (3)   properly  trained
management,  operation and mainten-
ance personnel, (4) adequate budget for
operation and maintenance, (5) opera-
tional  reports, and (6)  provisions  for
laboratory testing adequate to determine
influent and effluent characteristics and
removal efficiencies.
  (c) The  Regional Administrator shall
not pay (1) more than  50 percent of the
Federal share  of any Step 3 project un-
less the grantee has furnished a draft of
the operation  and maintenance manual
for review, or adequate evidence of timely
development of such a draft, or (2) more
than 90 percent  of the  Federal  share
unless the grantee has furnished a satis-
factory final operation  and maintenance
manual.
§ 35.935-13  User charges and industrial
     cost recovery.
  (a) The grantee must obtain the  ap-
proval of the Regional Administrator of
the  system of Industrial cost  recovery
(see { 35.928)  and of the system of user
charges. The Regional  Administrator
shall not pay  more than 50 percent of
the Federal share of any Step 3 project
unless the grantee has submitted ade-
quate evidence of timely development-of
its system(s) of user charges and Indus-
trial cost  recovery nor more  than  80
percent of such Federal share unless the
Regional  Administrator  has approved
such system(s).
  (b) The Jlegional Administrator may
approve  a  user charge system In  ac-
cordance wife the following criteria:
                              MOMAL MOUTH, VOL $». NO. 39—MONDAY, NMUACT 11',  1*74

-------
                                            WUS
  (1) The user charge system must re-
sult  In the  distribution of the mot of
operation and  TMAintAti qm^*? 0f  traa^-
meat works  within the gra&te*'* precise
area to each user lor user class) in pro-
portion to such user's contribution to the
total wastewater loading of tbe  treat-
ment works. Factors  such  as  strength,
volume, and delivery flow rate character-
istics shan be considered and Included as
the basis for the user's contribution to
ensure a proportional distribution  of
operation and maintenance costs to each
user (or  user class).
  (2) For the first year of operation, op-
eration and maintenance cost* shall be
based upon  past experience for existing
treatment works or some other rational
method that can be demonstrated to be
applicable.
  (3) The  grantee  shall  review user
charges annually and revise them peri-
odically to reflect actual treatment works
operation and maintenance costs.
  (4) lite user charge system must gen-
erate sufficient revenue to offset the cost
of an treatment works operation and
maintenance provided by the grantee.
  (6) The user charge system must be
incorporated in  one or more municipal
legislative enactments or other appropri-
ate authority. 1* the project is a regional
treatment works accepting wastewaters
from treatment works owned by others.
then  the subscribers receiving  waste
treatment services from the grantee shall
have adopted user charge systems. Such
user charge  systems shall also be incor-
porated  in  the appropriate municipal
legislative enactments or other appropri-
ate authority.
  (c) Upon  approval of a grantee's sys-
tem(t) of user  charges and industrial
cost recovery, Implementation and main-
tenance of such approved system(s) and
Implementation schedules therefor, shall
become a condition of the grant and the
grantee shall be subject to the provisions
with  respect to non-compliance  with
grant  conditions  of   130.404  of this
chapter.
  (d) The grantee must maintain such
records  as are necessary to document
such compliance.
  (e) Guidelines containing Illustrative
examples of acceptable user charge and
industrial cost recovery systems may be
consulted for advisory information. The
user charge guidelines are contained in
Appendix B  to  this subpart. Cost Re-
covery Guidelines are published sep-
arately and may be obtained from the
EPA Regional Office.
( 35.935-14  Final inspection.
  The grantee must notify the Regional
Administrator through the State Agency
of the completion of Step 3 project con-
struction. The  Regional Administrator
shajl cause 'final inspection  to be made
within 00 days of the receipt of the no-
tice. Upon completion  of the final Inspec-
tion and upon determination by the Re-
gional Administrator that the treatment
works  have • keen satisfactorily  con-
structed  In  accordance with the grant
agreement, the grantee may mate a re-
quest for  final payment  pursoant to
I S6J>4ft contract, or a combination
of the two, unless the Regional Adminis-
trator gives advance written approval for
the grantee to use some other method of
contracting. The cost-plus-a-percentage
of cost method of contracting shall not
be used.

§ 35.938-4  Formal advertising.
  Each  contract  shall be awarded by
means of formal advertising, unless ne-
gotiation Is permitted in accordance with
{ 35.938-5. Formal advertising shall be In
accordance with the following:
  (a)  Adequate   public   notice.   The
grantee win cause adequate notice to be
given of the solicitation  by_ publication
in newspapers or Journals of general cir-
culation, beyond  the grantee's locality
(Statewide,  generally)  Inviting Wda on
the project work, and stating the method
by which bidding documents may be ob-
tained and/or examined. Where the esti-
mated prospective cost of Step 3 con-
struction to ten minion dollars or more,
such notice must generally be published
in trade Journals of Nationwide distri-
bution, The grantee should in addition
solicit btda directly  from bidders, if  it
maintains g bidders list.
  (b) Adequate time for preparing Wds.
Adequate time, generally  not less than
30 days  must be allowed between the
date when  public notice  pursuant to
paragraph (a) of this section  to first
published and the date by which  bids
must be submitted. Bidding documents
(including "fiTlfl^fci""" and drawings)
                                       shaU be available to prospective bidden
                                       from the date when such notice is first
                                       published.
                                         (c)  Adequate bidding document*.  A
                                       reasonablanumber of bidding documents
                                       (invitations fox bid) shan be prepared
                                       by grantee and shan be furnished upon
                                       request  on a  first-come,  first-served
                                       basis. A complete set of bidding docu-
                                       ments shall be maintained by grantee
                                       and shaU be available for inspection and
                                       copying by any  pcrty. Such bidding
                                       documents shall Include:
                                         (1) A complete statement of the work
                                       to be  performed, including necessary
                                       drawings and specifications, and the re-
                                       quired  completion schedule. (Drawings
                                       and specifications may be m«Mi« available
                                       for inspection  instead  of  being fur-
                                       nished.);
                                         (2)  Tbe terms  and conditions of the
                                       contract to be awarded;
                                         (3) A clear explanation of the method
                                       of bidding and the method of evaluation
                                       of bid prices, and the basis and method
                                       for award of the contract;
                                         (4) Responsibility requirements or cri-
                                       teria which will be employed In evalua-
                                       ting bidders; Provided, That an experi-
                                       ence requirement or performance bond
                                       may not be utilized unless adequately
                                       Justified under the particular circum-
                                       stances by  the grantee;
                                         (5) The following statement:
                                         Any contract or contracts awarded under
                                       this Invitation for Bids are expected to b*
                                       funded In part by a grant from tbe united
                                       States Environmental  Protection  Agency.
                                       Neither the United State* nor an; of lt> d*-
                              FEDERAk REdSTEl, VOL. 39, NO. 29—MONDAY,  FEBRUARY 11,  1974

-------
                                            MJUS AN& EMULATIONS
                                                                         5267
 pNrtmtnt*, •genclM or employ*** IM or will
 b* • party to this invitation tor Bid* or aojr
 resulting contract.;

 and
  («) A copy of | 35.938 and 135.939.
  (d) Sealed bidt. The grantee shall pro-
 vide for bidding by seated Ud and for
 the safeguarding of bids received until
 public opening.
  (e)  Amendments to  bidding  docu-
 ments. If grantee  desires to amend any
 part of the bidding documents (Includ-
 ing drawings and specifications)  during
 the period when bids are being prepared,
 the amendments shall be communicated
 In writing to all firms who have obtained
 bidding documents in time to be con-
 sidered prior to the bid opening time;
 when appropriate, the period for submis-
 sion of bids shall be extended.
   The material or service to be pro-
 cured Is available from only one  person
 or firm (and, if the procurement is ex-
 pected to aggregate more than  $5,000,
 the  Regional Administrator has given
 prior approval);
  (c) The aggregate amount involved
 does not exceed $2.500, (except as pro-
 vided in paragraph (b) of this section);
  
  'd> Deferral of Procurement Action.
Where the grantee has received a written
compliant pursuant to paragraph (a) of
this section, it must defer Issuance of its
solicitation or award or notice to proceed
under the contract (as appropntftte)  for
ten days after mailing or delivery of any
written adverse determination. Where
the Regional Administrator has received
a written protest pursuant to paragraph
(b)  of this section,  he  must notify  the
grantee promptly and the grantee must
defer Issuance of its solicitation or award
of the construction contract, as appro-
priate, until  ten days  after it  receives
the determination by the Regional Ad-
ministrator.  If a determination  is made
by either the grantee or the Regional Ad-
ministrator  which is favorable to  the
complainant, the terms of the solicita-
tion must be revised or the contract must
be awarded (as appropriate)  in  accord-
ance with such determination.
  (e)  Enforcement. Noncompllance with
the provisions of this subchaptor affect-
ing  procurement will result in (1) total
                                             VOi. **; NO. 19—MONDAY, FfMUAKT 11, 1*74

-------
526*
or partial termination of the grant pur-
suant to  135.950,  (2)  Ineligibility for
grant assistance which could otherwise
be awarded under this subchapter or (3.)
disallowance   of  project  costs  (see
I 35.940-2(J))  Incurred In violation ot
the provisions of this subchapter or ap-
plicable Federal laws, as determined by
the Regional Administrator. The grantee
may appeal adverse determinations  by
the Regional Administrator In accord-
ance with the Disputes Article (Article
7 of Appendix A to Subchapter B of tfai»
title).
§ 35.940  Determination  of  allowable
    costs.
  The grantee will be paid, upon request.
In accordance with 3 35.945, for the Fed-
eral share of all necessary, costs within
the scope of the approved project and
determined to be allowable In accord-
ance with {30.701 of this chapter, this
subpart, and the grant agreement.
§35.940-1  Allowable project costs.
  Allocable project  costs of the grantee
which are reasonable and necessary are
allowable. Necessary costs may Include,
but are not limited to:
  (a)  Costs of salaries, benefits, and ex-
pendable  material  Incurred  by  the
grantee for the  project, except as pro-
vided in § 940-2(g).
  (b)  Costs  under  construction  con-
tracts.
  (c)  Professional and consultant serv-
ices.
  (d)  Facility planning directly related
to the treatment works.
  (e)  Sewer   system    evaluation
(§35.927).
  (f)  Project  feasibility and engineer-
Ing reports.
  (g)  Costs required  pursuant to the
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970,
(42 U.8.C. 4621 et seq.,  4051 et seq.), and
regulations Issued thereunder (Part 4 of
this chapter).
  (h) Costs of complying with the Na-
tional Environmental Policy Act, Includ-
ing costs of public notices and hearings.
  (1)  Preparation of construction draw-
ings, specifications, estimates, and con-
struction contract documents.
   (j)  Landscaping.
  (k) Supervision of construction work.
   (1)  Removal and relocation or replace-
ment of utilities, for which the grantee
Is legally obligated to pay.
   (m)  Materials acquired, consumed, or
expended specifically for the project.
   (n) A reasonable inventory of labora-
tory chemicals and  supplies necessary to
initiate plant operations.
   (o) Development  and preparation of
an operation and maintenance manual.
   (p) Project   Identification   sign*
f 130.804-4 of this chapter).
§35.940-2  Unallowable COM*.
  Costs which are not necessary for the
construction of a treatment works pref-
ect are unallowable. Such costs Include,
but are not limited to:
   (a) Basin  or areawlde planning not
directly related to the project;
  (b) Bonus payments not legally re-
quired for completion of construction in
advance of » contractual oomrdeUon
date;
  (c) Personal injury compensation or
damages arising  out of  the project,
whether determined  by  adjudication,
arbitration, negotiation, or otherwise;
  (d) Fines and penalties resulting from
violations of, or failure to comply with.
Federal, State, or local laws;
  (e) Costs outside the scope of the ap-
proved project;
  (f) Interest  on bonds  or any  other
form of Indebtedness required to finance
the project costs;
  (g) Ordinary operating expenses of
local government, such as salaries and
expenses of  a mayor,  city council mem-
bers, or city attorney,  except as provided
In $ 35.940-4.
  (h)  Site  acquisition  (for   example,
sewer rlghts-of-way,  sewage treatment
plant sites, sanitary landfills and sludge
disposal areas) except as otherwise pro-
vided In § 35.940-3(a).
  (1) Costs for which payment has been
or will  be received under another Fed-
eral  assistance program.
  (j) Costs of equipment  or material
procured In violation of 8 35.938-4 (h).
§ 35.940-3  Costs allowable, If approved.
  Certain direct  costs are  sometimes
necessary for the contraction of a treat-
ment works and are allowable If reason-
able and approved by the Regional Ad-
ministrator in the grant agreement or a
grant amendment. Such  costs Include,
but are not limited to:
  (a) Land acquired after October 17,
1973, that will be an Integral part of the
treatment process or that will be used
for ultimate disposal  of residues result-
ing  from such treatment (for example,
land for spray  Irrigation of- sewage
effluent).
  (b) Acquisition of an operable portion
of a treatment works.
  (c)  Rate determination studies re-
quired pursuant to i 35.925-11.
§35.940-4  Indirect cost*.
  Indirect costs ot the grantee shall be
allowable in accordance wttb an Indirect
cost agreement negotiated and  Incor-
porated in the grant agreement. An in-
direct cost agreement must Identify those
cost  elements  allowable  pursuant  to
835.940-1.  Where  the  benefits derived
from a grantee's indirect services cannot
be readily  determined,  a tump sum for
overhead may be negotiated based upon
a determination that such amount will
be approximately the same as the actual
indirect costs that may be Incurred.
 §36.940-5  Dispute!
     akfccxMts.
rtmrtmtrng •Mowr-
   The grantee should seek to resolve any
 questions relating to cost altowabllity or
 allocation at Its earliest opportunity  (If
 possible, -prior to execution of the grant
 agreement). Final determinations con-
 cerning the anowabttlty of costs; shall be
 coudtutTe unless  appealed wlthm  89
 daxi to accordance wtth tide "Disputes*
 artteie (Article T>  of the BPA  Ctenenl
Grant Conditions (Appendix A, Subchap-
ter B of this title).
§ 35.945  Grant payments.
  The grantee shall be paid the Federal
share of allowable costs incurred within
the scope of an approved project, subject
to the limitations of 5535.925-18. 35.-
930-5, and 35.930-8; Provided, That such
payments must  be in accordance with
the payment  schedule  and  the   grant
amount set forth in the grant agree-
ment  and any amendments thereto. The
payment schedule will provide that pay-
ment  for Step 1  and Step 2 project work
will be made only on the basis of com-
pletion of the step or, If specified In the
payment schedule in the grant agree-
ment, upon completion  of specific tasks
within the step. All allowable costs In-
curred prior to Initiation of construction
of the project must be claimed In the
application for grant assistance for that
project  prior to the award  of such as-
sistance or no subsequent payment win
be made for such costs.
  (a)  Initial  request for payment. Upon
award of grant assistance,  the grantee
may  request  payment  for  the unpaid
Federal share of actual or estimated al-
lowable project  costs Incurred prior  to
grant award subject to the limitations of
§ 35.925-18, and payment  for such costs
shall  be made in accordance with the
negotiated payment schedule Included In
the grant agreement.
  (b) Interim requests for payment. The
grantee may  submit  requests for pay-
ments for allowable costs Incurred  in ac-
cordance with the negotiated  payment
schedule included in the grant agree-
ment. Upon receipt of a request for pay-
ment, subject to the limitations set forth
in  § 30.602-1  of  this  subchapter and
5835.935-12,   35.935-13, and  35.936-18,
the Regional Administrator shall  cause
to be disbursed from  available appro-
priated funds such amounts as are nec-
essary so that the to+al amount of Fed-
eral payments  to the  grantee for the
project Is equal to the  Federal share of
the actual or estimated allowable proj-
ect costs Incurred to date, as certified
by the grantee in Its most recent request
for payment. Generally, payments will be
made within 20 days after receipt of a
request for payment.
   (c) Adjustment. At any time or times
prior to final payment  under the  grant,
the Regional Administrator may  cause
any request(s)  for payment  to be re-
viewed or audited. Each payment there-
tofore made shall be subject to reduction
for amounts  Included In the related re-
quest for payment which are found, on
the basis of such review or audit, not to
constitute allowable costs. Any payment
may be reduced for overpayments  or in-
creased for underpayments on preceding
requests for payment.
   (d) Refunds^ rebate*, credits, etc. The
Federal share of  any refunds, rebates,
credits, or q4*"r amounts
                  Interest thereon) accruing to or received
                  by the grantee with respect to the proj-
                  ect, to the extent that they are properly
                  allocable to eosto for wUeb the mate*
                              FiOOMU. IfOMMt *OL 39, NO.  S9—MONDAY, HEBIUAIY 11, 1974.

-------
                                                RULES  AND REGULATIONS
                                                                              5269
 has been paid under a grant, must be
 credited  to the current State allotment
 or paid to the United States. Reasonable
 expenses incurred by the grantee for the
 purpose  of  securing such refunds, re-
 bates, credits, or other amounts shall be
 allowable under the grant when approved
 by the Regional Administrator.
   (e)  Final payment. Upon completion
 of final inspection pursuant to § 35.935-
 14 and approval of the request for pay-
 ment  designated by the grantee as the
 "final payment request" and upon com-
 pliance by the grantee with all applicable
 requirements of this subchapter and the
 grant agreement, the Regional Adminis-
 trator shall cause to be disbursed to the
 grantees  any balance of allowable proj-
 ect cost which has not been paid to the
 grantee. The final payment request must
 be submitted  by the  grantee promptly
 after final inspection. Prior to final pay-
 ment under the grant, the grantee must
 execute and deliver an assignment to the
 United States, in form and substance
 satisfactory to the Regional Counsel, of
 the  Federal share of refunds,  rebates,
 credits or other amounts (including any
 interest thereon)  properly  allocable to
 costs  for  which  the grantee has  been
 paid by the Government under the grant,
 and  a release discharging'  the  United
 States, its officers, agents, and employees
 from  all, liabilities,  obligations,  and
 claims arising out of the project work or
 under the grant, subject only to such ex-
 ceptions  which may be  specified in the
 release.
 § 35.950   Suspension or termination of
     grants.
   Grants may be suspended, in accord-
 ance with § 30.902 of this subchapter and
 Article 4 of the  General  Grant  Condi-
 tions (Appendix A to this subchapter),
 or terminated, in accordance with § 30.-
 903  of this subchapter and  Article 5 of
 the  General Grant Conditions  (Appen-
 dix  A  of this subchapter).  The State
 agency shall be concurrently notified in
 writing of any such suspension or termi-
 nation action.
 § 35.955   Grant amendments to increase
     grant amounts.
   Grant agreements may be  amended in
 accordance with § 30.901 of this chapter
 with respect  to project changes which
have been approved  in accordance with
 § 30.900  and  § 35.935-11  of this sub-
 chapter: Provided, That no grant agree-
ment may be  amended to increase  the
amount  of a  grant  unless the State
agency has approved the grant increase
from available State allotments and re-
 allotments in accordance with § 35.915.
 § 35.960   Disputes.
   Final determinations by the Regional
 Administrator concerning ineligibility of
projects for which priority has been de-
 termined  in accordance with  § 35.915 and
 final determinations by the Regional Ad-
 ministrator concerning disputes arising
 under a grant pursuant to this subpart
 shall be final and conclusive unless ap-
 pealed by the applicant or grantee within
 30 days from the date of receipt of such
 final determination in accordance with
 the "Disputes" article of General Grant
 Conditions .(Article 7 of Appendix A to
 this subchapter).
                APPENDIX A
   COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS GUIDELINES

   a. Purpose.—These guidelines provide  ad-
 visory Information concerning basic method-
 ology for determining the most cost-effective
 waste treatment management system or  the
 most cost-effective  component  part of  any
 waste treatment management system.
   b. Authority.—The  guidelines  contained
 herein are provided pursuant to section  212
 (2) (C)  of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
 trol Act Amendments of 1972 (the Act).
   c. Applicability.—These guidelines apply
 to the  development of plans for and  the
 selection  of  component parts  of a waste
 treatment management system  for which a
 Federal grant  is awarded under  40  CPB,
 Part 35.
   d. Definitions.—Definitions of terms used
 in these guidelines are as follows:
   (1) Waste  treatment  management  sys-
 tem.—A system used to restore the integrity
 of the  Nation's  waters.  Waste treatment
 management  system is used  synonymously
 with complete waste treatment system as  de-
 fined in 40 CFR, Part 35.905-3.
   (2) Cost-effectiveness analysis.—An analy-
 sis  performed  to determine which waste
 treatment management system  or  compo-
 nent part thereof will result In the minimum
 total resources costs over time to meet  the
 Federal, State or local requirements.
   (3) Planning  period.—The  period  over
 which a waste treatment management sys-
 tem is evaluated for cost-effectiveness. The
 planning period  commences with the Initial
 operation of the system.
   (4) Service life.—The period of time dur-
 ing  which  a  component of a waste treat-
 ment management system will be capable of
 performing a function.
   (5) Useful  life.—The  period of time dur-
 ing  which  a  component of a waste treat-
 ment management system will be required to
 perform a  function  which is  necessary  to
 the system's operation.
   e. Identification, selection and screening
 of alternatives—(1)  Identification of alter-
 natives.—All feasible alternative waste man-
 agement systems shall be initially identified.
 These alternatives should  include  systems
 discharging  to  receiving waters,   systems
 using land or subsurface disposal techniques,
 and systems employing  the reuse of waste-
 water. In identifying alternatives, the possi-
 bility of staged development of the system
 shall be considered.
   (2) Screening  of* alternatives.—The iden-
 tified alternatives shall be  systematically
 screened to define those capable of meeting
 the  applicable  Federal, State,  and  local
 criteria.
   (3)   Selection   of   alternatives.—The
 screened alternatives shall be Initially ana-
 lyzed to determine which systems have cost-
effective potential and which should be fully
evaluated according  to the cost-effectiveness
 analysis  procedures  established  In these
 guidelines.
   (4) Extent of effort.—The extent of effort
 and  the level of sophistication used In the
cost-effectiveness analysis should reflect the
 size and importance of the project.
  f.  Cost-effective analysis procedures—(1)
 Method  of Analysis.—The  resources costs
shall be  evaluated through the use of. oppor-
tunity costs For those resources  that can be
 expressed hi monetary terms,  the Interest
 (discount) rate established in section (f) (5)
 will be used. Monetary costs shall  be calcu-
 lated In terms of present worth values  or
 equivalent annual values over the planning
 period  as  denned In section  (f)(2). Non-
 monetary factors  (e.g., social  and environ-
 mental) shall be accounted for descriptively
 in  the  analysis in order to determine their
 significance and Impact.
  The most cost-effective alternative shall be
 the waste treatment  management  system
 determined from the analysis  to  have  the
 lowest present worth and/or equivalent an-
 nual value without overriding adverse non-
 monetary costs and to realize at least identi-
 cal minimum benefits in terms of applicable
 Federal, State, and local  standards for  ef-
 fluent  quality, water  quality,  water reuse
 and/or land and subsurface disposal.
  (2) Planning period.—The planning period
 for the cost-effectiveness analysis shall be 20
 years.
  (3) Elements of costs*—The costs to  be
 considered shall Include the total  values of
 the resources atrlbutable to the waste treat-
 ment management system or  to one of  Its
 component parts.  To determine these values,
 all  monies necessary for capital construction
 costs and operation  and maintenance costs
 shall be identified.
    Capital construction costs used in a cost-
 effectiveness analysis shall Include all con-
 tractors' costs of construction including over-
 head and profit; costs of land, relocation, and
 right-of-way   and   easement  acquisition;
 design engineering, field exploration, and en-
 gineering services  during  construction; ad-
 ministrative  and  legal  services  including
 costs of bond sales; startup costs such as op-
 erator  training; and Interest during con-
 struction. Contingency allowances consistent
 with the level of complexity and detail of the'
 cost estimates shall  be Included.
  Annual costs for operation  and mainte-
 nance   (Including  routine replacement   of
 equipment and equipment parts)  shall  be
 included in the cost-effectiveness analysis.
 These costs shall  be  adequate to ensure  ef-
 fective and dependable operation during the
 planning period for the system. Annual costs
 shall be divided between fixed 'annual costs
 and costs which would be dependent on the
 annual quantity of wastewater collected and
 treated.
  (4) Prices.—The various components  of
 cost shall be calculated on the basis of mar-
 ket prices prevailing at the time of the cost-
 effectiveness analysis. Inflation of wages and
 prices shall not be considered In the analysis.
 The implied  assumption Is that  all prices
 involved will tend to change over time  by
 approximately the same percentage. Thus,
 the results of  the cost effectiveness analysis
 will not be affected by changes In  the gen-
 eral level of prices.
  Exceptions to the foregoing can  be made
 if there is justification for expecting signifi-
 cant changes in the relative prices of certain
 items during the planning period. If such
 cases are identified, the expected change  in
 these prices should be made to reflect their
 future relative deviation from  the general
 price level.
  (5) Interest (discount) rate.—A rate of 7
percent per year will be used for the cost-
effectiveness, analysis until the promulgation
 of the Water  Resources  Council's "Proposed
 Principles and Standards for Planning Water
 and Related Land  Resources." After promul-
gation  of the above regulation,  the rate
established for water resource projects shall
be used  for the cost-effectiveness analysis.
  (6) Interest during construction.—In cases
where capital expenditures can be expected
to be fairly uniform during the construction
                                FEDERAL  REGISTER,  VOL.  39, NO. 29—MONDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1974

-------
5270
      RULES  AND REGULATIONS
period, Interest during construction may be
calculated as I x Vt P X C where:
I = the Interest  (discount)  rate  In Section
     1(6).
P=the construction period In years.
C = the total capital expenditures.

  In cases when expenditures will not  be
uniform, or when  the construction period
will be greater than three years, Interest dur-
ing construction shall  be calculated on a
year-by-year basis.
  (7) Service life.—The service life of treat-
ment works for a cost-effectiveness analysis
shall be as follows:

Land	  Permanent
Structures	30-50 years
    (Includes   plant  buildings,
    concrete  process tankage,
    basins,  etc.;  sewage collec-
    tion and  conveyance  pipe-
    lines;  lift  station   struc-
    tures; tunnels; outfalls)
Process  equipment	15-30 years
    (includes   major   process
    equipment such  as clarifler
    mechanisms,  vacuum niters,
    etc.; steel  process  tankage
    and chemical storage facili-
    ties;  electrical   generating
    facilities on standby service
    only).
Auxiliary equipment	10-15 years
    (Includes  instruments and
    control   facilities;   sewage
    pumps and electric motors;
    mechanical equipment such
    as compressors, aeration sys-
    tems,   centrifuges,  chlori-
    nators,  etc.;  electrical gen-
    erating  facilities  on regular
    service).
  Other service life periods will be acceptable
when sufficient justification can be  provided.
  Where a  system' or a  component Is for
Interim service and  the anticipated useful
life Is less than the  service  life, the useful
We shall be substituted for the service life of
the facility in the analysis.
  (8) Salvage  value .—Land  for treatment
works, Including land used  as part of the
treatment process or for ultimate disposal of
residues, shall be assumed to have  a salvage
value at the end of the planning period equal
to its prevailing market value at the tune of
the analysis. Right-of-way easements  shall
be considered to have  a salvage value not
greater than the  prevailing market value at
the time of the analysis.
  Structures will be assumed to have  a
salvage value if there  is a use for such struc-
tures at the end of the planning period. In
this  case, salvage value shall  be estimated
using straightline  depreciation during the
service life of  the treatment works.
  For phased additions of process equipment
and auxiliary equipment, salvage value at the
end of the planning period may be estimated
under the same conditions and on  the  same
basis as described above for structures.
  When the anticipated useful life of a facil-
ity is less than 30 years (for analysis of in-
terim facilities), salvage value can be claimed
for equipment where it can be clearly dem-
onstrated that a specific market  or reuse
opportunity will exist.

                APPENDIX B
            FEDERAL  GUIDELINES

USER  CHARGES  FOR OPERATION  AND  MAINTE-
  NANCE  OF  PtFBLICLT  OWNED  TREATMENT
  WORKS

  (a) Purpose.—To set forth advisory Infor-
mation concerning user charges pursuant to
Section 204 of the Federal Water  Pollution
Control Act Amendments of  1972, PL 92-500,
hereinafter referred to as the Act. Applicable
requirements are set forth in Subpart E (40
CFRPart35).
  (b) Authority.—The Authority for estab-
lishment of  the user charge  guidelines is
contained in section«C04(b) (2) of the Act.
  (c)  Background.—Section  204(b)(l)  of
the Act provides that after March  1/1973,
Federal grant applicants shall be awarded
grants only after the Regional Administrator
has  determined that  the  applicant  has
adopted or will adopt a  system of  charges
to assure that each recipient of waste treat-
ment  services  will  pay  its proportionate
share of the costs  of operation and main-
tenance, including replacement. The intent
of the Act with respect to user charges is
to distribute the cost of operation and main-
tenance of publicly owned treatment works
to the pollutant source and to promote self-
sufficiency of treatment  works with  respect
to operation  and maintenance  costs.
  (d) Definitions.—(1)  Replacement.—Ex-
penditures  for   obtaining   and  installing
equipment,  accessories,   or appurtenances
which are necessary to maintain the capacity
and  performance during  the service life of
the treatment works  for  which such works
were  designed  and constructed. The  term
"operation   and  maintenance"   includes
replacement.
  (2) User charge.—A charge levied on users
of treatment works for the cost of operation
and  maintenance of such works.
  (e) Classes of users.—At least  two basic
types of user charge systems  are common.
The  first is  to  charge each user a share of
the treatment works operation and mainte-
nance costs  based on his estimate of meas-
ured  proportional contribution  to the total
treatment works loading. The second system
establishes classes for users having  similar
flows and waste water characteristics;  i.e.,
levels of biochemical  oxygen demand, sus-
pended solids, etc. Each class is then assigned
its share of the waste treatment works opera-
tion  and maintenance costs based on the pro-
portional  contribution  of the  class  to the
total  treatment works loading. Either system
is in compliance with these guidelines.
  (f) Criteria against which  to determine
the  adequacy  of user charges—The  user
charge system shall be approved by  the Re-
gional Administrator  and  shall  be main-
tained by the grantee  in accordance with the
following requirements:
  (1)  The user charge system  must result
In the distribution of the cost  of operation
and maintenance of treatment works within
the grantee's  Jurisdiction  to each user (or
user class)  in proportion to such user's con-
tribution to the total wastewater loading of
the   treatment   works.   Factors  such  as
strength,  volume,  and  delivery  flow rate
characteristics  shall be considered  and In-
cluded as the basis for tihe user's contrlbut
Uon to ensure a proportional distribution of
operation and maintenance costs to  each
user (or user class).
  (2) For the first year of operation, opera-
tion and maintenance costs shall be based
upon past experience for existing treatment
works or some  other rational  method that
can be demonstrated to be applicable.
  (3) The grantee shall review  user charges
annually and revise them periodically to re-
flect  actual  treatment works operation and
maintenance costs.
  (4) The user charge system must generate
sufficient  revenue to offset the cost of all
treatment works operation and maintenance
provided by the grantee.
  (6) The user charge system must be Incor-
porated In one or more municipal legislative
enactments  or other  appropriate, authority.
If-the project Is a regional treatment works
accepting waste waters from treatment works
owned by others, then  the subscribers re-
ceiving  waste treatment services from the
grantee shall have adopted user charge sys-
tems in accordance with this guideline. Such
user charge systems  shall also be Incorpo-
rated in the appropriate municipal  legisla-
tive   enactments  or   other   appropriate
authority.
  (g) Model user charge systems.—The user
charge system adopted by the applicant must
result In the distribution of treatment works
operation and maintenance costs to each user
(or user class) in approximate proportion to
his contribution  to  the  total  wastewater
loading of the treatment works. The follow-
ing user charge  models can be used for this
purpose; however, the applicant is not lim-
ited to  their use. The  symbols used in the
models are as defined below:
  CT = Total  operation  and  maintenance
         (O. & M.) costs per unit of time.
  Cu=;A user's charge for  O.  & M. per  unit
        of time.
  C« = A surcharge for wastewaters of exces-
        sive strength.
  Vc = O&M  cost  for  transportation  and
        treatment of  a unit of wastewater
        volume.
  Vu — Volume contribution from a user per
        unit of time.
  VT = Total volume  contribution  from all
        users per unit of time.
  Bc = O&M cost for treatment of a  unit of
        biochemical oxygen demand  (BOD).
  Bu = Total BOD contribution from a user
        per unit of time.
  BT = Total BOD contribution from all users
        per unit of time.
   B = Concentration  of BOD  from  a  user
        above a base level.
  Sc = O&M cost for treatment of a  unit of
        suspended solids.
  Su=Total suspended  solids  contribution
        from a user per unit of time.
   S=Concentration of SS from a user above
        a base level.
  Pc = O&M cost for treatment of a  unit of
        any pollutant.
  Fu = Total contribution  of  any pollutant
        from a user per unit of time.
  FT — Tetal contribution  of  any pollutant
        from all users per unit of time.
   P = Concentration  of any pollutant from
        a user above a base level.
  (1) Model No. 1.—If the treatment works
Is primarily flow dependent or if the  BOD,
suspended  solids, and other pollutant  con-
centrations  discharged by all  users  are ap-
proximately equal, then user charges can be
developed on  a  volume. basl$ in accordance
with the model below:

                    CT
                Cu=—(Vu)
                    VT

  (2) Model No. 2.—When BOD, suspended
solids, or other pollutant concentrations from
a user exceed the range of concentration of
these pollutants in normal domestic  sewage,
a surcharge added  to a base charge, calcu-
lated by means of Model No. 1, can be levied.
The surcharge can be computed by the model
fcelow:

       C.= [B^B) +Sc(S) + Pc(P) ] V.
  (3) Model No. 3.—This model Is commonly
called the "quantity/quality formula":

        Cu=VcV,+BcBu+ScSu+PcP«

  (h) Other considerations.—(1)  Quantity
discounts to large volume users will not be
acceptable. Savings resulting from economies
of scale should  be apportioned to all  users
or user classes.
  (2) User charges may be established based
on a percentage of the charge for water usage
only In  cases where the water charge Is based
on a constant coat per unit of consumption,

    [FR Doc.74-3267 FUed 2-8-74;8:45  ami
                                  FEDERAL REGISTER,  VOl.  39,  NO. 29—MONDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 19r

-------
APPENDIX C - LIST OF REGIONAL OFFICES

-------
                               APPENDIX C
Environmental Protection  Agency
Region I
JFK Federal Building
Room 2203
Boston, Massachusetts  02203

Environmental Protection  Agency
Region II
26 Federal Plaza
Room 908
New York, New York 10007

Environmental Protection  Agency
Region III
Sixth and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
Environmental Protection Agency
Region IV
345 Courtland St., NE
Atlanta, Georgia 30308

Environmental Protection Agency
Region V
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604'
Environmental Protection Agency
Region VI
1201 Elm Street
1st. International Building
Dallas, Texas  75270

Environmental Protection Agency
Region VII
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
Environmental Protection Agency
Region VIII
1860 Lincoln Street
Suite 900
Denver, Colorado 80203

Environmental Protection Agency
Region IX
100 California Streeet
San Francisco, California  94111

Environmental Protection Agency
Region X
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
                                         U.S. Government Printing Office: 1977-778-183/101 Region 8

-------