DRAFT
                   GUIDELINES

          WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANS
                 SECTION 303(e)
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1972
          ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                WASHINGTON, D. C.
                   AUGUST  1973

-------

-------
                             CONTENTS
      INTRODUCTI ON
                                                                Page
      A.   Forward                                                  I
      B.   Scope  and  Purpose                                        I
      C.   Relation with Other  Plans                                6
      D.   Timing of  Planning                                       7
      E.   Terminology                                              9
II.    COMMENCING  THE  BASIN  PLAN: CLASSIFICATION                   II
      OF  SEGMENTS

      A.   Assemble  Existing Water  Quality  Data                    II
          and  Note  Applicable  Standards
      B.   Construct an  Inventory of  Existing                      II
          Di schargers
      C.   Assemble  Estimates of Existing Population,              II
          Employment  and  Land  Use
      D.   Assemble  or Construct Base Line  Projections             12
          of Population,  Employment  and  Land Use  for
          the  Next  Twenty Years
      E.   Identify  Segments and Disaggregate Basin  Data           12
      F.   Classify  Segments                                      12
      G.   Determine Order of Segment Analyses                     14


III.   WATER  QUALITY SEGMENT ANALYSIS                             15

      A.   Data Type I Segments                                   18
      B.   Data Type I I  Segments                                   27
      EFFLUENT  LIMITATIONS  SEGMENT  ANALYSIS                       29

      A.   Introduction                                            29
      B.   Antidegradation                                         29
      C.   Steps in  Preparation  of Effluent                        30
          Limitations Segment Analysis

-------
V.    ASSEMBLING THE BASIN PLAN                                  33

      A.  Introduction; Plan Submission                          33
      B.  Basinwide Components                                   33
      C.  Individual Segment Analyses                            36
APPENDIX A:

      40 CFR Part 130
      40 CFR Part 131
APPENDIX B:

      Water Quality Analysis through Modeling


APPENDIX C:

      Suggested Forms (Optional)

-------
                            TABLES


                                                         Page


I-A.     Basin  Planning  System  for 303(e)  Plans              3
I-B.     Level  of  Planning  According  to  Segment
        Classi ficat ion
I-C.     Increases  in  Plan  Complexity  Over  Time
I-D.     Annual  State  Planning  and  Management
        Actions
  I-A.   Load  Allocations  for Water Quality                 17
        Management

-------
    INTRODUCTI ON
A.  Forward.

    These guidelines describe the preparation  of  initial  plans  pursuant
to the State  continuing planning process  (section  303(e)  of  the Federal
Water Pollution Control  Act Amendments  of  1972).   They  are  intended  as
a general explanation of the 303(e)  planning methodology, for use  by State
and local personnel  in preparing water  quality management plans and  by
members of the public who may wish to review and comment  on  the plans
during their  development.  Additional  guidelines will be  issued regarding
assessment of municipal  investment requirements and  for plan elements to
be included in later plans, including guidelines on  nonpoint sources, land
use and clean Iakes/eutrophication.

    The  1972  Amendments establish a  national goal  of  water quality suitable
for fishing and swimming by mid-1983,  and  they call  for a two-stage  program
for attaining that goal.  The principal means  of water  quality  control for
point sources of pollution will  be prescribed, uniform  levels of effluent
limitations.   Limitations to be  achieved  by the first stage, mid-1977, will
be based on current technology,  which must be  supplemented  in individual
cases by any  higher level effluent limitations necessary  to  achieve
applicable water quality standards.   Where necessary, higher prescribed
control  levels are to be achieved to meet  the  1983 requirements.

    Section 303(e) planning (basin planning)  is a  major element in the
State water quality management system for  implementing  these requirements
and for defining and achieving the desired water quality.  Each plan will
provide for orderly water quality management by:

       Outlining a plan—organizing  information and  selecting
       a cost effective plan.

       Determining priorities—assessing  water quality  and abatement
       problems and needs throughout the  basin and establishing pri-
       orities,  which will be the basis for awarding  grant assistance,
       processing permits and taking other needed  steps to achieve
       water  quality goals.

       Scheduling action—setting forth compliance schedules or target
       abatement dates and indicating necessary State and local  activi-
       ties such as timely permit processing and construction grant  awards.

-------
       Coordinating planning—establishing  goals and  identifying
       needs and priorities for  other  planning activities,  i.e.,
       local 201 facility decision  plans  and  208 areawide plans,
       and reflecting the results of those  activities.

     The basic steps to accomplish  this planning are  set forth  in these
guidelines.   A summary of the basic 303(e)  planning system  explained  in
these guidelines is shown in  Table  I-A.

B.  Scope and Purpose.

     A basin plan is a five year water quality management plan  for  the
streams, rivers, and tributaries and the  total  land and surface water
area in one  of the 267 basins defined  by  EPA, or any  other  basin  unit
agreed upon  by the State(s) and  the Regional  Administrator(s).  The pur-
pose of the  plan is to coordinate and  direct  the State's water  quality
decisions on a river basin scale.   The plan is neither a broad  water and
related land resources plan nor  a basinwide facilities plan;  it is  a docu-
ment that identifies the basin's water quality problems—including  a
determination of existing water  quality,  applicable standards and signi-
ficant point and nonpoint sources of pollution—and sets forth  a  cost
effective remedial  program for those problems—including effluent  limita-
tions or other control strategies;  identification  of  201 facility decision
planning and 208 areawide planning  needs; priorities  for municipal  facili-
ties planning and construction grants  and for industrial permit processing,
and the timing of plan implementation.

     Except  in the simplest of situations,  basin planning  is  conducted
through the  analysis of individual  segments (see 40 CFR §130.2(m))  as
described in Chapters M, III and  IV of these guidelines.   The  classifica-
tion of a segment determines  the order and level of  planning  for  the  segment.
(See Table  I-B.)

     303(e)  basin management  planning  and actual water quality  management
in the basin are continuing,  integrated processes  for taking  immediate
program actions.  Of necessity,  the initial plan will be  based  largely  on
existing or readily acquired  new data  and will  derive its  courses of  action
from existing plans or preliminary  outlines of  alternatives.  This  initial
plan will be periodically reviewed  as  additional or  more  current  informa-
tion and knowledge are obtained, initial  objectives  are accomplished,  other
planning  is completed and available resources and  capabilities  increase.
The  initial  plan will be expanded  and  strengthened over time  to produce
sounder management decisions  and direct  further abatement  actions,  such as
better nonpoint source controls, as they  become  feasible.   (See  Table  I-C.)

-------
                                                                        C  —
                                                I

                                            U  C71  >-
                                            OJ  TO  O
                                            4->  C >+-
                                            TO  TO
                                            SEC
                                                    TO —  ;=•
                                                >-—  in
                                                4J  Q.  TO    •
                                           •- —     .0  Q.
                                            Q..—  4-1     TO
                                            E  TO  C  OJ  -C
                                            O  3  QJ -C  O
                                           O  O-  E 4->^
                                                            
 TO   in
I-   >-
    to

     O)
     c

     c
     c
     TO

    O_

     O

     in
     TO
    CD
     I   TO

     TO  O

     CT

 a.  i-  ~S  'I
 >,  aJ  .—  i_
I-  4-J  —  0)
     TO  f*  4—*
 ro   2  TO  QJ
                                    OJ  1-  I       4-J
                                    O) O  —      QJ
                                4-1  TO M-  X      in
                                o  c      TO  in
                            QJ  OJ  TO  QJ  E  in  •-
                            c  •—  E  >      OJ  m
                                aj     .—  LI_  m T3
                                in  >. 4-"  o  m  o)
                                    4-<  ro      TO  OJ
                                • - —  C  4-1      C
                                (ft  ^  t-
                                QJ  TO  OJ
                                                        0)
                                                            Q.
                                                            TO
                     QJ  in      4-J  CT
                     l/>  0)	
                     >.     in  i-  u
                        • - -O  O  QJ
                        >^ TO  —  4->
                     C  4-J  O  1-  TO
                    <  —  —  Q. 3
                    OJ
             E  -a  ro
             OJ  TO  Q-
             >  O  —
             Q)  —  O

            !c  E  'c

                1  E
                                                   —  (DO
                                                        (D
                                                       J3
                                                        fD
                                                       l+-4->
—  r-   >,
     ro  M-
 QJ   c  —
 a.  TO   in
 >^      m
I-  T3   TO
     c  —
 ro   ro   o
 4J       OJ
 TO  4->   I-  .
Q   O
     OJ   .•>
    r—   TO
                                                                                           c
                                                                                           ro
                                                           OQ  .^—-

                                                           —  OQ

                                                           —   X

                                                             •  -a
                                                                       4-i   in   c
                                                                       c   a.  oj
                                                                       OJ   TO   Q-
                                                                       E  -c   a.
                                                                   4->  en <_>  <.
                                                                O  TO  0) *—'
                                                               o  T3  in
in -—.
4->  	
c  —
                                01   •
                                QJ  a.
                                in  TO

                               c/o
                                    I
                                                                                                                                   I/I

                                                                                                                                   I/)
                                                                                                                                           (TJ
                                                                                                                                           C
                                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                                           Q.
                                                                                                                              ro .—     o
                                                                                                                              —  TO   • -~-^
                                                                                                                               i   c  a>
                                                                                                                              O  — "D LL.
                                                                                                                               L- ^—  O
                                                                                                                               TO  TO ^ "O
                                                                                                                               CS-  3      OJ
                                                                                                                                  O1 -C 4-i
                                                                                                                               aL      cn  m
                                                                                                                               LJ-  u  3  OJ
                                                                                                                                   Q)  O  CTl
                                                                                                                              <_)

                                                                                                                              O
                                                                                                                                   fO
                                                                                                                              -=r 3
                                                                                                                               i   i
                                                                                                                               i   i
                                                                                                                              < CQ

                                                                                                                               X  X
                                                                                                                           en

                                                                                                                          to

                                                                                                                          (_>

                                                                                                                           X
                                                                                                                              T3 TD     T3
                                                                                                                               C  C      C
                                                                                                                               a)  CD      a)
                                                                                                                               Q. D.     Q.
                                                                                                                               Q. Q-     Q.
                                                                                                                •  TO  oj
                                                                                                               in  E  c
                                                                                                               4->l_.-
                                                                                                               c  o  E
                                                                                                E  c
                                                                                                01—
                                                                                                OJ
                                                                                               to  OJ
                                                                                                                       OJ  in  o  4->     —
                                                                                                                       4J  aj  —  aj  4J
                                                                                                                       QJ
                                                                                                                       "
                                                                                           —   c   in   c    •
                                                                                           4->   3       OJ   Q-
                                                                                   •—      —   E   •-  E   TO
                                                                               _i ._   •- i_       in   QJ  j:
                                                                               uj  Q.C  o   in-a4->(_>
                                                                                                     .
                                                                                                    E  O  —  in  a)  TO
                                                                                                    O  •—  i-    Q. in  c:  TO
                                                                C.
                                                                TO
                                            JD
                                            E      in
                                            0)  TO  in
                                            in  4J  TO
                                                                        C
                                                                            Q.
                                                                            TO
                                            in  TO
                                            <. "a
                                                                        OJ
                                                                    O  in

-------
                              TABLE I-B

          Level  of Planning According to Segment Classification


         Component                              Type of Segment
Inventory and categorization of                      EL,  WO.
individual discharges.
Assessment of needs for publicly                     EL, WO.
owned treatment works.
Already established schedules of                     EL, WQ.
compliance, and target dates of
abatement for significant discharges
not on a compliance schedule.
Where data exist or are readily                      WO only,
available, an assessment of total
maximum daily loads necessary to
meet water quality standards for
the criteria beino violated.
Where data exist or are readily                      WQ only.
available, effluent limitations for
significant discharges consisting of
already established effluent limita-
tions or, if none, target limitations,
as necessary to achieve water quality
standards.
Where existing or readily available                  WQ only,
data are  insufficient for waste load
analysis, the design and initiation
of a data col lection and waste  load
allocation program,  including a schedule
for execution of the program.
Assessment of nonpoint source pollu-                 WQ only,
tion and, where applicable, establishment
of needed control measures after  1-1-75.

-------
                         Table  I-C




            Increases in Plan Complexity over Time






Present unt!I  July I , 1974




     •  Management provisions (data assembly, discharge inventories,  etc.)




     •  Waste load analysis in WO segments based on existing or readily




        obtained data.




     •  Compliance schedules or target abatement dates.






Present until  January I, 1975




  All of the above pI us:




     •  Data acquisition programs as necessary.




     •  Waste load analyses based on existing and acquired data.




     •  Assessment of municipal  needs, to govern Federal  construction




        grant assistance.






Plans completed after January I, 1975




  All of the above pI us:




     •  Nonpoint source analysis and control, as feasible, including



        State programs  under section 208.




     •  Land use controls, if necessary and feasible.

-------
     303(e) planning during calendar  years  1973-74  will  be  primarily
directed towards managing the  abatement  and  control of point  sources of
pollution in the basin for the immediate five  year  period and laying the
groundwork for subsequent planning.   The basic objectives of  initial
plans are:

        To establish stringent but  realistic effluent  limitations  and
        compliance schedules or target abatement  dates for  point
        sources, leading to achievement  of water  quality goals.

        To identify municipal  needs.

        To direct construction grant  awards  and permit  issuance on an
        abatement priority basis,  leading to implementation of those
        limitations and schedules.

        To identify and schedule further needed actions, including
        localized planning and additional data collection.

     The basin planning steps  described  in  40  CFR Part  131  and further
discussed in these guidelines  are  necessary  to accomplish these manage-
ment objectives properly.  Thus, gathering  water  quality and  area  trend
information, classifying segments  and constructing  discharge  inventories
provide the basis for determining  discharge  load  allocations  and effluent
limitations, where needed, assessing  municipal needs, and establishing
dates for the timely attainment and maintenance of  water quality standards.
This information will guide specific  near term management actions, such as
permit and construction grant  processing; these actions  will  be  further
programmed on a yearly basis in the annual  State  strategy.   (See section  106
of the Act and 40 CFR 35, Subpart  B.) The  information will also  identify
the basin's longer range planning  needs.  In this way, the  written plan becomes
a visible statement  illustrating orderly analysis and a  coherent program  for
immediate and continuing action and planning.

C.  Relation with Other Plans.

    Three types of water quality plans are  provided by   law—basin  plan-
ning (section 303(e)), facilities decision  planning (section  201)  and
areawide waste treatment management planning  (section  208).

    Basin plans are the water quality management  plans  for  the waters  of
the State.  Viewed together they provide, statewide,  an  analysis of water
quality and waste source problems and a  description of  overall  remedial
goals.  Their primary use  is as a management guide for  area-specific actions
such as grant awards, permit processing  and the  identification of  needed
intensive  local planning.  However, the  303(e) planning  process  may also  be
used as the mechanism for carrying out particular statewide programs,  such
as areawide planning by the State (section  208(a)(6)  of  the Act)  or certain
statewide  nonpoint source planning (section 208(b)(4)).

-------
     By contrast with the statewide character of 303(e)  planning,  facilities
decision planning under section 201 of the Act and areawide waste  treat-
ment management planning under section 208 are limited to a local  area
within a basin.  In considering particular treatment or control  requirements,
they confront problems of site location and plant size and design,  and
they study the cost effectiveness of alternative waste treatment management
techniques and systems.  Section 201 planning is planning directly  related
to a publicly owned treatment works to be constructed with Federal  grant
money; section 208 planning provides comprehensive planning and  regula-
tion in an area having substantial  water quality control  problems  and must
result in a management program covering all point and, if appropriate,
nonpoint sources of pollution in that area.

     The need for 201 and 208 planning may be identified through the
303(e) analysis, and 201/208 plan objectives must be consistent  with
objectives established by the plan for the basin in which they are  located.
CorrelativeIy, subsequent revisions of 303(e) plans pursuant to  the con-
tinuing planning process must reflect the conclusions of the more  detailed
subplanning within the basin.  Table I-D reflects the relation between
plans.

D.   Timing of Planning.

I.   Timing as between types of planning.

    Full  implementation of the planning and management provisions  of the
Act is sequenced over time.  Elements which are postponed include  complete
facilities planning (FY75; §20l(g)(2)), areawide planning (at least 1976;
§§208(a)(l),  208(a)(2), 208(b)(D), estab I i shment of total  loads (1975;
§303(d)(2)) and liability for failure to obtain an NPDES permit  (after
December 31,  1974;  §402(k)).  In contrast,  the law mandated development of
the 303(e) process within 120 days after enactment and provided  that no
State would be authorized to participate in the permit system until  it had
a 303(e)  planning process.  Thus, the Act placed the initial  planning
impetus on 303(e).   This allows concentration of limited current resources
to achieve two immediate program needs:  permit issuance including,  where
time allows,  determination through 303(e) planning of any needed effluent
limitations higher than base level; and the building of  an orderly  statewide
framework for the increasingly complex and area-specific planning  scheduled
to foI low.

    Basin plans covering the next five years and current facilities deci-
sion plans are interdependent.  Facilities decisions regarding the number,
location and  magnitude of waste discharges in the basin  are necessarily
addressed during the preparation of basin plans.  By contrast, areawide
planning involves a delayed start-up and additional complex planning

-------





















\











\
x










e: -H
•H i— 1
sn co
rt 3
X) 0-

C 1-
• H CJ
o ui rt
r^ 3 **
(-> -f-i
O 4->
tn TH in
§ tx'x
CX t)

c cit£*
• r- -H

cc rt o
5«

\lx


tn
 r-l ^ 4-J
H cj S rt tn
u s in no m
re -H 4-» c
H DO C '" O
C o tn u
U GJ E GJ
ft GJ rH --
f4 - H 3 i/j
« tn -t T3 T)
J C 3 0 t-
XrH S""5 £
/} CX H in rt
T

c
O
*-»
(A

(U tn -M
E JH OJ
rH P 000.
O
1— 1

I-
s
a,
rt
^
3
c

















S "
ri <
O V)

--i n
go
0

ei *""
•/i u
t-2



ITi CQ
•a g
il






^•H
Kl O

a



S 3
4-> C
art
(D C •-»
•rH M O t9
U 4-> ••-» CX
.H 4-> -H
g r< U U
3 O p -H

i— 1 Ul
rt o
3 -H

V
a
4-
L
C
*T
Munici
P ^

I-.
L. CO
O 0 CJ
CX +-» 00
tn c
•H -fH
- • i— 1 |~t
00^ 3
12 QT3
C ••-» O
3 O T3
O-, «
o p o














,
X O O
0 U
si-3
ra ••*
i- *j •
o rt m -
£-| S-

•*-* ••H

tn 3* rH •
n u-< 4->
O M-t O •
I-H m DO
tn
D cc rt
4-1 C 4-*
3-H
4J 4->
o -/i a>
rH -H tn







^
rt
X
00
s
T3
"0
O
tn
 C
« S


,




c.
gfe.3 -§..25
E LJ m (-•
u
4-*
4->

rt
3
§




„£
' C
o
2 H- 1
n

-H ,f,

i »
*u
- o
fi "3
•< rt


o o
M CO
gi-
rt
O 4->

fe
O
*j

^




m
in
o
in

•8

g

n
5)

X JU
9
3
• rt: O

°"-3 'S

rt


rt DC
c

c3 *>n
o3 j




t-.
O

73
o

o
X
o
*-"
•3
CJ
(-,

4->
O

T3
S
2 §
6 3
•H O

a e
4-1 .p-
c o


«

I

C,




ls-%
CJJ C
rt
|3
x*6
"H in
i— t
rt -
3 C
CT-H
in
!-, rt

rt c
;£ -H

Z
E
n
1




U
o









CX

















&s
a

s
'u
yi
•i-*
•O

"O
g


















/s













in
4)



tn
rt
C





in
1
(U
p.
S,



•H tn
°g
O rH
-< 4-*





^
i
^


in
• i-<
en
O

O
r-j
3

O
-s
•o
i

cn
c
rt
CX

^ tfl
o •-*

• rH


'S C
CX
4-J
C T)
O C
4-) F3
















c

4-

b

c
c
c-

'c
f-
c
_c
4-
c


g
rg
in ^^
c 3 tn

U r-*
c a

CJ
L • ^H
C £
-H r^
ni (-
Lo rt
T




S
>

rt >;

t- o
in ,c
00
• -* J-

1






^

5 4-»
c "o
I5






L




°-£3
a
3
O
tn

4-
•r-
§
C
c
" J2 «
• H -f-
m > — v 4-


U ro O
0 -r-(
fe-sl
1
in
s
00
s
CX
in

• rH
tj
rt
g
sL
•a
ement.
uiidert
£o
.2n
•SIS













«— 1
I 1
"^ S
I =
M -3
SJ 3
4-> U

O
o • e t
+-> I-. to
c3 CO O
CO (-.
ra oo o
0-5
M C C -
•i-t "H o m
to rt -r- o
i-. *j u
4-J rt V*
J-H 3
CX (H 4V O
c o u*. 'Ji
• M *-» -rt ft>
.52 .5 "
2S. -i|
t- o < a


in w
o o
5 h
'r. O
t* tn
cxo
r-4
vn 3
o-p

-^ «

t/I-3
13 i


i
4-
a
4-1


ig
t—« T
p. i-.
i CO
.SB
t/1 CX
tn o
g-°S .
u


4.
•
»-C tn
I/I 4J C
"4-» o 5

rt "^ 4-1

^ N.






































^
o


'





O 13
0 O 3

ra rt s
+J g *J
3 i- x rt
•— t GO *-> 3
|£ S i




















CX S <



















^ o
00 r-t -H
o u. 3 4J
rsi o O M
•— ' c ^r u
G m TH
•5 (§ S |:

3 a> o t- •
r-i .c y o eu
O-, 4-» (3 M-i 4-»
M rt
S l-^feS
t- (!) C
Jc u C o
O t- t) f.
• H 3 > 4-1
<-" O 6
M ni m o c
H S 4-1 '^
C CJ O S
0 *J C. >-,
z -as-0 s
O C T3 O
3 ^ e a -a
g 5-S5K
w m *-> o
rt m j-. > i-t
4-> O O O «-«
W S. O T3 rt
T























8




















J-

-------
determinations.  It will  be directed toward the law's  longer range  goals,
including achievement of  the levels of treatment required  for July  I,  1983.

2.  Timing among various  basin plans.   (See 40 CFR §130.42.)

    While all  basin plans are to be completed by June  30,  1975 (see
40 CFR §!30.42(a)), the timing for completion of individual  basin plans
will  vary according to the severity of water quality problems in the
planning area  and such other factors as the State may  deem appropriate.
Factors may include plan  complexity or the number of sources in an  area
that are high  on the State's municipal and industrial  priority lists.
The schedule of plan preparation developed as a part of  the continuing
planning process will establish basin plan completion  dates.

3.  Timing of  basin plan  coverage and revision.

    A basin plan should generally cover a  five year period.   However,
completed basin plans should be revised whenever necessary,  including
revisions to reflect information newly developed by facilities plans,
permits or permit applications or the results of additional  monitoring or
surveillance.   (See 40 CFR §131.404.)  Revised plans should be expanded  to
include all elements required for plans completed at the date of the  revision,
(See Table I-C.)  Any permit compliance schedule milestones that are  re-
quired to track plan implementation should be incorporated into the appro-
priate basin plan at the  first plan revision following issuance of  the
permit.  (See  40 CFR § I 31.209(a)(ii).)  Other permit information should
also be taken  into account in that revision.

E.  Terminology.

    Certain terms used frequently in these guidelines  require a brief
explanation.  The regulations contain further definitions.  (See 40 CFR
§130.2.)

       "303(e) plans," "basin plans" and "water quality  management
       plans"  are the same—they all refer to the plans  described
       in these gui deli nes.

       "Loads" or "loadings" are quantities of pollutants  in the water.
       The total load is  an instream amount; the total maximum daily
       load is the amount which may be added by all sources (without
       violating water quality standards); load allocation refers to
       the amount of the  total maximum daily load which, it is determined,
       may be added by an individual source.  The  load allocations  are
       reflected in effluent limitations (defined  in §130.2) assigned  to
       individual point sources.

       "Targets" are goals.  They are not  directly enforceable but
       become binding when incorporated into a permit  or other Federal
       or State regulatory mechanism.  For example, a  target abatement

-------
                          10
date is a single date when it is expected  that  needed  remedial
actions will  have been completed.   This is in contrast with  a
permit's schedule of compliance, which is  a  formal,  binding
sequence of dates for implementing specific  actions.   (See
section 502(17) of the Act.)

"Milestones"  are interim dates in a schedule of compliance or
other action  timetable.  Their inclusion allows measurement  of
progress towards achievement  of the final  objective.   (Require-
ments for permit schedules of compliance are set forth at
40 CFR §124.44.)

-------
II.  COMMENCING THE BASIN PLAN;  CLASSIFICATION OF  SEGMENTS

     This chapter describes the  initial  steps  to  be  taken  in  commencing
the basin plan, including the classification of segments.   Planning
should proceed pursuant to the approved  State  continuing  planning  process.
Citations in this chapter are to relevant regulations  under Part 40  of
the Code of Federal Regulations.  (See Appendix A.)  The  applicable
regulations should be consulted  throughout the plan's  preparation.


A.  Assemble existing water quality data and note  applicable  standards.
(§§131.201, 131.202.)

    Existing water quality and related hydrologic  and  hydraulic data may
consist of outputs from ongoing  State or Federal  permanent  monitoring sta-
tions or fields surveys, from permit applications  or other  discharge-related
data, or from other sources.  Data should be sufficiently current  and
accurate.  Applicable water quality standards  should be  noted.

B.  Construct an inventory of existing dischargers.   (§§130.2(o),  130.27,
131.201, 131.206,  131.208, 131.211.)

    The  inventory of dischargers should  identify  and locate all significant
dischargers (defined as any discharger causing serious or critical water
quality problems relative to the segment to which  it discharges).  Existing
information as to the amount, characteristics  and  treatment of the effluents
from each significant source, including  information  from National  Pollutant
Discharge Information System ("NPDES") applications  or permits,  if any,
should be assembled and should be described in the plan.   Significant
nonpoint sources should be included, although  control  of  nonpoint  sources
may be deemphasized until after  the first round of NPDES permits for point
sources has been fully processed.  Minor sources  which are  required  to
obtain permits under the NPDES should be identified.  A  description  of  their
effluents is not necessary, although a notation of readily  available infor-
mation respecting minor sources  may be helpful in  order  to  estimate  the
extent of their combined, total  impact on the  overall  water quality  situation,

C.  Assemble estimates of existing population, employment  and land
use.  (§§131.206(b)(2),  131.211, 131.212.)

    Estimates of the existing population, employment,  and  land  use in the
basin should be assembled as a basis for assessing existing patterns of the
generation of pollutants and as  a basis  for projecting the  amounts and  spatia
distribution of future waste loads.  Population data are available from the
Bureau of the Census; emp oyment data are available from the Bureau  of  Labor
Statistics  (U. S. Department of  Commerce).  Land  use data  should be  obtained
from official  planning agencies  within the basin.   To  the extent possible,
in-stream qualMy data assembled pursuant to Paragraphs  A and B of this
chapter should be combined with  population, employment,  and land use data
to construct a materials balance for each significant  pollutant to provide a
basis for identifying the most significant sources of  pollution within  the
area.

-------
D.   Assemble or construct base line  projections  of  population,  employment
and land use for the next twenty years.   (§§I 31.206(b)(2),  131.211,  131.212.)

    Base line projections of  population,  employment and  land  use  should  be
assembled if available or otherwise  constructed.  These  projections  provide
a basis for making base line  projections  of  future  patterns of  waste load
generation.  These projections should  cover  the  next 20  years in  5-year
increments.  They should be consistent with  demographic  and economic projec-
tions developed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis  (U. S.  Department of  Com-
merce) and the Economic Research Service  (U.  S.  Department of Agriculture)
and with projections used as  a basis for  State planning  for air quality
management; the use of any projections that  deviate significantly from BEA
should be justified.  BEA projections  are available at  level  of States,  BEA
economic regions, Water Resource Council  regions, and for Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Areas, all  of which generally include more than a single county.
If it is necessary to disaggregate BEA projections, the  assumptions  made in
the disaggregation process should be made explicit.  Historical trends of
county population and employment data  are available upon request  to  BEA.
Land use projections should be assembled  with the assistance  of officially
designated planning agencies  in the  area.

    Using these projections and the  best  available  estimates  of waste load
generation per unit of activity, project  the incremental impact of a five
year growth in waste loads from residential,  commercial, industrial, and
nonpoint sources.  To assure that the plan is consistent with  longer range
development as well as providing for water quality  management during the
immediate five year planning period, these projections  should cover  the
next twenty years  in five year increments.

E.   Identify segments and disaggregate basin data.   (Preamble to  40  CFR
Part  131 and §§130.2(m),  130.11, 131.203.)

    Each segment  (as defined in §130.2) should be  identified, and the
assembled data for the basin (paragraphs  A-D, above) should be disaggre-
gated by segment.  Any departures from the segment   identification contained
 in the State continuing planning process  should be  noted.

F.  Classify segments.

    An  initial  list of segment classifications was  submitted by each
State as a part of the State continuing planning process submittal.
The basin plan should reevaIuate and refine those  initial classifications.

    Each segment  must be  classified as either "water quality"  ("WQ")
or "effluent  limitation"  ("EL")  in accordance with  the  following  defini-
tions  (see §§130.II,  131.203):

-------
           Water qua Iity class.   Any  segment  where  it  is  known
      that water quality does  not meet  applicable water quality
      standards and  which is not  expected  to  meet water quality
      standards even after the application of the effluent  limita-
      tions required by sections  30l(b)(l)(A) and 30l(b)(l)(B)
      of the Act.  JY

           Effluent  limitation class.   Any segment  where  water
      quality is meeting and will  continue to meet  applicable
      water quality  standards  or  where  there  is  adequate  demon-
      stration that  water quality will  meet applicable water
      quality standards after  the application of the effluent
      limitations  required by  sections  30l(b)(l)(A) and 30l(b)(l)(B)
      of the Act.

      WQ segments  may be further  classified as follows:

           Data Type I:  Segments for which data are sufficient
      to execute load allocations without  additional monitoring.

           Perfect and complete data  on water quality  and all
           point and nonpoint  sources will never exist:   Suf-
           ficiency  of data is a  question  of  judgment.

           Data Type II:  Segments for  which  additional monitoring
      is needed to acquire sufficient data to classify the  segment
      with certainty or to execute waste load allocations.

      The classification process  involves  consideration of  the  disaggregated
basin information, including the  discharger inventory, water quality  data
and growth trends  and baseline projections of waste loads.  Classification
should be based on measured instream  water quality  if  available  or,  if  not,
the estimated instream water quality  in the area of maximum pollutant concen-
tration.  Segment classification  should take  into account the contribution of
pollutants from adjoining segments by assuming that water quality  standards
will be met (e.g., upstream sources will comply  with applicable  effluent
limitations), unless violations in adjoining  segments  are caused by  nonpoint
sources not expected to be abated within the  classification period,  in  which
case the estimated substandard water  quality  must  be  recognized.  In  areas
of uncertainty, the  segment is classified  "WQ-II."
_[_/  The effluent limitations required by sections 30l(b)(l)(A)  and (B)
are base level limitations consisting generally of best practicable control
technology currently available (BPT) for industrial  point sources and
secondary treatment for municipal  sources.   BPT and  secondary treatment
are defined in regulations issued  and to be issued by the Administrator.

-------
                                  14
G.  Determine order of segment  analyses.

    The general  order for conducting individual  segment  analyses  should  be
determined.  While the order of analyses  is  a  local  planning  decision,  it
is generally appropriate, if feasible,  to—

       Commence analyses of complex segments promptly, to  assure  their
       time Iy complet ion.

       Analyze adjacent or interrelated segments simultaneously,  to
       assure coordination of interdependent decisions.

-------
                                 15
III.  WATER QUALITY SEGMENT ANALYSIS
Introduction
      Each water quality segment analysis should  be  prepared  as  described
in this chapter.  Planning should proceed pursuant to  the  approved  State
continuing planning process.   Citations  are  to the relevant sections of
40 CFR Part 131  (see Appendix A to these guidelines),  which should  be  con-
sulted throughout the segment analysis.

      The thrust of planning  in water quality  segments is  to  establish
effluent limitations for significant sources and  to  indicate  the time  for
implementing these limitations.  This provides a  basis for the permits,
construction grant awards and other actions  which lead to  achievement  of
the limitations and consequent protection of water quality.

      The limitations must be at least as stringent  as reauired  by  section
30l(b)(l) of the Act, which provides as  follows:

           "(b)   In order to  carry out the objective of this  Act there
shaI I  be achieved—

               (IMA) not later than July I, 1977, effluent
           limitations for point sources, other than publicly
           owned treatment works, (i) which  shall  require  the
           application of the best practicable control  tech-
           nology currently available as defined  by  the
           Administrator pursuant to section 304(b)  of this
           Act,  or (ii) in the case of a discharge  into a
           publicly owned treatment works which meets  the
           requirements of subparagraph  (b)  of this  paragraph,
           which shall reauire compliance with any applicable
           pretreatment requirements and any requirements
           under section 307  of this Act; and

                (B) for publicly owned treatment  works in
           existence on July  I, 1977, or approved pursuant
           to section 203 of  this Act prior  to June  30, 1974
           (for which construction must  be completed within
           four years of approval), effluent limitations
           based upon secondary treatment as defined by the
           Administrator pursuant to section 304(d)(l) of  this
           Act;  or

-------
                (C)  not later than  July  I,  1977,  any more
           stringent limitation,  including  those  necessary
           to meet water quality  standards,  treatment
           standards,  or schedules  of  compliance,  established
           pursuant to any State  law or  regulation (under
           authority preserved by section 510)  or any  other
           Federal  law or regulation,  or required to  implement
           any applicable water quality  standard  established
           pursuant to this Act."

      The definition of water quality  segment  is  that  it  is a segment
where application of the section  30l(b)(l)(A)  and (B)  requirements  by  a I I
sources would be insufficient to  achieve water quality standards.   It
follows that in such a segment the  law requires that some significant
point sources must be subjected to  controls  beyond the best practicable
treatment ("BPT")/secondary treatment  effluent limitations prescribed  by
the Administrator,  or some nonpoint sources  must  be controlled  in order
to achieve standards,  or some combination of point and nonpoint  source
treatment or control must be implemented.   It  does not follow that  such
controls will be necessary for all  sources  nor for all  parameters of sources
requiring such controls:  the base  level  BPT/secondary treatment limita-
tions will be adequate for all  parameters discharged by some sources,  and
even with sources that must achieve higher  reductions  in  some parameters,
base level limitations will be sufficient for  other parameters.

      The segment analysis must define the  specific problems causing the
water quality segment classification;  identify the contributing  responsible
sources and consider alternative  remedial measures. Separate alternatives
may be derived by varying the load  allocations for each discharger  and thus
varying the responsibility for abatement as  between sources or  classes of
sources.

      Modeling is generally the appropriate method of  ascertaining  total
maximum daily loads and determining the effects of the proposed  alternative
abatement strategies.  The modeling technique  selected depends  on the  nature
and complexity of the problem. The technique  should  represent  the  minimum
level of sophistication needed to provide for  accurate determinations.
(See Appendix B.)

      Following the development and analysis of alternatives, a  cost
effective  waste treatment management  strategy is to  be established for
implementation in the segment. Where  appropriate, the detailed  strategy
will be developed through 201 or  208  planning.

      Table  I II-A illustrates the method and use  of the load  allocation
process.

-------
17
..,
--*
—
^
1=
s






~^
~

^
§


3

3;








_

±

—



2



ex

~?


—
^
^r
c
5
;=
p


r-

1/3 c;
*-> O
o B






























^

-y















j-a "
n CD ft
r"t r-.
n




•• —
___
rt
o


rt
C
y
.S







|



4-t T:

> o •-  c
^ O r-


x: o u
O *j u", r
-O O nj j;
*~J 1A ^
— Cj X^-
3 'J rH C
O ^- CX C
** C "5" '
c; ' 
S
1
w i -^
y , 	 , £ , OQ
C 3 13 c o o
C G ^ 3 • 0
OC31/5 OD0 +-1
«.2 3 B) .S p
*^3 *-* "O H 4-J C ££
rH '- -H O *-> C 2 "•
Cfl O rH J^ -H -H rt ^
3 -r-* -r-t U C O •— • O
 A C
^ rH ^ rt
»c t> v. r,
rM O 0

rH 4-> in
o. c +•> c

<" £ in n
^r

i X X ' *^3
4-) I-H •—< rt -Ji o
C D. C- p ^ tj O
n r~, c» >- C- u u
C r3 ra O -f G X
- •Su.M^-l0
AO - (/i cfl B* O *->
-J a, 3 -HO
0 E U ^ r-4 C

o C.-H in "3 - -*••*-*
j- rt - •- c. pj-(
k o t. y; „ <:- ^


^ ^ o ' ^ • ~" u
*3 "" - r; c c
^ % — o o D r> -^j
o c v- e - c
r- O t*. 4« +j 4-» -»- r;
DC -. x: rt rt

*- ^ r3 o ^ O >• *-
O ^ o > *-» ^ + ^
-1 ° d5 ° , *2 P
^-. 3 r-i v- rt .—*(-,
u 0 o -£ b +"
3 ^r-.j^x:*-'^.'1—
'T"



in
G c-
0 t3 ;p

	 7 !!A <
fi (id.














8
L) O •
3 "-M in
T3 c c:
C 00
O • "H
O tiO O 4-»
LT, C *H
CJ B -r-* C


















rH I r-l fNJ
• o y 4-1 ex tn
rt C r- 5 rj + O
X-^ '"c'^r^^ r-.g
p ci- i/) *-* o o 'j — rt
3!/iurtt-*Ji
U}r-"' 4J C O * - ' r-t



Ot^%,,'5^'^lr;5_ AV
-0 5 ^ / ^ -% ° g •/-.

rH — f- J-. CJ ™ O
3 — w c; -< a ~< • aju
00 BoC4---3^ U

g o o £^ JD || g = 1
•^G -5^*^'^^^ ir-


i— t 4- "3 •-< e O — + '£
o n _-•*- u", ^i ' — i o *-* o
j-l CJ 1- — ' X ™ +-* O +"
• G1— p4-*^"F; d-H x^
^

, i, .5-
i ii .-< O O ' _C < < O
— < j -3 V- 4J •_» T3 y 3 3 4J
OX' — ' r-i ' -^ r, O cx>— O 1-
f-ir-i -r:Wl-c<-" O'T-'d.^^- — - *

	 ^ — ' — • "3 » "*. "3 >, O O _< 4-»

t— rtrH d -H 3 V, 4J U S 4-1 --I ^3 4-> 4-> O*
T .
-3
rt
1 §

in rt

4^' £
•r-l GO


O1 +-1
t- S
8 -a
S ^

-------
                                  18
A.  Data Type I  Segments.

    Data are sufficient to execute load  allocations  without  additional
monitor!ng.

I.  Describe existing water quality and  set forth  applicable water
quality standards"(§131.202.)

    Existing water quality and related hydrologic  and  hydraulic  data,  and
the water quality standards applicable to the segment  or legal citation  to
such standards,  should be  disaggregated  from the data  and  standards  of the
basin.  (See Chapter M, Section A, of these guidelines.)

2.  Determine totaI  maximum daily loads.  (§131.205)

    Each water quality standards parameter being violated  or expected  to
be violated in the segment should be identified.  For  all  parameters,  whether
or not violated, the total maximum daily loads of  related  pollutants which
may be added to the water  body by a I I  point and nonpoint sources without
violating the standard must be determined.

    Each total  load limitation must be at least as stringent as  necessary
to  implement the applicable standard under the low flow critical water quality
conditions prescribed by the standards and any conditions  which  should be
anticipated in the individual  situation, such as seasonal  waste  discharges.
It must include provision  for seasonal variation and for a margin of safety
which takes into account any lack of knowledge concerning  the relationship
between effluents and water quality as well as any uncertainty resulting from
insufficiency of data,  including data from nonpoint sources,  Where  thermal
standards may be violated, thermal loads must be separately estimated  as
provided in § I 31.205(b).  For parameters which are meeting applicable
standards or which will meet applicable standards upon implementation  of
the July 1977 base level effluent limitations, the antidegradation principle
applies.   (See Chapter  IV, Section B of these guidelines.)

3.  Inventory, categorize and rank existing dischargers.  (§131.206(a).)

    The inventory and categorization of dischargers in the segment should
be  disaggregated from the  inventory and categorization for the basin,
checked for accuracy and completeness and revised if necessary.   (See
Chapter II, Section B, of these guidelines.)  Significant dischargers  should
be  ranked  in order of abatement priority.

-------
                                   19
4.  Assess nonpoint sources.   (§§l31.203(c)(2),  131.211.)

    The segment analysis should assess the amounts  and  character  of  pollu-
tants from nonpoint sources identified in the area  of the  segment.   It  is
desirable that the segment analyses consider agricultural,  si IvicuIturaI,
mining related, construction  activity related,  salt water  intrusion  related
and other nonpoint source pollution to the extent provided  in  §131.211.
Specific abatement or control  strategies for nonpoint sources  may be sug-
gested.  Consistently with national priorities,  these strategies  should  be
developed as provided in §131.21 I(c)  following  completion  of the  initial
planning required as a basis  for permits.

5.  Determine waste load allocations.  (§§I 31.206(b),  131.209.)

i.  General  considerations.

    A waste load allocation for a  segment is the assignment of  target
loads to alI  significant point and  nonpoint sources so  as  to achieve
water quality standards in a  cost-effective manner.  It involves, in
effect, the selection of the  best practicable water quality management
alternative for the segment over a  five period  while taking cognizance
of longer range needs of the  basin  and of that  particular  segment.   This
alternative will contain the  major  water related determinations for  the
area and must therefore be consulted for specific management actions,
including the writing of conditions for NPDES permits and  construction
grant awards.

    The purpose of waste load allocations is three-fold:   (I)  to  establish
a basis upon which effluent limitations can be  assigned and permits  issued
to individual dischargers to  satisfy water quality  standards over the next
five years; (2) to provide a  basis  for establishing compliance schedules or
target abatement dates and (3) to  identify and  provide  a  basis for ranking
needs of municipalities for which planning and  possible construction of
Federally-assisted facilities must  be initiated within  the next five years.
Since a basin plan is a management  plan, it prescribes  the abatement strategy
for individual sources only generally.  While the plan  does not determine
detailed engineering specifications for particular  projects,  some knowledge
of alternative facilities and nonstructuraI  alternatives  and  their associated
costs  is obviously required to develop feasible, cost effective allocations.
The allocations for each industrial or municipal discharger must  either
result in an attainable total  effluent allowance or recognize  that the
restriction may result in the discharger being  forced to  close or reduce
its operation to avoid being  subject to possible enforcement  (through action
on a permit or other enforcement mechanism under State  law).   To  determine
feasible limits, the analysis must  consider generally the  alternative tech-
nical and economic capabilities available to each significant  discharger.

-------
                                   20


Where standards are being violated  because  of  point  source  discharges,
the technical  requirements for some point sources  must  be beyond  base  level
effluent limitations.   The economic and  social  costs of  the alternatives
available to each source must be weighed.   In  addition,  the trade-offs
and total costs among  combinations  of  alternatives for  multiple sources must
be reviewed i n search  of the mix of processes  at all  facilities which will
result in the most efficient overall  plan for  achieving  standards when all
sources are in operation.

    In developing waste load allocations, the  following  points must  be
considered:

     (A)  Coordination with permits.   (§131.209.)

          Effluent limitations established  by  any  current permit  issued prior
          to completion of the plan should  be  recognized in the plan. For
          each discharger subjected to the  NPDES which  has  not been  issued
          a permit the analysis must establish target load  allocations.
          Target allocations will generally be incorporated into  any subse-
          quently issued permit, subject to all  rights  of the permit applicant
          and other interested persons to contest  the targets.  They are not
          enforceable  until incorporated into  a permit  or otherwise  made
          enforceable  through State law  or  regulation.

     (B)  Coordination with facilities planning.   (§131.210; 40 CFR  Part 35,
          Subpart F.)

          Facilities planning involves detailed planning directly related
          to the Federal assisted construction of  municipal waste treatment
          facilities.   Such planning develops  plans for cost effective municipal
          waste treatment or control  by  determining the best practicable
          alternative  waste management system  over time, its geographic cov-
          erage, its service of other area  sources,  including industrial
          sources, and the nature and amount of the planned discharge (load
          reduction achieved).  These decisions for the specific  facility
          will affect  not only the  source's load  allocation requirements  but
          also the total number of  industrial  and  municipal sources  contributing
          to the total  load.  Analysis of the  segment and  the facility  plan
          are  interdependent:  The  facilities  plan cannot  disregard  the overall
          segment analysis, yet that analysis  must respect  the  realities of
           individual  facilities needs and  capabilities, with particular
          attention to considerations of cost  effectiveness, growth  trends
          and available financing.   (See paragraph 8, below.)

-------
(C)   Relation  to areawide  waste  treatment management.

     The waste load  allocation process will  help  identify those
     areas  where areawide  waste  treatment management planning
     (section  208 of the Act) should  be  initiated.  Waste  load
     allocations and areawide planning should  be  coordinated:  area-
     wide plans  should  be  consistent  with total  loadings planned for
     the segment and basin.

(D)   Accommodation of future growth.

     Growth trend information compiled for the segment must  be
     considered  and  a determination made as  to the  load allotments,
     if  any, to  be reserved for  future discharges.  The allotment
     must be consistent with continuing achievement of standards and
     preventing  any  significant  water quality  degradation.   (See Chapter
     IV, Section B.)  The  growth allotment should be separately dis-
     played in the reported  load allocation.

(E)   Nonpoint  sources.

     In  allocating pollutant  loads among point sources, the  addi-
     tional  pollutant contribution from nonpoint  sources must be
     considered, to  assure that  the combined total  will not  exceed
     applicable  water quality standards.  Such contribution  should
     be  separately entered in the load allocation display.   The  long
     term point  source  load allocations may  depend  upon the  abatement
     and control projections respecting nonpoint  sources.

(F)   Upstream  contribution.

     The amount  of pollutants expected to be entering the segment
     from upstream must be added in when determining whether the total
     of  proposed individual point and nonpoint allowances exceeds the
     allowable maximum. (See Chapter  II, Section  F.)  For purposes of
     notation  and calculation, this contribution  estimate necessarily
     involves  coordination with  planning for the  upstream segment.
     The method  of coordination, level of certainty regarding the
     estimated future load and the time span covered  is a matter of
     of  planning judgment.

(G)   Clusters.

     The cluster analysis  requirement (§!3l.60(c),  §!3l.209(c)) may dic-
     tate that initial  load allocations for  clusters be formulated
     in  advance  of complete planning.  It may  be  appropriate to
     accelerate  the  segment analysis  in areas  where cluster  analyses

-------
                             22
     are  required.   In  any event, subsequent  load allocations should
     be consistent  with the cluster determinations.   (See paragraphs
     (A)  and  (B), above.)

(H)   Treatment  of uncertainty  in waste  load allocation.

     Uncertainty  in waste  load allocation process may consist of:
     (I)   uncertainty with respect to growth  projections; (2) a  lack of
     knowledge  of cause-effect relationships  among effluents and water
     quality;  (3) pending decisions with respect to the construction
     of reservoirs,  withdrawals, and other developments which could
     significantly  alter the water quality standards applicable to the
     segment, and  (4) uncertainty as to the data being employed.

       Growth  projections.

       Unanticipated growth occurring  during the period covered by the
       plan,  if  not controlled, could  cause  water quality conditions to
       deteriorate to  such a  point that the  classification of some
       segments  would  be changed from  effluent  limited to water quality
        limited,  or in  water quality segments higher  levels of technology
        if not  controlled, could be required  to achieve standards.  Since
       the rate  of growth of  waste  loads  is  controlled by  local decisions
       with  respect to annexation,  industrial expansion, sewer connection
       permits,  etc.,  the plan's  load  projections and allocations must be
       reviewed  with the responsible municipalities and  industries.  The
       discussion  should note that because of the antidegradation prin-
       ciple,  if future growth  is underestimated and hence assigned an
        inadequate  load allocation, projects  proposed for later  in time
       may be  foreclosed or restricted by reason of an early exhaustion
       of the  available  load  allowance.

       Lack  of cause-effect knowledge.

       Uncertainty due to a  lack of knowledge of the cause-effect
        relationships among waste  loads and water quality must be
       taken into  account  in  the waste load  allocation process.
       Experience  with cause-effect modules  in water quality  is  in-
       sufficient  to provide  a  basis for  specifying  tolerance  levels
        for prediction  errors, but the  use of sensitivity analysis  is
       encouraged. Where the social cost of errors  is small, factors
       of safety should  be  included; where the  social cost of errors
        is large,  research and monitoring  to  reduce  uncertainty  should be
       conducted or scheduled.  A schedule for  such  activities  should be
        i ncluded  i n the pIan .

-------
                                  23
             Pending development.

             Where there is substantial  uncertainty  with  respect  to
             pending development decisions,  allocations should  be made
             under both the assumption  that  development will  not  occur
             and that the development will occur.  Water  quality  impli-
             cations of the proposed development  should then  be brought
             to the attention  of the decision-makers concerned  with  the
             project or program.

             Uncertainty as to the data.

             The level  of confidence in the  data  should match the sig-
             nificance of the  dependent decisions.   Additional  confirmation
             of data should be sought where  the costs of  possible error
             so warrant.

          Time periods covered by the plan should  reflect the level  of
uncertainty that may arise from each of these source. For example,  while
the Act provides for the issuance of permits of up to 5 years'  duration,
if major uncertainties exist it may be  appropriate to issue a number
of permits having a shorter duration, thus assuring  proper near term acti-
vities based on existing conditions but postponing a longer commitment
that might be recognized as inappropriate when further information  is
obtained.  In any event, plans should be reviewed and revised,  pursuant
to the State's continuing planning process and consistently with  any
current, issued permits, when  new information is  obtained, unanticipated
new permit applications are received, or other significant changes occur.


ii.  Varying point source allocations according to extent of  non-
     point source responsibility for violations.

     It will  be recalled that  Water Quality, Data Type I  segments are
those for which sufficient data are available and violations  of water
quality standards are anticipated within a five-year period even  after
the application of base level  effluent  limitations to all  point sources.
The anticipated violations must necessarily  result from one of  three sit-
uations: residual pollution would be primarily from  nonpoint  sources;
residual pollution would be primarily from treatment plant effluents after
the achievement of base level  limitations, or residual pollution  would  result
from treatment plant effluents and nonpoint  sources  of comparable magnitude.
Allocations under each of these conditions should  be as follows:

-------
                         24
(A)   Dominant  nonpoint.   Where  remaining violations, after the appli-
     cation  of BPT  and  secondary treatment  by point sources, are
     predominantly  caused by  nonpoint  sources,  loads should  be al-
     located to point sources according to  those base  level  effluent
     limitations, since water quality  cannot be significantly
     improved  through the application  of higher effluent  limita-
     tions.  The need for nonpoint controls should be  noted, and where
     these conditions occur  in  complex urban-industrial or other
     critical  areas, section  208 planning activities should  be con-
     sidered.   Any  statewide  planning  under section 208(b)(4) must
     be taken  into  account.

(B)   Dominant  point.  Where  remaining  pollution from point sources
     after the application of base  level effluent  limitations  is the
     dominant  cause of  anticipated violations,  loads should  be allo-
     cated so  as to achieve  water quality standards in a  cost effective
     manner, including  allocations requiring higher levels of treatment
     or control.  In segments where  previously  developed  plans are
     available and  up to  date,  these plans  may  be  sufficient to assign
     waste loads to individual  sources.   In other  segments,  evalua-
     tion of alternative  load allocation strategies is necessary
     to determine the most cost effective strategy for achieving
     water quality  standards.   Waste loads  should  be allocated con-
     sistently with the preferred strategy.

(C)   Comparable point and nonpoint.  Where  remaining pollution
     from point sources after the application of base  level  effluent
     limitations and pollution  from  nonpoint sources—which  may  include
     in place  or accumulated  pollutants—are of comparable magnitude,
     loads should be allocated  in a  manner  similar to  that outlined  for
     dominant  point areas, except nonpoint  source  controls should  be
     considered simultaneously  with  more stringent point  source
     effluent  limitations.  Again, evaluation of alternative strat-
     egies is  necessary to determine a cost effective  means  of
     achieving standards. Point  source  loads should be assigned on
     the basis of the alternative selected. The need  for nonpoint
     controls  should  be noted,  and when these conditions  occur  in
     complex urban-industrial areas, section 208 planning should be
     considered.  Any statewide planning under  section 208(b)(4)
     must also be taken into account.   In the absence  of  any
     208 planning,   a target date  for  defining  specific  nonpoint
     source  control programs should  be established.  When all  NPDES
     permits have been  processed,  nonpoint  source  programs  should
     be addressed.

-------
                                25
     Evaluation of alternatives, where required,  should be carried out only
at the level  of detail  required to execute the waste load allocation process.
The evaluation should not reach the level  of engineering design,  but the
alternatives considered must be technically feasible and the cost estimates
must be soundly based.

6.  Effluent limitations for significant dischargers.  (§§131.206, 131.209.)

    Effluent limitations, or target limitations,  must be established for each
significant point source in the water quality segment.   Limitations must be
set forth for every pollutant discharged by the source.  Effluent limitations
established in any issued,  current permit must be incorporated.   Where no
permit is in effect,  target limitations must be formulated.  (See §131.209.)
The target limitations  must be at least as stringent as necessary to meet the
requirements of the Act and applicable regulations and, for parameters for
which load allocations  are required, the load allocations established for such
source.

    The Administrator is publishing effluent guidelines defining  secondary
treatment for municipal  facilities and best practicable technology for various
classes and categories  of industrial point sources.   Such guidelines are
published in the Federal Register (see 40 CFR Parts   133,    ).  Upon publication,
copies of the guidelines and information respecting  them may be  obtained from
the Regional  Administrator.  These guidelines may be used to prescribe target
limitations for specific parameters if the resulting effluent will be consistent
with the source's assigned load allocations.  Stricter limitations must be
developed where the base level restrictions would not result in  achieving
compliance with the source's load allocation and  with water quality standards.

7.  Treatment plant residuals.  (§I 31.203(e).)

    The analysis should include controls over the disposition of  all residual
waste from any municipal, industrial or other water or waste water treatment
processing, whenever the processing or disposal occurs within the segment.
Quantity estimates and  specific disposal sites should be set forth.  Additional
guidance on this subject will be published.

8.  Assess municipal  facilities requirements.  (§131.210.)

    The segment analysis must include an assessment of investment require-
ments for municipal waste treatment or control in the segment.  A comparison
of these investment requirements with available financing will indicate
generally the date when implementation will be feasible.  The needs assess-
ment  is one of the elements used in determining,  reviewing and revising the
State municipal priorities list, which governs construction grant awards.

-------
                                  26
    Pending publication  of  further guidance,  the  assessment  should  be
conducted as follows:

    i.     Ascertain  the  effluent  load  reduction which  will be  achieved
          by the  proposed  facility and determine  whether  this  reduction
          is required  to attain and maintain  applicable water  quality
          standards  and  effluent  limitations.

    ii.    Compile and  review any  available  evidence  concerning the  cost
          effectiveness  of  the proposed treatment or control method.
          Employ  engineering plans, specifications and detailed cost
          estimates  if available;  otherwise,  cost estimates  must be
          developed.  The  Administrator will  issue guidelines  on this
          subject.

    iii.   Determine  the  population or  population  equivalents to be  served.
          Include the  population  trend forecasts  developed at  the commence-
          ment of the  basin planning activity.   (See Chapter II, sections  (C)
          and (D) of these guidelines.)  State  the design lifetime  period
          used, and  indicate how  the population analyses  employed compare
          with projections used  in other State  and local  planning activities.

9.  Schedules or  targets for significant dischargers.   (§§131.207,  131.209,
131.210.)

    A schedule of compliance or target abatement  date  must be  determined,
as explained in this section, for each significant point  source which  is
not currently in  compliance with  the effluent limitations applicable to  it
and is not anticipated to  be in compliance  by January  I,  1975.  If  the State
is participating   in  the  NPDES, target  dates for the  processing of permits
respecting any covered source which will not  have been processed at the  time
of the basin plan's  completion must also be set forth.

    Any schedule  established by a current,  issued NPDES  permit must be
included in the segment  analysis.  Target final abatement dates must  be
developed for all other  significant sources and for  any  permitted source
having a permit with an  incomplete schedule.

    Each schedule or target abatement  date  should reflect stringent per-
formance goals, to assure  implementation of the plan's required effluent
limitations  in the shortest practicable time.  However,  all  dates established
by the plan must be  realistic and feasible:  No segment  analysis should
culminate in arbitrary,  fictitious requirements which  would  be impossible
to meet.

-------
                                  27
     The schedules or targets should provide for timely implementation of
the statutory goals of section 301  whenever the Act's deadlines can  pos-
sibly be attained.  Any alleged impossibility should be clearly documented
by the discharger. No target date inconsistent with the Act will  be  ap-
proved, although inclusion of non-approvable target dates will  not neces-
sarily preclude approval  of other portions of a plan.  It should be  noted
that target dates contained in the plan are not directly enforceable,  and
inclusion in the plan of  a target compliance date inconsistent  with  the
requirements of law cannot guarantee the subject source any immunity from
public or private actions to enforce the law's requirements or  penalize
violations thereof.  It should also be noted that basin plans and the
schedules and targets contained therein are subject to revision:   Improve-
ments in technology or financing prospects may result in shortening  established
target dates.

JO.  Monitoring program.   (Part 131, Subpart C.)

     Each water quality segment should be included in the State's monitoring
program.  (See Part 131,  Subpart C, and 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart B, Appendix A.)
A program to monitor total stream discharge loadings and instream water quality
in each water quality segment in the basin must be included in  the basin  plan.
Initial monitoring efforts should serve the purposes of the initial  plans:
they should be directed primarily towards acquisition of data needed to allocate
loads and issue NPDES permits in Water Quality segments by December  31, 1974.
Subsequently, monitoring  may also be directed towards nonpoint  source  analysis
and controls.  The annual State program will set forth specific monitoring  pro-
gram for each year.

II.  National priorities.

     Planning in the segment should be consistent with national priorities
as determined by the Administrator.  Information respecting current  priorities
may be obtained from the Regional Administrator.

12.  Relationship with other plans.  (§131.204.)

     Planning for the segment should take into account any other water quality
or other applicable resource plan prepared or under preparation which  involves
all or any part of the basin.  The basin plan of which the segment analysis is
a part will  identify and  discuss such other planning activities in the basin.

-------
                                28
B.  Data Type I I  Segments.

    Additional  monitoring is needed  to acquire  sufficient  data  to  classify
the segment with  certainty  or to execute waste  load  allocations.
I.  Procedures for Data Type II  segments.

    For Data Type II  segments,  the following steps  should  be employed:

    i.    Select a tentative model  to relate source loads  to water quality
          (unless an  existing,  current model is available).   (See Appendix B
          of these guidelines.)

    ii.   Design, schedule and  execute a  data collection  program.  (See
          paragraph 2, below, and 40 CFR  Part 35,  Subpart  B, Appendix A.)

    iii.  Reclassify  the segment as either Effluent Limitation or Water
          Quality, Data Type I,  and proceed according to  the guidelines
          for those segments.

2.  Data Col lection.

    Surveys for Water Quality,  Data Type  II segments should  be those
required as a part of each State's overall  monitoring strategy.  (See
40 CFR Part 35, Subpart B, Appendix A (Monitoring).)  According to the
regulations, the requirement for intensive surface water  monitoring
surveys should be met as a matter of priority, and beginning with Fiscal
Year  1975, the State's intensive survey capability should be adequate
to support the State's continuing planning process, including the develop-
ment of data necessary to set effluent limitations.

    Surveys should measure each parameter for which the applicable
standard  is being violated during the critical period for that parameter.
Using as a guide the preliminary waste load and cause-effect estimates
developed for the classification of segments, surveys should be designed
to allow simultaneous estimates of  loads  from point and nonpoint sources
and of their  impacts on water quality.  These impacts should be represented
in the form of the least sophisticated model adequate to  enable planners to
predict water quality conditions under adjusted conditions of flow, temp-
erature and  load allocations.   (See Appendix B to these guidelines.)  The
model should be properly validated.

-------
                                  29


IV.   EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS SEGMENT ANALYSIS


A.  Introduction.

    In effluent limitations segments,  either water quality  is  and  will
continue to be at  least equal  to applicable water quality standards  or,
if water quality does not meet the standards, it will  do so after  the
application of best practicable control  technology by  industrial sources
and secondary treatment by municipalities  within the segment and compli-
ance by upstream sources with  requirements applicable  to them.   Effluent
limitations for dischargers in EL segments are based solely on  technology:
it is not necessary to relate  the effluent limitations of individual  dis-
chargers to water  quality or permissible waste loadings, as is  required
in water quality segments.

    Segment analysis in effluent limitations segments  accomplishes a
variety of important objectives:

       It establishes an orderly, visible  water quality management
       scheme for  the segment.

       It describes existing water quality as a basis  for preventing  significant
       degradation.

       It sets forth a coordinated, prioritized schedule of compliance
       for all significant sources in  the  segment.

       It produces an inventory of dischargers in the  segment  for
       use in formulating the  annual  State strategy, which  in  turn
       is used to  schedule permit processing and construction  grant
       awards and  to set forth the State's monitoring  and surveillance
       program for the year.

B.  Antidegradation.

     Water quality should not  be significantly degraded. The  objective
of the 1972 Amendments is "to restore  and  maintain the chemical,  physi-
cal, and biological integrity  of the Nation's waters."  (§101(a).)
The Act requires as a minimum that sources achieve effluent limitations
necessary to meet  water quality standards  (§30 I(b)(I)(C)),  and water
quality standards  must be such as to enhance the quality of water.
(§303(c)(2).)  Standards generally contain antidegradation  statements
further elaborating this policy.

     To implement  the rule against significant degradation, existing
quality should be  described in the plan, using current data regarding
water quality and  effluents where available and estimates where existing
data are insufficient and additional  data  cannot be readily obtained.

-------
                                  30
The existing water quality level  set forth  in  the plan  will  be  the  base
line against which to measure future changes.   The definition of  signi-
ficant degradation may consist of objective measurements  or  may be  in
relation to the character of  the  locality,  (e.g., extreme stringency
in an area constituting an outstanding natural  resource), but  in  no case
may water quality levels be reduced to a  point where  standards  may  be
violated.  The State may prevent  significant degradation  in  a number of
ways:

        Requiring installation of the effluent limitations required
        by sections 301, 302, 306, and 307  of  the Act.

        Requiring installation of new technology  as it  becomes
        avai lable.

        Preventing excessive  concentration  of  sources through case
        by case review, development of site location  alternatives,
        zoning or other measures.

        Establishing new source preconstruction review  procedures.

         Instituting zero discharge or zero  growth policies,  if  necessary.

        Assuring adequate opportunity for public  comment  and hearings
        on all actions involving  possible degradation.

C.  Steps in preparation of effluent limitations  segment  analysis.   (Generally,
§!3l.203(d).)

    Each effluent limitations segment analysis should be  prepared as
described in this section.  Planning should proceed pursuant to the
approved State continuing planning process.  Citations  are the  relevant
Sections of 40 CFR Part 131  (see  Appendix A to these guidelines), which
should be consulted through the segment analysis.

 I.  Describe existing water quality and set forth applicable water quality
standards.  (§131.202.)

    Existing water quality and related hydrologic and hydraulic data,  and
the water quality standards applicable to the segment or   legal  citation  to
such standards, should be disaggregated from the  data and standards of the
basin.   (See Chapter  II, Section  A, of these guidelines.)

-------
                                  31
2.  Inventory,  categorize and rank existing dischargers.   (§131.206(a).)

    The inventory and categorization of  dischargers  in  the segment should
be disaggregated from the inventory and  categorization  for the basin,
checked for accuracy and completeness and revised if  necessary.   (See
Chapter II, Section B, of these guidelines.)  Significant dischargers
should be ranked in order of abatement priority.

3.  Treatment plant residuals.   (§131.203(e).)

    The analysis should include controls over  the disposition  of  all
residual  waste  from any municipal, industrial  or  other  water or  waste
water treatment processing,  whenever the processing or  disposal  occurs
within the segment.  Quantity estimates  and specific  disposal  sites
should be set forth.  Additional  guidance on this subject will  be published.

4.  Assess municipal facilities requirements.   (§131.210.)

    The segment analysis must include an assessment of  investment
requirements for municipal  waste treatment or  control  in  the segment.
This assessment should be developed in the same manner  as employed
in water quality segments.   (See Chapter III,  Section A.8., of these
gui deIi nes.)

5.  Schedules or targets for significant dischargers.   (§§I 31.206(c),
13).209.)

    A schedule of compliance or target abatement  date must be  determined
for each significant point source which  is not currently  in compliance
with the effluent  limitations applicable to it and is not anticipated
to be in compliance by January I,  1975.   Schedules of compliance or target
abatement dates for effluent limitation  segments  are  developed under  the
same principles as control  scheduling in water quality  segments.   If  the
State is participating in the NPDES, target dates for the processing  of
permits respecting covered sources must  also be set  forth as for water
quality segments.   (See Chapter III, Section A.9., of these guidelines.)

6.  Assess nonpoint sources.  (§§203(d)(4), 131.211.)

    Consideration of agricultural, si IviculturaI, mining  related, salt
water intrusion related and other nonpoint source pollution, as  provided
in §!3l.2ll(a), is desirable, but generally it is not  required in initial
EL planning since by definition water quality  in  EL  segments will meet
applicable water quality standards without additional controls on nonpoint
sources.  Additional consideration should be given,  however, where  it is
dictated by special circumstances such as the  necessity to act to preserve
an outstanding natural resource.

-------
                                  32
7.  National  priorities.   (§131.203(d)(4).)

    Planning  for this segment should  be  consistent  with  national  priori-
ties as determined by the Administrator.   Information  respecting  current
priorities may be obtained from  the Regional  Administrator.

8.  Relationship with other plans.   (§131.204.)

    Planning  for the segment should take into account  any  other water
quality or other applicable resource  plan  prepared  or  under  preparation
which involves all or any part of  the basin.   The basin  plan of which  the
segment analysis is a part will  identify and  disucss such  other planning
activities in the basin.

-------
                                 33


V.  ASSEMBLING THE BASIN PLAN


A.  Introduction;  Plan Submission.

    The basin plan consists of two  major components—the basinwide
information derived from or in support of the individual segment
analyses, and the individual  segment analyses.   These components should
be assembled in a single package.  Five copies  of  the package should
be submitted by the Governor or his designee, on or before the plan's
scheduled completion date, to the Regional  Administrator.   The Regional
Administrator is required to approve or disapprove the plan within 30
days after its submission.


B.  Basinwide Components.

    Each basin plan must include the following  basinwide components.


I.  Maps.

    i.   A map of the State showing the basin in relation  to other
basins, including portions of other States as necessary to show any
interstate coordination area.

    ii.  A map delineating the basin and identifying its segments.  The
classification of the segments should be indicated on this map.  (See
also paragraph 3, below.)

    A comprehensive map identifying and locating significant dischargers
and monitoring stations in the basin is not required.  This information
is reflected in the individual segment analyses.


2.  Water quality standards.

    Applicable water quality standards for the  basin are identified
in the individual  segment analyses  and need not be repeated in the basin-
wide statement.  Standards for the  basin must be reviewed  at least once
every three years, pursuant to section 303(c) of the Act and 40 CFR
§131.202(b)-(c).

-------
                                34


3.  Segment classification.

    The basin plan should contain  a  list showing the classification
of each segment in the basin,  pursuant to §131.203.   (See Chapter II
and paragraph I,  above.)   The  segments should be listed  in order of
abatement priority, pursuant to il3l.208(b).   The system for ranking
segments in the basin should be consistent with the  criteria for state-
wide ranking of segments  (see  §130.41) and applicable priorities.
4.  Priorities.

    The basin plan should identify and explain any deviation from national
priorities.


5.  Industrial  discharge inventory.

    The basin plan should contain an inventory and categorization of indus-
trial  dischargers in the basin.   Significant dischargers should be ranked
in order of abatement priority;  the ranking should be consistent with the
system for the State Industrial  Discharge Inventory.   (See §130.44.)  The
basin inventory should be aggregated from the individual segments lists
and should be consistent with the priorities set forth in those lists.
(See Chapter III, A.3, Chapter IV, C.2., and Appendix C, Form 2 (optional).)
The basin  inventory will be used by the State in developing the State
Inventory.  (See ll31.208(a).)


6.  Municipal discharge inventory.

    The basin plan should contain an inventory and categorization of
municipal  dischargers in the basin.  Significant dischargers should be
ranked in  order of abatement priority; the ranking should be consistent
with the system for the State Municipal Discharge Inventory.  (See §130.43.)
The basin  inventory should be aggregated from the individual segment  lists
and should be consistent with the priorities set forth  in those lists.
(See Chapter III, A.3., Chapter  IV, C.2., and Appendix C, Form 2 (optional).)
The basin  inventory will be used by the State in developing the State
Inventory.   (See §131.208(a).)

    The basin plan should also show the municipal facilities investment
needs  in the basin.  (See §131.210; see also Chapter  III, A.8. and Chap-
ter IV, C.4.)

-------
                                35
7.  Permit issuance target dates.

    If the State is participating  in the National  Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System, each basin plan should include a  list indicating
target dates for the processing of permits respecting  any covered  sources
which will not have been processed at the plan's completion.   This list
should be compiled from the individual  segment analysis lists.   (See
Chapter Ml, A.9., Chapter IV, C.5., and Appendix C, Form 4-B  (optional).)
8.  Nonpoint sources.

    It is desirable that the basin plan  provide for consideration  of
nonpoint sources.   Consistently with national  priorities,  if  planning
resources are limited,  nonpoint source planning should  not be pursued  to
an extent which  would  substantially curtail  planning for point sources
subject to the NPDES.   If the Governor has determined pursuant to  sec-
tion 208(b)(4) of  the  Act that consistency with a  statewide regulatory
program under section  303 requires that  certain nonpoint source processes
should be developed by the Governor for  application to  all  regions within
the State, the basin plan should note such determination.

    The plan should include target dates for the future consideration
of nonpoint sources and, if feasible, imposition of controls.  Full
compliance with  §131.211 should be initiated after January I, 1975.
9.  Land use policies and controls.

    The basin plan should describe the coordination of the plan  with  land
use policies and controls, pursuant to §131.212.


10.  Relationship with other plans.

     The basin plan should identify all  water quality or other applicable
resource plans prepared or under preparation which involve all  or any part
of the basin.  These plans would include the plans described in  §!3l.204(a),
any major water resource planning by the Corps of Engineers or other
authorities, and any cluster analyses undertaken  in the absence  of a
completed segment analysis.  The basin plan should include the information
required pursuant to §131.204.

-------
APPENDIX A

-------
11
                                36
Legal  basis of  plan;  Enforcement.
     The basin plan should set forth  briefly  the  legal  basis  of  the  plan,
including the basis for enforcement of  schedules  of  compliance pursuant
to §!3l.207(b)(2).
12.  Certifications.
     The basin plan should include the assurances and  certifications,  by
the Governor or his designee,  required pursuant to §131.400.
C.  Individual  Segment Analyses.

    The separate analyses of each segment in the basin plan must be
included as a part of the basin plan.   To aid in information management
and display, Appendix C suggests  optional  forms which may be employed
for this presentation.  Use of the forms is not required.  Segment and
basin information may be presented in  any manner adequate to enable
public and governmental information and review and to serve as a guide
for ongoing water quality management.

-------
             I   TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1973
                Volume 38 • Number 58
                PART II
                ENVIRONMENTAL
                   PROTECTION
                     AGENCY
                  STATE CONTINUING
                  PLANNING PROCESS

                    Interim Regulations
No. 58~rt.

-------
8031
      RULES  AND  REGULATIONS
   Title 40—Protection of Environment
     CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL
         PROTECTION AGENCY
    PART 130—STATE CONTINUING
         PLANNING PROCESS
      Notice of Interim Regulations
  Notice is hereby given that these reg-
ulations are set forth as interim regula-
tions by  the Environmental Protection
Agency tEPA).
  Section  303(e)  of the Federal Water
Pollution Control  Act,  as amended (86
Stai.  816;  33  XJ.S.C. 1314 (1972)), re-
quires each State to submit a continuing
planning process which is consistent with
the Ac' These proposed regulations de-
scribe the necessary elements of a State's
continuing planning  process. They also
set forth procedures governing planning
process adoption,  submission, and  revi-
sion and EPA approval.  These regula-
tions also provide a mechanism for States
to satisfy portions of sections 208, 303(d)
(Critical waters   and  maximum   daily
loads); 305(b) (State reports on  water
quality and related information, includ-
ing   nonpoint  sources);   314   (Clean
lakes); after June 30, 1973, 516(b)  (Fed-
eral/State  estimate  of publicly owned
treatment  works  construction  needs);
and they provide data for 305 (a) and
104(a) (5)   (Federal  report on  water
quality).
   Purpose. The purpose of the continu-
ing  planning  process is to provide the
States the water quality assessment and
program management information nec-
essary to make  centralized coordinated
water quality management  decisions; to
provide the strategic guidance for de-
veloping the  State program submittal
under section 106 of the Act; and  to en-
courage  water quality  objectives  which
take into account overall State policies
and programs, including those for land
use and other related natural resources.
   Goals of the State process. The goals
of such a State  process are to:
   Provide  a basis upon  which the State's
overall program (106) will be developed.
This will be accomplished by developing
an annual strategy, Tyhich will be based
upon basin plans  where  they are com-
pleted and upon available information
where the plans are not completed. This
annual strategy will assist the State:
   In directing resources—planning, mon-
itoring, permitting, and financial  assist-
 ance against  water quality problems on
 a priority basis.
   In establishing  a coordinated schedule
of action.
   In reporting on progress in achieving
 program  targets  and  scheduled  mile-
 stones.
   Insure that applicable water quality
 standards  are  attained.  Where   water
 quality standards violations occur an as-
 sessment will be  made whether the ap-
 plication of Best Practical Control Tech-
 nology (BPT) for industry and secondary
 treatment for municipalities will correct
 the water quality problem. If not, a maxi-
 mum pollutant load will be calculated
 and individual discharge allocations will
 'oe made to meet these loads.
  Specify  the requirements  for,  and
schedule the completion of, section 303
basin plans for all waters.
  Insure public participation m the de-
velopment  of  the plamrng pro* ;&s and
of plans.
  The  complexity and timing of a plan
for a specific area will be tailored to the
problems of the area. No  process  need
require individual plans to be more elab-
orate than is  necessary for sound \\ater
quality management,
  Classification of  waters. To  establish
priorities, and to assist the State in as-
sessing water quality problems, the proc-
ess provides that the waters of each State
will be classified according to the severity
of pollution and the anticipated difficulty
of developing and implementing remedial
efforts. Waters will  be classified into two
classes:
  (1) Water quality class: Any  segment
where it is known that water quality does
not meet applicable water quality stand-
ards and is not expected to meet water
quality standards even after the appli-
cation of the effluent limitations required
by  sections 301(b) (1) (A)  and 301 (b) (1)
(B) of the Act.
  (2) Effluent limitation class:  Any seg-
ment where water quality is meeting and
will continue to meet applicable water
quality standards or where there is ade-
quate  demonstration that  water quality
will meet applicable water quality stand-
ards after  the application of the effluent
limitations  required  by sections 301 (b)
U)(A) and 301(b)(l)(B) of the Act.
  Content  of  the planning process. The
State  continuing planning  process pro-
vides for the development of "basin plans.
The process will:
  Delineate planning  areas and identify
planning agencies.
  Classify  waters  into water quality or
effluent classes.
   Identify the elements to be  included
in  the plans  in accordance with provi-
sions of Part  131 of this chapter.
   Provide a phased schedule for the com-
pletion of plans.
   Establish a mechanism  whereby the
State's priorities for construction of pub-
licly owned treatment works, for process-
ing waste  water discharge permits and
for other program priorities will be es-
tablished. The program priorities will be
reported   in   the   section  106  State
program.
   Provide  a mechanism for determining
investment  requirements  on   publicly
 owned treatment works.
   Provide  a basis  for assessing achieve-
ment of interim program milestones and
final ambient results to be reported as
 part of the section  106 State program.
   Each State will prepare its plans pur-
 suant to the approved process  schedule
for plan preparation. If after his approval
 of the process the  Regional  Adminis-
 trator finds  that  the State's  approved
 process  is deficient,  he will confer with
 the State as to his  findings  and  may
 request  the State  to revise its process
 as appropriate. If the State fails to make
 the necessary revisions in a timely man-
 ner,  the  Regional Administrator  may
withdraw his appro.al of thu  ,,'i.jceo.s,
after1  consultation  v'th  the AHminis-
trator, if he finds that the  pioce.s,  is
grossly deficient. Such fi'idur'  >nay be
based, among other things, o-i •<  .ibM.i'j-
tial failure of plans developed ina'-u.'nt
to the process  to (onfoiiu v'th tin r-
quirements of the A^t, o>' on p. ./ib ;tm • i -
failure of the State to meor. I be appro, f •
phasing of planning, or on a sub.-tan'id
failure of the State to implement, plans
  Federal properties, facilities,  ami ac-
tivities are subject  to Federal, Slate, in-
terstate,  and local standards  and effluent
limitations for  control and abatement  of
pollution. The  State's planning  process
should  include provision  for  Federal
sources. It is contemplated that Federal
agencies will provide information to the
States in  accordance  with   procedures
established by  the Administrator.
  Plan content. Companion regulations
under section  303(e), Part  131  of this
chapter,   describe  the preparation  of
plans pursuant to the planning process:
Part  131 should be consulted during the
development of  the  planning  process
under Part 130.
  In  effluent limitation classes the  plan
should contain discharge priorities, com-
pliance  schedules  for discharges  with
permits and target abatement dates for
other dischargers and other management
information as may be necessary; while
in water quality classes,  in addition  to
the above information, the plan  should
establish  maximum  daily   loads  and
should determine the greater effluent re-
ductions required for  dischargers to at-
tain  the water quality goals. Similarly,
the monitoring and surveillance program
will focus primarily on those areas where
water quality  problems are  most severe
and where existing information is most
deficient.
  Publication  of  regulations governing
Part  131, Preparation of Plans Pursuant
to  State Continuing  Planning Process,
has been  delayed. Publication  of these
regulations is expected shortly.
  Prior to the adoption of final regula-
tions within 180  days from this date,
consideration will be given to comments,
suggestions, or objections which may  be
submitted in writing to: Chief, Planning
and Standards Branch; Office of Air and
Water  Programs;  Room 1007,  Crystal
Mall Building  No. 2, Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460.
All comments, suggestions, or objections
received on or before May 11,  1973 will
be considered.
   These  interim  continuing planning
process  regulations shall become effec-
 tive  on  March 27, 1973.  It  is necessary
 that  these regulations take effect prior
to a  30-day period after  publication be-
 cause States have begun to seek EPA ap-
 proval of  a State  operated  permit pro-
 gram as provided under section 402 fb)
 of the Act, and because no such approval
 can be made unless a State's continuing
 planning  process  under  section  303 (e)
 of  the Act has been first approved. See
 40 CFR 124.93. For  the same  reason,
                                FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL  38, NO. 58 —TUESDAY,  MARCH 27, 1973

-------
                                              RULES AND REGULATIONS
notice of proposed rule making and pub-
lic comment thereon, prior to the effec-
tive date of these regulations, is imprac-
ticable and contrary to the  public in-
terest.

          WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS,
                      Administrator.

  MARCH 20, 1973.
   Subpart A—Scope and Purpose; Definitions
£-ec.
       Scope and purpose.
130.1
130.2
       Definitions.
      Subpart B—General Requirements
130 10  Process coverage.
130.11  Classification of segments.
130.12  Planning agencies.
130.13  Legal authorities.
130.14  Public participation.
13015  Separability.
     Subpart C—Contents of Basin Plans
130.20  Level of complexity of plans.
130.21  Establishment  of planning  areas
         (basins).
130.22  Relation between  plans and  other
         planning provisions.
13023  Water quality standards.
130 24  Total maximum daily loads.
130 25  Individual point source discharge al-
         location; impact on water quality.
13026  Schedules of  compliance.
130 27  Inventory of individual dischargers.
13028  Assessment of municipal needs for
         publicly  owned  waste  treatment
         works.
130 29  Konpoint sources of pollutants.
130.30  Monitoring and surveillance.
13031  Intergovernmental cooperation.
130.32  Adoption of plans.
Subpart D—Preparation of Annual State Strategy
130.40  State strategy.
13041  Problem assessment and priorities.
130.42  Schedule for  plan preparation.
13043  State immicipal discharge inventory.
130.44  State industrial discharge inventory.

Subpart E—Requirements for Approval of Plan-
           ning Process; Reports
130 50  Submission of process.
130.51  Contents of process submittal.
130 52  Planning process review;  approval or
         disapproval.
130.53  Prohibition of  approval of certain
         planning processes.
130.54  Revisions.
330 55  Reports.
£ ubpart F—Relationship of Process to Permit and
         Construction Grant Programs
130 60  Relationship  of continuing planning
         process with State participation in
         National Pollutant Discharge Elim-
         ination System.
53061  Relationship  of continuing planning
         process with constrxiction grants.

  AUTHORITY  Sees 303 and 501, 86 Stat 816;
C-3 USC. 1314 (1972).

     Subpart A—Scope and Purpose;
               Definitions

\\ 130.1   Scope and purpose.

   (a)  This part establishes regulations
f pecifying procedural and other elements
which must  be  present in  a State con-
tmum:;  planning process to obtain ap-
pi'cual ol the Administrator pursuant to
action 303't ) ol the Federal Water Pol-
lution Gonti,'] Act, as  amended, 86 Stat.
1116, 33  U'iC. 1314 Tins  pait provides
' hat each St  ite nuiM achieve compliance
'Mth the reriuuuneiitF of thr, regulation
not  later tlun  June  30,  1975, and in-
cludes specification of levels of compli-
ance  which shall be achieved  prior to
that date.
  (b)  The  purpose of  the continuing
planning  process is:  To  provide the
States the  water quality assessment and
program management information nec-
essary to make centralized coordinated
water quality  management decisions; to
provide the strategic guidance for devel-
oping the State program submittal under
section 106 of the Act; and to encourage
water quality  objectives  which take into
account overall State  policies  and pro-
grams, including those for land use and
other related natural resources.
  (c)  The  State continuing  planning
process is directed toward the attainment
of water  quality standards established
pursuant to sections 301 and 302 of the
Act to achieve the goals set forth in the
Act. The planning process will  develop
an  annual strategy  for  directing re-
sources, establishing priorities, schedul-
ing of actions;  and reporting  programs
toward achievement of  program objec-
tives.
  (d)  The total State planning process
is comprised of:
  (11  The annual State strategy, which
sets  the State's major objectives and
priorities for preparing  basin plans and
its annual  program plan.
  (2)  Individual  basin  plans,  which
establish specific targets for controlling
pollution in individual basins.
  (3)  The annual program plan  (section
106), which establishes the results ex-
pected and the resources committed for
the State  program each year. The an-
nual  plan  is developed  from  the objec-
tives  and priorities of the annual State
strategy, and, when available, from the
specific targets developed in basin plans.
  (4)  Reports, which measure program
performance  in  achieving  programmed
results.
The "continuing planning process" is the
process by which the State develops the
foregoing plans and reports.
  (e)  This part describes:
  (1) The general requirements for the
planning process (Subpart B).
   (2) The content of the basin  plans
(Subpart C).
  (3)  The preparation of the annual
State strategy (SubpartD).
  (4)  The requirements for approval  of
the planning  process (Subpart E).
   (5) The relationship of the process to
permit and construction grants programs
(Subpart P).

§ 130.2  Definitions.
  As  used in this  part,  the  following
terms shall have the meanings set forth
below.
   (a) The term "Act" means the Federal
Water  Pollution   Control   Act,   as
amended,  33 U.S.C.	, et seq.
   ib> The teim "EPA" means the US.
Knurr.ninental  Protection Agency.
   ic) The term "Administrator" means
the Administrator  of  the  U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
   >d) The term "Regional Admimstra-
loi" means the appropriate EPA Regional
Administrator.
  (e) The terms  "continuing  planning
process," "planning process," and "proc-
ess"  mean  the  continuing  planning
process required by section 303(e)  of the
Act. Such process develops the State focal
point  for water  quality  management
decisions. This includes phasing of plans
to be prepared during fiscal years 1973,
1974, and 1975.
  (f) The term "plan" means the water
quality  management  plan  for  each
hydrologic basin or other approved bnsni
unit within a State. Such plan constitutes
a mechanism for implementing applica-
ble effluent limitations and water quality
standards, and will consist of such com-
ponents as are necessary for sound plan-
ning and program management  in the
basin covered by the plan.
  Requirements for the preparation  of
such plans are described in Part 131  of
thia chapter.
  (g)  The  term   "effluent  limitation"
means  any restriction established by  a
State or the Administrator on quantities,
rates,  and concentrations  of  chemical,
physical,  biological, and other constitu-
ents which are discharged from point
sources into navigable waters, the waters
of the contiguous  zone, or the ocean, but
does not include schedules of compliance.
  (h)  The terms "schedule of implemen-
tation" and "schedule of compliance" aie
synonymous   and  mean a description
for each source of remedial measures to
be   accomplished  and  a  sequence  of
actions or operations leading to compli-
ance with applicable effluent limitations,
water  quality standards and  other re-
quirements of State and Federal law.
  (i) The term "municipal needs" means
the  total  capital funding  required  for
construction of publicly owned treatment
works,  as denned in section 212(2)  (A)
and (B) of the Act, that are required to
meet national water  quality  objectives
of sections 301 and 302 of the Act.
  (j) The term "National Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System" means the
Federal permitting  system  authorized
under section 402 of  the  Act including
any State or interstate program which
has been approved by the Administrator,
in whole or in part, pursuant to  section
402  of the Act.
  (k)  The term  "phasing  of  planning"
means  the State  schedule  approved  by
the  Regional  Administrator  for  the
preparation  of  plans,  pursuant  to the
continuing planning process, during the
fiscal years 1973,  1974, and 1975.
  (1) The  term   "basin"   means  the
streams,  rivers, and tributaries and the
total land and  surface  water  area  con-
tained in one of the 267 major and minor
basins  defined by EPA, or other basin
unit as agreed upon by the Stateis) and
the Regional Administrator Unless spec-
ified otherwise, "basin" shall reler  only
to those portions  within the bordeis ol a
smyle State.
  (m)  The  term "segment"  means  a
portion of a basin the sin face \\atei\s of
which hau> common hydrologic charac-
teristics  (or  fiov,  regulation patterns) ;
common  natural physical, chemical, and
biological processes,  and  which  have
common  reactions to  external Mre--'.es.
e.g , dischaige of pollutants.
                                KDLR/,1  K. jlSTEIi, VOL  38,  NO.  58—TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1973

-------
                                               RULES AND REGULATIONS
       T'-.e te:m  "cl'l. id" v.tviv,  t'>, •' •"•
V".r- r'l: -hai'C'CMs which  'ii ,- Iv: i ~.F pi,l
!•;'•!-(   'ii s-r ;>, ') •<  <• '!•-t Mif rcn'1 l''\i-
':  r >i thr-ii e'l'iK'n1.- causes •>!• MOV Oil ise
•,.,.%;•( .ulitv taru'.aid vio'.atims
  ~  •> The ten,' "s!»,mfi ..tit dischar^-i '
:> i  ! .".'  ,,i y i.ivliAi1",'  ' vh<.  is c iii: -n,;
^>;ic.'i    T .-niu'iil •> >u-r qa >i;t>  >u- (he sc;::i,cni to i\'!u-  :i it.
H,,:'}™   ,0-
    Each  segment shall be classified
as follows.
  < i)  Water quality class. Any segment
whore   it  is  known that  water   quality
does not  meet applicable water  quality
atundai da  and which is not expected to
ni^el \\ater quality standards even after
t'-vi. .implication of Ihe effluent limitations
i(-i..i.Le-l by  section:;  301(0;'1 > i i • •«.> of  the Ac*.
   '.'.:•  Efflr.-ml limitation class. Any ifg-
r-.'-i..'. '  he'.? v.ater quality is meeting and
" ill . o:iVai:2 to meet applicable water
ar.Js afh'  U,-.'  H-Tlu..!;<),  .,
limUani. '. ••  roqiiiifu  b,   j>
> 1 i i \i  and itJ] i n< • 1 > . U  i
   .'.' -  Ai':  r! '-MjVvJjnn  -h-'li :•-.>' t  an/
;r t't"~'- u'y .I'iou.u,,1 ; for  i iilu j;\ac\i '.LJ-
nomi- ..iif":  crtno   ,M-.!,,.,  ,,!-•" >h u er at
le".st  a  5-ycai  i.c'T'd  '.u:d 'Ui :  ddiiii.u.il
allowance  rerecting  the- d-jf;r<'t of pic-
cision and laiidity of the t,is upon
which  the  ila* ,ifi( .uions  an-  based.
When- the analysis is irst, ]in_; ise or thtie
i.s  unteitainty concerning ejrtjv ill  jjro-
jfclions, a greater margin of safety shall
be  required for the assignment of  any
segment to an Effluent Limitation Class.
In  determining  the  additional  allow-
ance,  consideration should  be  given to
economic and demographic projections
that are utilized in other State programs.
fSee  § 131.210.)
   (e)   The  classification  of  all waters
should be included in the submission of
the planning process by  the Governor of
each  State  to the   Regional   Admin-
istrator.
   (1)  Submission and approval or dis-
approval shall also be in  accordance with
§§ 130.50 and 130.52.
   (2)  Review and revisions of such clas-
sifications shall be made in accordance
with  § 130.54.
§ 130.12   Planning agencies.
   (a)  (1) The Governor of a State shall
designate a State  agency responsible for
conduct  of the required planning. The
Governor may designate a local or inter-
state  agency to conduct all or any portion
of the planning within  each basin  and
may  assign   planning   responsibilities
under the process  and Part 131 of  this
chapter to any such  designated agency.
   (2)   The  process shall  set forth  the
criteria followed in designating  planning
agencies pursuant to  paragraph (a) of
this section and in determining the juris-
diction thereof Locally elected officials of
general purpose units of  governments,
and other pertinent local and  area wide
organizations within the jurisdiction of
the potentially designated agency shall
be  consulted  prior to any  designation.
The criteria for such determinations shall
be included.
   (b)   (1)  The initial submission shall
include a specific designation  of each
planning agency responsible for conduct-
ing all  or any portion  of  the  planning
pursuant  to  the   process  within each
basin. Each designation siiall include:
     The agency's name  address,  and
name of director.
   ill) The agency's  juiisdiction  (geo-
graphical coverage and  extent of plan-
ning  responsibilities).
   «2) In the event that all or a portion of
a  plan is  to be undertaken by an agency
other than  the State  water  pollution.
control agency, evidence from such other
agency shall  be  supplied  which  shows
r-rceptance of  .;uch designation raid that
agency's  intrnt  to comply within  the
tin.es -~et f01 th in the process.
   (3)  The KUsto  .nay  n,a,'.r.e additional
assitnra T-ts, as set forth i;i this section,
  I.'id ! .'>   ' .  .
  T;-- f i'!..  '
  11  .M.el: t.i  , '
T ' .^0, S i   l'uhi,« pai';, j[»j] S.H;.
  Each  piof'".-^  if r. *   r_-v;,:nn t-1  i ;<r>">"-;p'it'nn  i>i pcrf./d'.tif'O  v ;'h
section  iPHo)  of the Ac*". 3rid any rrpn-
lation issued by the Administrator fheic-
under.  Public  participation with  ade-
quate  opportunity for  public  hearing
uoon  proper showing shall  be required
on significant  elements of the planning
process including proposed State strategy
and  priority lists  developed under the
continuing planning  process pursuant to
section 106 regulations.
§ 130.15   Separability.
  If any  provision of  this part,  or the
application of  any provision of this part
to any person  or circumstances, is held
invalid, the application of such provision
to other persons  or  circumstances,  and
the remainder of this part,  shall not be
affected thereby.
   Subpart C—Contents of Basin Plans
§ 130.20  Level of complexity of phui!-.
  (a)  The process  shall provide  that
plans for  water  quality segments  will
contain  all  the  following  parts  while
plans  for effluent limitation  segments
shall  include items (4), (5),  and (6). See
§ 130.11 for segment  classification,
  CD An assessment of total maximum
daily loads necessary to meet water qual-
ity  standards  for the  specific criteria
being violated;
  C2) An assessment of nonpoint source
pollution and,  where applicable, needed
control measures;
  (3) Already established effluent  limit
requirements for  significant dischargers
and target limits, not previously estab-
lished, for significant dischargers  that
are  required to  achieve water quality
standards;
  (4) An assessment of needs for  pub-
licly owned treatment works;
  (5)  An  inventory  and categorization
of significant  individual discharges;
  (6>  Already established  schedules of
compliance and target dates of abate-
ment for significant dischargers not on
o compliance schedule.
  (b)  The process will allow for basin
plans containing one  or more water qual-
ity  segments and/or one or more  efflu-
ent  limitation segments. The level of
plasm ing shall be related  to lequire-
mentii of augments within the ba^ni.
g !30.21  K.-staMislmiPiit of ji! in-ii •:•  areas
     Oi-inc).
  The procoas  shall  piovide  lot estab-
lishment of  planning ami,', as fol!<;^.
    Except  as  provide;! in pr.ragrnph
i'ri i.f this  Ci'-tion, t!>' 'vi.sir, boundaries
                                FEDERAL REG'SUR,  VOL
                                                         NO
                                                                -TUESDAY, MARCH 17,  1973

-------
 utojj uA\t!.ipq;tA\ aq ABUI uia;sA"g
 -aui;a a3jBqosia ;UB;itnoa JBUOI;B.M o*u
 UI ItOn'GrJpn.IBd 3;B;S J° IBAO.tddy UO
                       •sssoojd SmuirETd
 3uinur;uoo paAOJddB  UB aABq ;ou saop
 tpiqM a;B;g A"UB aOJ pBAO.lddB 3q ;OU IJ.BU.S
 ';oy aq;  jo (S)'.B)gofr uoi;oas m papiA
 -o.id uoi}t'dpi;JBd uiua;ut aqj UBq; jaq;o
          ICI
          jo b
                                jo
                                                                       .jf;  uoip:s
                                                                                                  pire
 [
  '06'OSI § mi* aouBpjoooB ur pa^^ruiqns
aq iiBqs ssaoojd atfi  jo suoisuaa (0)
qons A~q
-uoa J3}jB JO^B-nsruiuipv
paquosajd aq A'BUI se a^Bp
jo qdBjSBJBd s{q; jo  (g)
05 ^uBnsand jo^Bj^sruruipv  iBuorSaa aqi
A"q uonBoyr^ou SUTMOHOJ sABp 09 urmiM
ssaoojd si)r asrAai tiBqs a^^g aqj, (£)
        •uonoas srm J°  (B)  qdBjSBJBd jo
tieo3 am ajnss-B o^ a^BntiapBut AHBT^UB^S
-qns si ssaoojd am ^Bq-j a^B^g aq^ o; uriq
A"q uoi-jBoynou PUB Jo^BJ^srurtupv iBUOia
-aa aq^i A"q 3urpuu B uodn AjBssaoau SB
ssaoojd s^r aswaj n^qs a^B^g aqj, (Z)
siqi jo  (B) qdB.i3B.iBd jo ieo3 aq^ ajnssB
0} a^BnbapB sauiti IIB IB sr ssaooad Sum
-UBid qons ^Bq^i Suunsui jo asodind aq^
joj ssaoo.Td SuruuBid paAOJddB
              aiui-i o^ auii; moaj
                        aqj,  (T)  (q)
                             •^oy aq^ jo
             aq; q^tM A^ruuojuoo ur SBAT^
-osfqo A^iiBnt) J3^BM  TBuorjBU qsncluioo
-OB HIM qotqA\ sueid ^uajano jo aouBu
-3-jutuiu PUB ^uaiudoiaAap sq; a.mssB o^
A'.iBSsaoau sq  f"eui SB ssaoo.id aq^  asiAa.i
Iiuqs puu ssaoo.it; aurauBid aurmmuoo SIT
A\3TA3.l  Alp3miUB  HBUS 0}B-|g Oqi  (B)
           ('09'OST § asS) 'pa^o.iJdB  ion
^i  ssaao.rd aqj jr  UA\B,ipq;T.-A .10
oq  ni\v  ui3|sA"y  uoi^Biuuin
^unvUI°d IBUOI^BN sq't u:
OIBJS am jo [BAo.uldu oqx  'ssdoo.id  aqj
 ';  \iV .10 ).U'(I JO  JOAOIddB JO [U\\iJ.IptntN\
"T  ITII^O.I A'nui  y-'-ioo.trt 3unuiB[c!  oin jo
' • .  -i;"t • -T '. \ iH«sr. \m qs-ijdtuooDB 05 a.min?,j
•l > •" i I  }<", nilTH[-' )1UB (Ti-jrilJOp SBA\ p3rfO
-!,>'';"i '  "  ':.V['T 10 u oil I ipns (;ii;;tt Aq
' vio:..  . .,',  i---'}f', a in T'in ajBJipur /;BUI
«,!r',.")t'i,iTr''l  •  ;•  - iiyrHJu  i;ir,« IJII-A lUTfiy
-noi HI ', ;i ;,,].'   , -I •; r»n- rncl p UBI'O."'
tui'id -n ni-jij "] vi; -  -(j ;"'i;-;n,rai  341
                                         jg;jnt!.iaq;
                                               ;ou
-u; 3Sji-i[.i..ip ]i!i.i):i^  U'Oi'I ?

                         •ui'id pa.io.idd'a
Aire ui uonBzrJoSa^o pim Sup;uBi -wq;
tfjpM  aouBp.ToooB  ui aq  U^qs ;sii OIBIS
aq; ui uonBzi.TO3a;B3 puB SUIJUIBI .tpq;
'j3A3A\oq :jaq;33o; ps;sq  aq  ;ou paatt
uisBq  aiuss  3q;  jo  s.iaS.iBqostQ  (Z)
                    'Tt'OST § utp3mB;uoo
s3ur^UB.i ;uaui3as  aq;  q;iM  ;ua;stsuoo
siaSJBqosip tBdpiunm ;uBOijiu3is azuoS
-a;Bo  pus ^UBJ HBqs a;s;g  aqx  (.T)
    : SA\ot[oj SB pajBdajd aq UBqs A"JO;uaA
-ui aSjBqosia iBdprur-K a;B;g aqx  < 0)
                       •69'OST §o;;itBns
-jnd pajmba.t SB JB3A qoBa aouo ;sBai ;B
po;;iuiqns pus  pastAaj aq UBqs A"jo;uaA
-ui aSjBqosia IBdpunjM a;B;g aqx (Q)
          •s;uBj3 uoi;onj;suoo jo PJBAYB
.ioj ja;dBqo stq; jo   oq]
SuisBqd .ioj 3ouonl)3s V, apiAOjd i[Li[ir aju
-paqos aqx •uor;Bj«da.td iretd .ioj atnpaq.is
B  n':tiqB;sa  nuqs  sssoo.id  oqx (B)
•uojir irdj.id £  Jf"(){;i §
                                         uie.r3o.id jaq^o pue 's;ruijad jo d)UBnssi
                                         'S>[JOAV ;uaui;B3j; p3U.wo Apt[qnd  jo uou
                                         -on.ijsuoo 'sireid jo ;uauidopA&p oq} uio
                                         -AOfl A[[ruauaS HBqs Hui5iuiu siqx (Ji
                                         -dB  Auv; ut  ainijuBJ .uoq; q;iA\  ;aj;s'ib-
                                         -uoo oq  liBqs-- ;sij O;B;S aq;  ut  3u!>,uB.t
                                         .noq) 'j?A3A\oq  :aoq;a3o;  pa;sif  UL(  ;ou
                                         pjou ui',rq -juiu-5 oi[) jo S4
                                                              QNV  saina
                                                                                                                    81:08

-------
                                     'LI HDHVW  'AVOUCH—85  'ON  '' C 'iOA 'iB'Sil?5'
                   •JO;BJ;SIUIUIPV
            SB S3i;UOUd
q3tq  jo  uoi;BAjasa.td Jtoj  p33N (,£>
              •papgjjB uot;i;indo
                !SUOI;OB uiBjaojd a;Bud
-OJddB  jaq;o PUB 'suBjd  uiSBq  's;ui3J3
uoi;onj;suoo   's;tuuad  jo ' Suiinpaqos
PUB sai;uoijd  aq;  jo 2ui;sit  v  (E)
:suraiqojd  asaq; jo sai;uotJd j33jBqosip
jo iBotqdBJSoaa am  jo 3ui;sn. V (Z)
                              '. sutaiqojd
asaq; jo sasnBO aq; puB suia[qojd A;qisnb
aa^BM jo ;uamssassT3 apiAva^B^s y  (1)
                rure^uoo neqs
aqj, 'A3a;Bj;s  a^B^g  sq; jo
-.ioj aq^ ui sanssj ^ueoyiuSis jo
PUB uoi;i30ui;uapi  sqi ui ^uamaAtoAui joj
            aq'j q^m papiAOJd aq
           stq jo JouaaAoo aqx '
      IBHUUB ue jo  uot^BiBdajd aq^ joj
aptAOjd UBqs ssaooad SutuuBjd aqj, ce)
               •XSOIBJIS OlBJg  Of 0£t §
                 uoi;BJBdajj — Q
                         siq^ jo frOfc'm
PUB TO>'T£I §§ 83S)  's^Tuuad jo aouBnssi
am q^T^ uoi^ounfuoo ut piaq ajaa  s3ut
-jBaq oqqnd aaaqA\ s^uaiuSas uo 'a
joj ;piati ^isnoTAa.td a.iaA\ sSuuBaq
uejd aq^  jo suoi^iod asoq? joj
UBjd aq^ uo ppq aq itiA\ sSuwBan '3V8
-ijdoaddB SB 's3uu-eaq oqqnd aa^js 'pasiA
-aj aq £13111 su^tcj aq^ ^Bq^ pu"B
aq^ jo su^id ^uauiaSBUB
IBiotgo aq-j SB 'sSutj'Baq oqqnd
         'paidopu ^nepino  aq UPAS,
          apuojd \IBI\S ssaoojd aqj,
            •suR[
                               'SUBld JO
                PUB '(uamcIotaAap aq; ui
            joj 'a;Big SUIBS aq^ ut 's^uaui
-UJ3AO3  tBOo^  aaq^o  qiiM  S}uaui33uB.i
-.IB jaq^o jo iBuoi^n^tis"! a^BUdoJddB ;no
AJJBD JO suijstxa azin^n o; pa§BJnooua aq
IItA\  a^B^s
^Bq;  apiAOJd  U^qs ssaoojd  aqi  (q)
     CZZ'QKl § 39S) 'aiBUdo.TddB SB
utsBq aq^ ut papniout aq qiA\ PUB paMatA
-aj  aq  HIM s^ndut  SuiuuBid. 113001 PUB
aplA\B3JB 'suBid  msBq jo uoiiBjBdajd 9q;
ut iBq^t apuojd  HBqs ssaoojd aqj,  (B)
•uoijRjadooa
                              CSQ'OSI §
898)  'Si6t  'I   AjBnuBf   Aq  pajinba.i
^jodaj gq^ q^m auiuuiaaq ' (q>QO£ uotjoas
japun pajmbaj s^joda.i IBHUUB aqi Supnp
-oid joj uiBjSojd B apnpui u^qs uiBJSOJd
            pu^ Sutjo^iuout qoBjj  
                                     jo
saojnos ^utod-uou Aji^uapi PUB
-sip iBnpiAtput pu-B A;itBnb ja^
-aq  dtqsuonBiaj aq-) qstiq^isa  :gg'0£T
       OET §§ UI paquosap SB '
        PUB SUOIJBOOHB PBOI 'spBoi
          auiuija-jap  'SIBOS Aiq-enb
       PUB qsitqB'jsa oq AjBssaoau
jo uopoanoo ainssB o; pauSisap si qotqA\
uiBjSojd  aouBijiaAjns  PUB  Sutjojtuoui
B  joj aptAOJd  Ituqs  ssaoojd aqx  (B)
              pun Siiiaoiiuoj^   OS'OSl §

                        •ja^dBqo siq; jo
TTS'IET § ui paquosa.td SB 's^uB;nnod jo
saojnos ^uroduou .ISAO S^OJ^UOD
'atqtssod  ^ua'jxg  aq; o;  'PUB
'Ajiijuapt  IIIA\ UBid qoBa s-juauiSas
             apiAOJd HBqs ssaooad aqj,
          jo §9.»nos iiiioduo^[   6S'OSI
     jo OTZ'TET §  ui  paquosajd SB 'utsBq
aq;  ui  S^JOM  ;uaui;Baj;  B;SBA\ p
Apnqnd  joj  spaau aq; SSBSSB HIA\
qaBa ;Bq;  apiAOJd HBqs  ssaoojd aqj,

                            •S5J4OM.
1U9UI1G3.il JOJB*V pOUMO X|31|qnd  JOJ
spoau (ediaiunui jo iu9uiss9ssy     '
                                 aoanos
;uiod jaq;o  PUB  'iBu;snpui  'i-edpiunui
o; s;iuuad  jo aouBnssi aq;  joj  (g>
               •;ov aq; jo s;uauia.imbaj
          aq; ;aaut o; pajtnbaj sat;tipBj
       a;sBA\  pauA\o Apqqnd  jo  'aouB
-;SISSB IBWUBUIJ iBjapa^ q;tA\ 'uot;onj;s
-uoo Joj s;oafojd  Suiutuua;3p  ui  (p
                               :pasn aq
lIBqs uoi;Bztjosa;BO PUB A\io;uaAui qons
•;uaui8as  Aq sjaSjBqostp asaq;  jo  uoi;
-BzuoSa;BO  PUB sjaSjBqosip  ;uBotjtu3is
jo Ajo;uaAut UB apnput HIA\ UBtd qoBa
     apiAOJd nBt(s ssaoojd  oqj,  (B)
      •JS^di'ip SIUT jo • (-z ;,'']   'n P
-ajd SB ;uauio;B<(.' j° ;i " ],•'• i"i i
-Udmoo jo  FoitipdqDs  ctC'toxap ;|t'-\
qji33 IBIJI  apiAo.id ni'qs  ssaw.ul  sqj,
      •o.>\ii?i((litio.) jo so^npuj.t^  9£'OV I
stq; jo  o)£OE'm §  "t pir(t.iosa.td  SB
'3mssaoojd ;uaui;ca.i; ja)BA\ B^SBA .10 .10;
-BA\ jaq;o .to 4iBi.i;snpui 'tBdi.minui AUB
uio.ij a;si3A\ i^nptsaj \\v, jo uout-,odstp aq;
J3AO SIOI;UOD qsiiq-e-jsa  qiA\  treid qoca
;Bq; spiAOJd nsqs  sssaojd  aqj,  (,3)
                    ua;dT3qo siq; jo O||U
             iuiod
                               £2'0£l
                        •ja;dBqo siq; jo
           §  ui paptAOJd SB PJBPUB;S A;t
            pa;BioiA ajqBoqddB aq; ;3atu
o; pajrn&aJ  'suoi;nqu;uoo  aajnos ;uiod
-uou jo uot;B.iaptsuoo Sutpnpui 'spBO[
Airep aiqtsstuijad umuiixBui IB;O; qsqqB;
-sa ittA\ UB[d aq; ;uaui§as A;qBnb ja;BA\
qoBa Joj ;Bq; apiAOJd n^qs ssaoojd aqj,
         •;ov aq; jo SIBOS aq; q;tA\ aoire
-rajojuoo o;ut uiaq;  Suuq o; spJBpu-e;s
A;tiBnt)  ja;BA\  jo suotsiAaj  A-iBssaoau
aq; SUI^BUI  ui ;SISSB o; sa;B;s aq;  Aq
pasn auo aq; aq Heys  'ssaoojd aq; jo ;jBd
SB  padoiaAap  suBid  utsBq aq;  Suipnp
-ui 'ssaoojd  aux  c.ta;dBqo siq;  jo ZOZ
-'1ST § aas) 'UBid aq; Aq pa.iaAoo sja;i3A\
          aq; o; atqBottddB SPJBPUB;S A;t
            aq; q;JOj ;as HIA\ UBid urs-eq
      ;-eq; apiAOJd iiei^s ssaoojd
                                                                            aq;
joj su-eid saojnosaj iBjn;isu PUB asn
Sutpntoui suBid IBOO; PUB a;B;g
-dB jaq;6 PUB  (ja;dBqo siq; jo
aas) UBtdqns A;qBnb  JS;BA
qoB3 q;iA\ pa;Butpjooo aq HI
qo^a ;Bq;  aptAOjd UBqs  ssaoojd aqx
          •suoisiAoad Suiuuejd jai|io
pUB  SUUKl  IIJJ«1,)<[  UOJ1BJOJJ  SS'QSl §
-sip  jBnpi\ipu<  jo
                   siq; jo TOE'TST
•s;uaui3as  s,uisBq  aq;  jo uot;Bout;uapi
UB  puB  a;B;g aq;  utq;iA\ utsBq  pasod
-ojd  qoBa jo sauBpunoq aq; 8ut;Baun
-ap AIJBBP aiBOS a;BnbapB jo dBUi B apnp
-ut UBqs uoisstuiqns IBI;IUI aqx  (P)
  •\BAOJddB joj JO;BJ;SIUIIUPV iBuoiSan
aq;  o; pa;;iusqns  aq HBqs satJBpunoq
Buuajjip qons Auv 'uia;sAs uiSBq  Vda
aq;  ui paut;u3pi asoq;  tuo.ij 3uuajji.p
satJBpimoq 'SumuBtd  jo  ;uaiuqsnqB;sa
aq; JQJ apiAOJd ABUI ssaoojd aqx  (°)
                                •uia;sAs
UOI;BUHOJUI  A;qBnb ja;BA\ yaa ^u; ui
       jouiut SB paut;uapt asoq; aq
                                                              QNV saina

-------
any Stale if approval of the continuing
planning process is withdrawn following
approval, including withdrawal of proc-
ess approval based on  gross failure  to
comply with the schedule for plan prep-
aration (§§ 130.40 and 130.41) or on fail-
ure of plans to conform  with the process
(§ 130.52).
   (c)  In connection with any permit is-
sued to  a  significant discharger  in a
cluster  where water  quality violations
occur, or are suspected to occur, and for
which no plan has been approved by the
Regional Administrator, the water qual-
ity impact of the discharges of all mem-
bers,  municipal and  industrial, of the
     RULES AND REGULATION

cluster to which such major discharger
belongs, must be considered in connec-
tion with the issuance of such disharger's
permit.
§ 130.61   Relationship   of   continuing
    planning  process with  construction
    grants.
  (a) Before approving a grant for any
project for  any  treatment works under
section 201 (g) of the Act after June 30,
1973,  the Regional Administrator shall
determine, pursuant to 40 CPR 35.925-2,
that such works are in  conformity with
any applicable plan approved in accord-
ance with this part and Part 131 of this
                                 80.19

chapter. Disapproval  by the Regional
Administrator of a plan, or relevant por-
tion thereof, for the area where a project
is to be located may constitute grounds
for not approving  a  grant for  such
project.
  (b)  The Regional Administrator may
suspend or terminate a grant for any
project  for any treatment works in ac-
cordance with § 35.950 of this chapter if
he determines that such grant is incon-
sistent with a plan, for the area of the
project, approved subsequent to approval
of the grant.
   [FB Doc.73-5641 Filed 3-26-73;8:45 am]
                               FEDERAL REGISTER,  VOL. 38, NO. 58—TUESDAY, MARCH 27,  1973

-------
     NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING
     Water Quality Management Plans
         Preparation Guidelines
              for States
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
         401 "M" Street, S.W.
        Washington, D.C.  20460

-------
   ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
               AGENCY
          [ 40  CFR Part 131 ]
WATER  QUALITY MANAGEMENT  PLANS
    Preparation Guidelines for States
   Notice is hereby given that the regula-
 tions set forth below are proposed by the
 Environmental Protection Agency.  The
 proposed regulations are designed to as-
 sist  States in the preparation of water
 quality management plans.
   Secion 303 (e)  of the Federal Water
 Pollution Control Act, as amended (86
 Stat. 816;  33 U.S.C. 1313  (1972)), re-
 quires each State to have a continuing
 planning process which is consistent with
 the  Act. Plans under this  part  will be
^prepared pursuant  to the State's  ap-
 proved planning process.
   The purpose of preparing basin plans
 is to provide the  information the States
 will  need  to  make centralized  coordi-
 nated  water quality management deci-
 sions;  to provide the strategic guidance
 for developing the State program sub-
 mitted under section 106 of the Act; and
 to encourage  water quality  objectives
 which take into account overall State
 policies  and programs, including those
 for land use and other related  natural
 resources.
   The regulations describe the prepara-
 tion of plans and the procedures gov-
 erning plan adoption, submission,  and
 revision and  EPA approval.  The  rela-
 tionship of plans with EPA grants and
 the  national permit  system is  also de-
 s ribed. Provision is  included  for co-
 ordination between plans and any  per-
 mit  for  a  source located in a planning
 area.
   The  regulations are designed to as-
 sure that  there  may  be  prepared pur-
 suant to this part basin  plans which
 will be adequate  for water quality man-
 agement in areas having complex water
 quality problems.
   Many areas of the  State will present
 simpler water quality management  con-
 cerns. Water will be classified  accord-
 ing  to  the  severity  of  pollution  as
 follows:
  (1) Water  Quality  class.—Any  seg-
ment where  it  is  known  that water
quality  does not meet  applica/ble water
quality  standards,  and is not expected
to meet water  quality  standards even
after the  application of  the  effluent
limitations required by sections 301 (b)
(1)(A)  and 301 (b) (1MB)  of the  Act.
  (2) Effluent  limitation   eZoss.A—Any
segment where water quality is meeting
and  will  continue to  meet applicable
water quality standards or where there
is adequate  demonstration  that water
quality  will meet applicable  water qual-
ity  standards after the  application  of
the effluent limitations required  by sec-
tions (301(b)U)(A)  and 301 (b) (1MB)
of the Act.
  A  basin plan can contain one or more
water quality segments  and/or one  or
more effluent limitation  segments.  The
plan in the effluent limitation segments
need employ only those elements neces-
sary to  assure proper program manage-
ment in those  segments; while  in  the
water quality segments the plan needs
to include  such analysis  as is necessary
to assure  that  control  actions taken
will  meet  water  quality standards  as
well  as  the requirements of sound  pro-
gram management. All plans under this
part should  be completed  by June 30,
1975. Provision  for phased accomplish-
ment of planning prior to  that date,
consistent   with   advancing  national
capabilities, is included.
  Federal   properties,   facilities,  and
activities are subject to  Federal, State,
Interstate,  and local standards and efflu-
ent  limitations  for control  and  abate-
ment of pollution. The State's planning
process   should  include  provision  for
Federal sources. It is contemplated that
Federal agencies will provide informa-
tion to the  States in  accordance with
procedures established by the adminis-
trator.
  Since plans under this part must  be
prepared in  accordance with  the ap-
proved  State continuing  planning proc-
ess,   regulations   pertaining  to   the
planning process, set forth at part 130 of
this  chapter, should also  be consulted.
  Prior  to the  adoption of  the final
regulations, consideration will be given
to comments, suggestions, or objections
which may be submitted in writing to
the  Chief,  Planning  and  Standards
Branch; Office  of  Air  anciWater Pro-
grams,  room  1007, Crystal Mall Build-
ing  No.  2,  Environmental  Protection
Agency, Washington,  D.C.  2&460.  All
comments, suggestions  or objections re-
ceived on  or before  July 9, 1973.
                   ROBERT W. FRI,
                Acting Administrator.
  MAY  18, 1973.
Si'bpart  A—Scope and  Purpose: Definitions
Sec.
131.100  Scope and purpose.
131.101  Definitions.
        Subpart B—Plan  Preparation
131 200  General.
131.201  Boundaries of planning unit.
131.202  Water quality standards.
131.203  Plan content—segment  classifica-
          tion.
131.204  Identification  of  relationship  of
          other plans.
131.205  Total maximum daily loads.
131.206  Individual point source discharges;
          impact on water quality.
131.207  Schedules of compliance; coordina-
          tion with permits.
131.208  Ranking of segments and inventory
          of point source discharges.
131.209  Coordination of  certain  planning
          components and terms of permits.
131.210  Municipal facility investment re-
          quirements.
131.211  Individual   nonpoint  source dis-
          charges; impact on water quality.
131.212  Coordination with land use  poli-
          cies and controls.

   Subpart C—Monitoring and Surveillance
131.300  Relationship of monitoring and sur-
          veillance to plans.
131.301  Coverage of monitoring and surveil-
          lance program.
131.302  Use of monitoring surveys  for plan
          development.
131.303  Frequency of monitoring surveys.
131.304  Output of monitoring surveys.
131.305  Water quality data Irdm fixed sta-
          tions; input to Information sys-
          tem.
131.306  Provision and use of point source
          discharge information Input to in-
          formation system.

  Subpart D—Completion and Review of Plans:
        Relation to Permits and Grants
        Certifications.
        Public hearings.
        Submission.
        Plan review; approval or disapproval.
        Revisions.
        Prohibition of  approval  of certain
          plans.
        Prohibition of certain construction
          grants.
        Discharge permit terms and condi-
          tions.
        Separability.
131.400
131.401
131.402
131.403
131.404
131.405

131.406

131.407

131.408

  AUTHORITY.—Sees. 303, 501, 86 Stat. 816, 33
U.S.C. 1313, 1361.

Subpart A—Scope and Purpose; Definitions

§131.100   Scope and purpose.

  (a) This part establishes regulations
specifying procedural and other elements
which must be present in plans prepared
pursuant to a continuing planning proc-
ess approved in accordance with section
303 (e)  of  the Federal Water  Pollution
Control Act, as amended (86 Stat. 816, 33
U.S.C. 1313),
  (b) The  purpose of preparing  basin
plans is to provide the information the
States  will need to  make centralized
coordination water quality management
decisions; to provide the strategic guid-
ance  for developing  the  State program
submitted  under section  106 of the act;
and to encourage water quality objectives
which take into account overall  State
policies and programs including those for
land  use  and otbf»i  related  natural
resources.
  (c) The basin plans will provide the
technical, economic, social, and environ-
mental  basis  for the identification and
the adoption of the means of achieving
applicable  water quality objectives. The
plans will  assist the State  in  directing
                                 FEDERAL  REGISTER, VOL. 38, NO. 99—WEDNESDAY, MAY 23, 1973

-------
resources,  establishing  priorities   and
scheduling of actions.
§ 131.101  Definitions.
  The definitions set forth in § 130,2 of
this chapter shall apply to this part.
      Subpart B—Plan Preparation
§ 131.200  General.
  (a) Each plan under this part shall be
p-epared pursuant  to the process devel-
oped  and approved in  accordance witti
part 130 of this chapter, relating to the
continuing planning process  required by
section 303 (e) of the act.
  (b) Each plan shall include, but is not
li mited to, the contents described in this
subpart.
  (c) The detail of planning conducted
for each segment in the plan  will depend
o-i the  complexity  of the  water quality
problems and the water quality decisions
to be made.
  (d) The information in each plan shall
b3 presented in  an equivalent  basis to
facilitate  interbasin coordination  com-
parison.
§ 131.201  Boundaries of planning unit.
  Each plan shall contain a delineation
of the boundaries of the basin on a map
o[ appropriate scale. Such  map shall in-
c ude but is  not limited to  the follow-
ing:
  (ai An identification of the  location
of each significant discharger  by  river
mile  and/or  shore location for  bays,
lukes, and estuaries.
   (b) An identification of the location of
all (Federal,  State,  local)  monitoring
stations by river mile and/or grid  loca-
tion.
  NOTE —Such a map may omit discharger
and monitoring station locations if such loca-
tions  are available in the EPA water quality
information system and If the plan includes
the listing described in section 131.206 and
a  list of monitoring stations and  their
iDcations.
 !l 131.202  Water quality standard*.
   (a) Each plan shall set forth the water
c uality standards applicable to each body
of water or segment In the basin or shall
include the legal citation of  such stand-
E.rds.
   (b) The Governor (or his designees)
thall from time to time, but at least once
every 3 years hold public hearings  for
the purpose of reviewing applicable water
quality standards  and, as appropriate,
modify and adopt standards  as set forth
in section 303 (e) of the act.
   (c)  Modification  and  adoptions of
standards  shall consider the objectives
(if the act specified in section  101 (a) of
1he  act and  the social, economic and
technical,  including natural, considera-
 ',ions to achieving these objectives.
 ~ 131.203   Plan content-segment  classi-
      fication.
   (a) Based on  the following  analysis,
 ;ach plan shall classify all waters within
 che planning basin as water quality class
 segments and/or effluent class segments
 as follows:
  (1) Effluent class segment analysis.—•
d>  An identification of those waters by
segment where  water quality  is  better
than applicable  water quality standards
and will continue to be better  after the
application  of best practicable  control
technology  for  industry and secondary
treatment for municipalities;
  (ii) An identification of those waters
by segment  where water quality does not
meet applicable  standards, but will after
the application  of best practicable con-
trol technology for industry and second-
ary treatment for municipalities;
  (2)   Water   quality  class  segment
analysis.—(i)  An identification of those
waters by segment where  water  quality
is not expected to meet applicable water
quality standards even after the applica-
tion of  the  effluent  limitations required
by sections 301 (b) (1) (A)  and (B) of the
act.
  (b) This  analysis shall be used to re-
classify as appropriate the current State
classification  of segments  pursuant to
§ 130.11.
  (c) For  all water  quality  segments
within the basin, each plan shall contain
the following:
  (1) An assessment of total maximum
daily loads necessary to meet water qual-
ity  standards for  the specific  criteria
being violated
  (2) An assessment of nonpoint source
pollution and, where applicable, needed
control measures.
  (3) Already established effluent limit
requirements for significant dischargers
and target  limits, previously not estab-
lished,  for  significant dischargers that
are required  to achieve  water  quality
standards.
  (4) An   assessment   of    municipal
facility requirements
  (51 An inventory and categorization of
significant individual discharges.
  (S) Already established  schedules  of
compliance and target dates  of  abate-
ment for significant dischargers not on  a
compliance schedule.
  (d) For  all  effluent  class  segments
within  the  basin, each plan shall con-
tain as a minimum the following:
  (1) An assessment oi municipal facil-
ity requirements.
  (21 An inventory and categorization of
significant individual discharges.
  (31  Already established schedules of
compliance and target dates  of  abate-
ment for significant dischargers not on
a compliance schedule.
  (41 National  priorities as determined
by  the  Administrator.
  (el Each plan shall establish controls
over the disposition of all residual waste
from any municipal, industrial, or other
water  or waste  water treatment proc-
essing,  whenever  the  processing or dis-
posal occurs within the basin.
  (f) Each plan shall be  revised as nec-
essary to reflect revisions of the appli-
cable water quality standards.
§ 131.204  Identification of relationship
     of other plans.
  (a) Each basin plan shall identify the
relationship and indicate the  current
status of  any other  water quality or
other applicable resource plan prepared
or under preparation which involves all
or any part of the basin, including:
   (1) Each areawide waste treatment
management plan under section 208 of
the act.
   (2) Each facilities plan for a proposed
project for the construction of treatment
works under section 201 of the act.
   (3) Each level B basin plan pursuant
to section  209 of the act or Public Law
89-90.
   (4) Applicable portions of each  water
quality standards implementation  plan
under section 303  (a)  and (b) of the
act.
   (51 Applicable  portions  of  40  CFR
150.1 and  150.2 plans  (former 18 CFR
601.32 and 601.33, 1971  ed.i.
   (6) Other applicable  resource  plan-
ning including:
   (i) State land use programs.
   (ill  Activities  stemming  from  the
Coastal Zone Management  Act (Public
Law 92-5831.
   (iii) Activities  stemming  from the
Rural Development Act of 1972 (Public
Law 92-4191.
   (ivl Other federally assisted planning
and management programs.
   (b) Each basin plan  shall separately
identify each plan which has been inte-
grated with the basin  plan.
§ 131.205   Total maximum daih  loads.
   (a) Each plan should include, for each
water quality  class  segment  identified
pursuant   to   § 131.202,   the   total
maximum  daily loads of pollutants, in-
cluding thermal loads,  allowable  for  a
specific criteria  being  violated or ex-
pected to be violated. Such loads shall be
at a level at least as stringent as neces-
sary to implement the applicable  water
quality standards, including
   (11 Provisions for  seasonal variation.
and
   (21  Provision of  a margin  of safety
which takes into account any  lack  of
knowledge  concerning the  relationship
between effluent limitations and  water
quality,  including  any  uncertainty  in-
sulting from  insufficiency  of  data,  in-
cluding data  from nonpoint sources  of
pollutants.
   (b)  (11  Each plan shall estimate, for
each water quality segment where ther-
mal standards may be violated, the total
daily thermal load  allowable  in such
segment. Such load  shall be at a level
at least as stringent  as  necessary to as-
sure; the protection and propagation  of
a balanced, indigenous population  of
shellfish,  fish,  and wildlife. Such loads
shall take into  account:
   (i) Normal water temperatures.
   (ii) Flow rates.
   (iii) Seasonal variations.
   (ivl Existing sources of heat input
   (v)  The dissipative  capacity of the
identified segment.
   (21  Each  estimate shall include an
estimate  of the maximum heat  input
that can be made into each water quality
segment where temperature is one of
                                FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL.  38, NO. 99—WEDNESDAY,  MAY 23, 1973

-------
Uio criteria being violated and skall in-
clude a margin of safety which  hikes
olio account lack of knowledge c-jiiconi •
ing the development of Jhermsl  wa'er
qliality criteria for protection raid propa-
gation of indigenous biota in the identi-
fied segment.
  i^j Wlieie  predictive  mathematical
mcaelo are used in  the determination of
maximum daily  loads, each model shall
be  identified and briefly described, and
the  specific use of the model shall  be
cited.
§ 131.206  Individual point  source dis-
     charges ; impact on water quality.
  ''a) Each plan shall identify each sig-
!;!'.cant point source of pollutants, set
forth rhe location  of each source, and
describe, by  parameter, its  waste dis-
charge  chara-. t--ristics.  The identifica-
tion, location, u.,:d  description shall in-
clude procedures for utilizing data from
the national pollutant  discharge  elimi-
nation system.
  (b> Each  plan  shall  establish dis-
charge  load  and thermal load alloca-
tions or target allocations for significant
point and nonpoint sources  in  each
water quality segment  a,s follows:
  (1) The plan  shall  establish a dis-
charge  load allocation or  target load
allocation for significant point and, to
the degree feasible, nonpoint sources in
each water quality  segment  identified
pursuant  to  § 131.203 and  shall  where
required establish a load allocation for
each thermal source. The total of such
discharge  load  allocations  for   each
source in the segment  shall not exceed
the total maximum daily load or thermal
load allocation established or estimated
for such segment pursuant to § 131.205.
  (2) Each discharge load allocation and
thermal allocation established or esti-
mated pursuant to  this paragraph shall
incorporate an allowance for anticipated
economic  and demographic growth over
at  leaV a 5-year period and an addi-
tional Allowance reflecting the precision
and validity of the method used in deter-
mining  such allowance.
  (3) Establishment of discharge load
allocations and thermal load allocations
shall be coordinated with the develop-
ment of terms and-conditions of permits
under  the national  discharge elimina-
tion system  in  the manner  prescribed
by  § 131.209.
  (4) Where  permits have been issued,
the relationship of the allocations and
the schedules of compliance to the per-
mits shall be  governed by §  131.209.
  (c) (1) Each plan_ shall contain effluent
limitations, or  target limitations, con-
sistent with the requirements of the act,
applicable to significant point sources
identified  in paragraph  (a)  of  this
section. .
   12) Effluent limitations for each source
in  water  quality segments  shall be  at
least as stringent  as necessary to meet
the load allocations established for such
scnirces pursuant to paragraph  (b) (1)
of  this  section.
   (3) Establishment of effluent limita-
 tions shall be coordinated with the devel-
oyi)i^iit  if  term.-,  Cind  c<,i:,lit!oi:-;  of
permits  under  the  !iarr,i,al Pollutant
discharge  elm:n;i1i'>n  systfri   in  the
manner iJi-eseriLn.d oy § '.3:.20:i.
§ 131.207  Schednh'* of c!»mf.!'anre; co-
     ordination with pernnlo.
  (a) Each plan shall inc^ir!0 srhPriules
of compliance or target date? of abnte-
ment for significant point ^'Tiroes identi-
fied in § 131.206 which are not curienlly
in compliance  with  the effluent limita-
tions established  in paragraph (c> of
such  section and are not anticipated to
be in compliance by  January 1, 1975.
  (b)(l) Each  schedule shall   contain
realistically established  milestone dates
pursuant to this subsection.
  (i)  -If the State or the regional ad-
ministrator has issued a permit to the
source under the national pollutant dis-
charge elimination system, the  schedule
shall contain the major interim and final
dates included  as terms or conditions of
the permit, if any, that are necessary to
assure an adequate  tracking of  progress
towards compliance.  For  purposes of
plan preparation the permit issued could
be attached to the plan submitted.
  (ii)  If the source  is required to obtain
a permit under the national pollutant
discharge elimination system but no per-
mit has  been issued as of the date that
the plan is submitted, the schedule shall
set forth a tentative or target date when
the source  must obtain a permit, as well
as other target abatement dates that will
enable an adequate  tracking of progress
toward completion of the facility.
  (2) The plan shall set forth  the legal
basis for enforcement of the schedule of
compliance (e.g.,  was adopted,  as State
law;  was promulgated  as State regula-
tions; is or will be incorporated in waste
discharge permit).
  <3) Establishment  of  schedules  of
compliance shall be coordinated with the
development of terms and conditions of
permits under the national pollutant dis-
charge elimination system in the manner
prescribed by § 131.209.
§ 131.208   Ranking of segments and in-
     ventory  of point source  discharges.
  (a) Each plan shall include an inven-
tory and categorization of sources which
shall be used by the State in the develop-
ment of the State strategy. This strategy
is described in part 130, subpart D of this
chapter.
  (b)  Each plan shall include a ranking
of its segments in  order of  abatement
priority using, as a minimum, the criteria
specified in § 130.41 of this chapter.
§ 131.209   Coordination  of certain plan-
     ning components and terms of per-
     mits.
   (a)  If the State is participating in the
national pollutant discharge elimination
system, 01  if the permit  program is ad-
ministered by EPA.  individual discharge
allocations,  effluent  limitations,   and
schedules of compliance  shall be devel-
oped as provided in this paragraph.
   U) (i) The State  will use its best ef-
forts to incorporate  in permit terms and
conditions the  applicable target individ-
u<;! effluent liini'.i'i. n~ and tmgK scrr-I
ill-::  of  hitcripr.'  ("-';,Hi :hfi by  ivv
iip"»'o,'o.1  pli'i".  '•"ibif."'1", Vrrrpver  to V!
th" ri"~>)t,s Ihn1 •',,-• ••cvr-it .ipnlicnnt if. '
other r.it(".ei.fiair < ~.f compli-
ance in the j~o :r: >.-•:";•'..•  ,  o'-.-'.lJ  -
   iii)  The milfoU.1...•  . y-.,. ,-,' i
plan impietr.Cut.i:-'     • (,.-.;••  1 r.s    ;
schedule of  con'.ph. rux est.ibiis!.
a pernut shall be inco;porat^d into t.
plan at the first revision of the plan to
take place following issuance of the per-
mit.
   (2)  Iii a planning area where a plan is
under  development, permit terms and
conditions proposed for anj source and
plan piei aration shall be  coordinated,
to assure that the plan reflects fnforma-
tion developed  in connection with  the
permit application  and conditions  for
effluent limitations  and a schedule  of
compliance proposed for the permit.
   (3)  Where, pursuant to the approved
phas'-ig of planning,  no  plan has  been
approved  or is under development, the
State shall not be precluded by such lack
of planning from processing any permit
(consistent with established priorities).
In such case, permit  terms and condi-
tions proposed in a cluster shall be devel-
oped following the State's consideration
of all  discharges in  the  cluster.  (See
§ 130.60 of this chapter.) The State shall
retain  the  documentation of any cluster
analysis for use in the subsequent prep-
aration of the discharge load allocations,
effluent  limitations,  and   compliance
schedules for the area.

§ 131.210  Municipal  facility investment
     reqiiireinents.

   (a)  Each plan shall include an assess-
ment of municipal waste treatment in-
vestment requirements. Such assessment
shall be based upon the criteria set forth
in paragraph (b) of this section.
   (b)  Municipal facility investment re-
quirements shall be determined accord-
ing to  the following criteria:
   (1)  Load  reduction achieved by  the
identified facility, and whether this re-
duction is  required to attain and main-
tain applicable water quality standards
and effluent limitations.
   (2)  Evidence  concerning   the   cost
effectiveness  of  proposed   treatment,
where  available.
   (3)  Population or population equiva-
lents  to be  served,  including forecast
growth or decline of such population over
the design life of the needed facility. The
time period  used shall be stated. These
analyses shall take into account projec-
tions used in other State and local plan-
ning activities.
   (c)  Cost estimates for facilities meet-
Ing the above criteria shall be  based on
engineering plans, specifications, and de-
tailed  cost  estimates  where  available.
For any facility for which detailed esti-
mates  do not exist, cost estimates shaH
be made based on guidelines prepared !>y
the Administrator.
                                FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL.  38, NO. 99—WEDNESDAY,  MAY 23, 1973

-------
g  31.211   Imlii iilu;il  nonpoiut  source
     cliseliarjti s ; inipaet on Hater <]nalit>*
  (a1 To the  extent feasible  and  de-
pendent upon  issuance of  appropilate
guidelines  under section 304(e)  of  the
act, plans .shall provide for the considei a-
ticn of agricultural  .silvioultural, mining-
re; atcd, construction activity related,  salt
wr.ter intrusion related and other non-
point source pollution.
  (b) Each plan for each water quality
segment shall identify and evaluate non-
point source discharges including as  a
minimum a description of  the type of
problem and an  identification of  the
waters affected, including an evaluation
of the effects.
  (c) Where feasible, each plan for each
wt ter quality segment  shall include  the
following:
  1 1 )  Description of present and pro-
po~ed abatement or control stiategy;
  < 2)  Determination  of  priority  tor
abatement  or control;
  (3> " EstaWLliment  of  schedule   of
compliance;
  '•It An estimate of  the  costs of  1m-
ple mentation; and
   t5>  Assignment of  responsibility of
'Abatement  control.
Pita obtained froru the plan monitoring
program established pursuant to subparr
C of this part shall be employed in mak-
'i v»itli  l.intl  use
     j>oli< i<  s and .-'mlroK.
  The plan should  describe the extent
t<> \\hich land use decisions can be in-
fluenced to complement and  reinforce
die  control actions required  to meet
wuter quality goals  Each plan shall set
foi th any procedures established to as-
sure land  i.fc re'ationships have been
given adequate  consideration in the  de-
velopment of the plan.
Subpart  C — Monitoting  and Surveillance
§ 131.300   Id lalicuisliip  of  monitoring
     anti '.Moeillanre lo plans.
   ta>  Each plan shall be  based upon
adequate monitoring  and  surveillance
data, as st I forth in this subpart, from
Vvhich to determine the relationship be-
tween instioam water  quality and indi-
vidual disc h.uv,ss  Such data will facili-
tate implementation of the plan.
     Each pla!1  -liall  contain lor each
water quality segment:
   (!>  A proguini to monitor  the total
she-am  disthn.i''  loadings,   including
contnuutions   fium   significant   dis-
chargers, v, inch  hall  be  related to the
maximum  daih leads established by the
plan pursuant  LO  j 131 20f>, and
   t'2)  A (t.ntin n,  ' program  l.,r moni-
toring instil ,•'!,   attr  quality ..tandaids
;u d goal-,
   III e.stalill l,h.   :hc'  inui.itoi ing  and
 ; u. ', < illaiu e 11  •!• '.nn lor  discuie water
 r''t,rienl:'  ct it. ui -i.i'ion sli.dl  be given
to the seventy ol the pollution and ap-
plicable  water  quality  standards  and
goals  including  the  use to  be made of
the  waters.
§ 131.302   I <->e of monitoring MII-M-JS lot-
     plan develupmeii!.
  Each plan  shall incorporate  the re-
suits  of any monitoring survey com-
pleted prior to  the date of  adoption of
the plan which provides current data for
the  area covered by the  plan.  If cur-
rent  data  are  not  available  the State
should conduct  an adequate monitoring
survey to obtain the necessary data be-
fore completion of the plan.
§ 131.303   Fi fqueney of monitoring sur-
     veys.
  Each plan shall provide  that the mon-
itoring survey for the area within water
quality  classified segments covered by
the  plan will be lepeated at appropri-
ately defined luUi vals, depending on the
variability ol  conditions and changes in
hydiologic or efiluent regimes. The sur-
vey  intervals shall be stated m the plan.
§ 131.304   Output of monitoring Mir\eys.
  The monitoring  sur\ey  shall  produce
sufficient  mfoimatiou  to support  the
planning for  the area. Output shall in-
clude, but is not limited to, the following:
   (a)  A listing of all surface waters by
stream segment m  water zone, which do
not  comply with applKablc water quality
standards  and goali.
     In water  quality segments, a de-
:-cnplion of pollutant mass balances, in-
cluding  estimates of the total pollutant
loads to be controlled in the segment.
   (c)  Input to  the  EPA.  water  quality
information system  of basic data  col-
lected during the monitoring survey, and
validation anr!  correction  of data avail-
able piior to the sui vev.
   (d) A listing  of stations, parameters,
and frequencies to be monitored u> pro-
vide compliance, progress measurement,
and trend information requiied  by  this
chapter.
   (e)  A proposed  schedule,  based on
variability  of stream  quality, expected
changes in flow and effluent regimes, or
other information,   for the subsequent
monitoring survey to be  undertaken 111
the  same basin.
§ 131.305  Water quality data from fixed
     Mutions;  input to information sy.slem.
   ia)  Each plan shall provide  for the
maintenance  of a small number of per-
manent in-stream  water quality trend
evaluation  stations  at key locations in
each basin to measure progress toward
applicable water quality  st-iiiditrds and
goals, trends  in water quality, and com-
pliance  \vith  appioved ply,is, and shall
be  used as a basis  for completing the
section 305 ib> reports.
   .>n :,hall  he
made available loi  u.-.,  in c!' '.elc.pmg 'hi
plans required  in  vlus part, including
data concerning the loeution. ultniiiuv-
tion. and  characteii/.ution  of each u,1
charge   supplied  by  appli.Miit.-.  :>'!'
permits.
   'hi Other   mformnl.ion   on   jjoin1
sources developed by inonitonr,!/ si;r\i' s
shall be assembled lor use  in d"vei»p '.;;
the plans required by this  pai t
   (c) The State shall input Huh •> ,;i.
source  • j.t.i to the EPA mttvrr     .-,.. -
tern in  sucli  manner as the btuto i-.nr!
the Regional  AdiiiinL-.tiafir .sliail  agree
Subpart  D—Completion  and  Review   oi
   Plans; Relation to Perm'ts anil GranU
§  131.400   r:erliliealions.
   Each plan shall  incluue  tlie foli:,v ;i.'
aasurances and certific -ition b> t!ie Ouv
ernor or his designee'
   (a) That the plan is the  , ftiaal Stat-
water pollution abatemeii'  piaut for I  u
hydrologic unit covered by  sujh plan
   fb) That the plan  was aifoptul .''Tiii
public hearings as presented in 5 111 •;• '
and that  public  i .c ticipatv, u  «,•  ,i
forded  in  .iceordaricf v.itli • e"  i..i,i.'.
promulgated  lor  sect ion  10 H- •  '.1  r. ••
act.
   ic) Th ompatib'" n/'
all plans  established  pursuant 10 ;
tion 303(e'  of  the act,  o:  r-.uri.ij.i.'it  ;••
other sections of the ac t  for other •>,•;'>.••!
within tile State and  iii a::y other Stale
(except  that if the plan is not wholly
compatible with any  plan  tor  wu.rr.s  in
another State, a description and expla-
nation  of  such incompatibility shall  l»
supplied).
   (d)  That the plan h.is  incomer ite>i
the  relevant  features of each pi.in ftv
the construction of publicly owned tiea'
ment works under section 201 oi tne a< '
and each  areawide water  qt.ahtv man-
agement plan under  section 20H ol i' ••
act, involving all or a ji'irtion "I »he ii> -
drologic unit covered  by  the !jMsi'i plan,
if such plans have been ai>prc,v(>T't' nninmg
the  priority for Federal ;m.l  StaV ,,,-
sistance for such  consti ,1-ii.'i; a-  pio-
vided in § 130.43 of this  chnptei
 § 131.101   1'iiMir lirur!ii»s.
   
the adoption or a,  '   ti'i^tantr, ,i ,i.,i.jii
of the plan and afu.-r reasonable  r'i;;ce
thereof, one 01  more  public heaiir   i; i
the  proposed plan or on  purls  j  'he
j)lan, in accordance with the rey  'Uon-.
promulgated pursuant loseiUcx, 1,1)10
of tlie act  The number and !<>< .,  'on  of
hcann;;-,  shall  reflect the SIT  1,1  the
                                 FFDERAL RECITER,  VOL  36, NO 99—WEDNESDAY, MAY. 23,  1973

-------
planning  area  and  its population and
population distribution. Public participa-
tion  and  contribution shall be encour-
aged commencing with the earliest pos-
sible stages of plan development and con-
tinuing throughout  the  period of  plan
preparation, including revisions thereof.
The  State may conduct its public hear-
ing on the plan simultaneously with the
public  hearing on permits in the  area
covered by the plan. If the public hearing
was  conducted on a segment or  cluster
of the plan for the purpose of facilitating
the issuance of permits, then this  por-
tion of the plan  need not be subject to
additional public  hearings requirements,
   'b)  For purposes of this section:
   U)  The term  "substantive" includes
but is not limited to any significant revi-
sion of water quality standards, maxi-
mum daily loads  for water quality seg-
ments, load allocations for individual dis-
chargers, effluent limitations, or schedules
of compliance.
   (2)  "Reasonable notice" includes, at
least 30 days prior to the date of  each
hearing:
   (i) Notice given to the public by prom-
inent  advertisement  announcing  the
date, time, and place of each such hear-
ing and the availability of the proposed
plan for public inspection; and
   (ii)  Notification to the Regional Ad-
ministrator.
   (c)  There shall be prepared and re-
tained for submission to the Regional Ad-
ministrator upon his request a record of
each hearing. The record shall contain
at a minimum a list of witnesses to-
gether  with  the   text of each  written
presentation.
   (d)  There shall be submitted with the
plan a. description of any  major  con-
troversy raised by the hearing and the
disposition thereof.
§ 131.402 Submission.
   Plan submission shall be accomplished
by delivering five copies of the plan to the
Regional  Administrator, together with a
letter  from  the Governor (or his des-
ignee) notifying  the Regional Adminis-
trator of  such action.
§ 131.403 Plan review;  approval or dis-
     approval.
   The Regional Administrator shall ap-
prove  or  disapprove the plan submitted
pursuant   to   § 131.402   within   30
days  after the date of submission, as
follows:
   (a)  If  the  Regional  Administrator
determines that the plan conforms with
the  requirements  of  the act, this  part,
the continuing planning process and con-
tiguous   plans  including  neighboring
States' plans, he shall so notify the Gov-
ernor  or his designee by letter.
   (b)  If  the  Regional  Administrator
determines that  the plan fails to con-
form with the requirements of  the act,
this part, the continuing planning proc-
ess or contiguous plans  including those
of neighboring States, he shall notify the
Governor or his  designee by letter and
shall state:
  (1) The specific revision:; necrs^iry to
obtain approval of the plans, and
  (2) The time period  for lesubmission
of the plan.
  (c) Where plans involving interstate
waters are found to be  incompatible, he
shall notify  the Governors, or their des-
ignees, of the  concerned States of the
specific areas of incompatibility.
§ 131.404   Revisions.
  (a) The plan  shall  be  revised  from
time  to  time  as  necessary to accom-
plish national  water quality objectives
in conformity with the requirements of
the  act  and  the  continuing  planning
process. Procedures for revision shall be
set forth in the plan.
  (b)(l)  The  Regional  Administrator
shall from time to time review each ap-
proved plan for the purpose of Insuring
that such plan is at all times adequate
to assure the goal  of paragraph (a) of
this  section.
  (2) The plan shall be revised as nec-
essary upon finding by the  Regional
Administrator  and notification  to the
Governor (or his designee)  that the plan
is substantially inadequate to assure the
goal of paragraph (a)  of this section.
  (3) The plan shall be revised within
90 days following notification by the
Regional Administrator pursuant to sub-
paragraph (2)  of this paragraph, or by
such later date as may be prescribed by
the  Regional Administrator after  con-
sultation with  the  State.
  (c) Revisions of the  process  shall be
adopted after reasonable notice and pub-
lic hearings as prescribed in § 131.401.
  (d) Revisions shall be  submitted in
accordance with § 131.402.
  (e) Plan  review and  approval or dis-
approval shall  be carried out in accord-
ance with § 131.403.
§ 131.405   Prohibition  of  approval of
     certain plans.
  The Regional Administrator shall not
approve any plan that does not conform
with the requirements of section 303(e)
of the act, the continuing planning proc-
ess, and this part. Substantial failure of
any  plan to conform with the applicable
requirements of section  303 (e) of the act
and  of this part  may Indicate that the
planning process by which such plan was
developed was  deficient and may result
in withdrawal  of approval of the plan-
ning process or portions thereof relating
to such  plan.  Approval of  the State's
participation in  the  national  pollutant
discharge elimination  system  may be
withheld or withdrawn if the process is
not fully approved.
§ 131.406   Prohibition of  certain   con-
     struction grants.
   (a) Before approving a grant for any
project for  any treatment works under
section 201 (g)  of the act after June 30,
1973, the Regional Administrator  shall
determine, pursuant to  40 CFR 35.925-2,
that such works  are in conformity with
any  applicable  plan approved in accord-
ance with this  part and part 130 of this
chapter  D'sappro1, -\1  b;  f'-.s
^dministrafor of a plan, r  constitute  ground1-
for not  approving  a  grant for  such
project.
  (b) The Regional Adn.r.i'-! vior may
suspend  or terminate a grain  for  any
project for any treatment works lii ac-
cordance with  § 35.950 of this Chapter if
he determines  that such grain is incon-
sistent with a  plan, for the area of f - -
project, approved subsequent to approval
of the grant.
§ 131,407  Discharge  permit  terms  and
     conditions.
  Each permit issued under the  national
pollutant discharge elimination system
to any source covered by the plan shall
be prepared in accordance with  the plan
as  provided   in   § 131.209,  shall  be
processed pursuant to the State priority
permit issuance procedures set  forth in
§ 130.44  of  this   chapter, and shall
contain  such  terms  and  conditions as
may be necessary to meet the applicable
requirements of the plan; subject, how-
ever, to  all the rights that the permit
applicant and other interested persons
may have under State or Federal law to
contest the terms  and conditions of the
permit in the permit issuance proceeding.
Failure of any permit to  conform with
the requirements of this section may con-
stitute grounds for the Administrator to
object to the issuance of such permit.
§ 131.408  Separability.
  If any  provision of this part, or the
application of any provision of this part
to any person or  circumstance, is held
invalid, the application of such provision
to other  person or circumstances,  and
the remainder of this part, shall not be
affected thereby.
 [PR Doc.73-10306 Filed 5-22-73;8:45 am]
                               FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 38, NO, 99—WEDNESDAY,  MAY 23, 1973

-------
                                B-l
                              APPENDIX B

                WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS THROUGH MODELING


    Water quality analysis through modeling enables planners  to predict
water quality under adjusted conditions of flow,  temperature  and pollutant
loads.  Hence, it provides a basis for load allocation  and effluent  reduc-
tion determinations.

    Water quality analysis is conducted by the following steps:

       Categorize the water body.

       Conceptualize the phenomena.

       Consider alternative appropriate modeling
       techn iques.

       Select the least sophisticated adequate modeling
       techn ique.

       Calibrate the selected model.

       Validate the model.

       Predict water quality.

These steps are discussed in further  detail below.   It  is expected that
in the actual  development of the model, additional  sources will be con-
sulted to supplement this general  information.


A.  Categorize the water body.

    Water bodies may be categorized in one of three categories:  Flowing
streams, estuaries, and lakes and impoundments.  Dominant transport  mech-
anisms differ in each category; hence, varying modeling techniques are
appropriate for differing categories.  Further, the degree of sophistication
of technique within each water body category may  also vary according to
conditions in the water.  A combination of techniques should  probably be
employed for analyses where more than one category  of water body is  involved,

-------
                                B-2
B.  Conceptualize the Phenomena.

    The phenomena and interactions that occur in  the water body  must
be conceptualized for use in a  model.   Conceptualization  consists  of
reducing these phenomena to mathematical  formulations or  equations
which will  describe variations  of  the  phenomena  in  response to changes
in conditions.  The selected model  must reflect all  major, relevant
phenomena.


C.  Consider Alternative Appropriate Modeling Techniques.


I.  Alternative modeling techniques.

    The model  to be used depends  on the category(ies) of  the water body(ies)
being analyzed (see paragHaph A),  the  type of wafer quality problem and the
complexity of the problem.

    A preliminary investigation of the area to be modeled will indicate
the water body category(ies) and  problem type(s).  This investigation
normally will  include review of maps and existing water quality  and hydro-
logic data.   (See Chapter II, Section  A.)  Existing data  obtained  in  the
preliminary investigation should  be used to aid  in  the determination  of the
level of sophistication of  the  study.   The object of the  selection process
should be to utilize the minimum level of sophistication  which will provide
sufficient detail to justify the  selection of water quality management
strategies that will result in  achieving water quality standards during
critical conditions.

    For  model selection purposes, the techniques may be  broken  into  four
general types—A through D.  These techniques are identified  in  Table B-l,
below.  It should be noted  that Types  A, B, C and D represent arbitrary points
on a scale of techniques that range from simple  to very complex, and  shadings,
variations and combinations of  techniques may be  appropriate  in  a  given case.
The most complex techniques, Type D, should be reserved for research  efforts
into the most intricate water quality  situations.

2.  Data considerations in  selecting technique.

    While model selection is based ultimately on  identifying the  least
complicated adequate technique, the extent of data available or to be
acquired must also be considered.

-------
                                   B-3
                                Tr.blo D-l
              Waier Quality  Simulation  Techniques A-C
Rscsivinq V/ater Category
 Type
     Soon i sfi cari on
Flowing sl'reams
Esruarie:
Lnkes and  irrountiiriB
   A

   B

   C

— D

   A
   C
   D

   A

   B


   C
   D
Simplified steady state

Steady state

Transient stare

CompI ex

Simplified steady state
(one di mensionaI)

Steady state  (one or two
d imensionaI)

Transient (two  dimensional)
CompI ex

Compleloly mixed

One dimensional vertically
rn i xed

Strati tied
Cornp I ex

-------
                                  B-4
    The Type A simplified steady state analysis should  be  a  first  try,
unless clearly inadequate.   If consistent data  exist or will  be collected,
Type B steady state models can be validated  and applied to a  low flow
analysis.  The accuracy of the study is tied to the amount and  complete-
ness of the data.

    For Type C studies, detailed data sets are  required to capture the
variations in water quality.

5.  The risk factor as an element in selecting  technique.

    The water quality analysis and prediction developed by any  model can
only approximate the actual  water quality which will  occur under the
various suggested  hypotheses.   The simpler models assume many coefficients
based on previous  modeling experience.  These assumptions  will  never be
entirely correct for the distinct water body being analyzed;  hence, remedial
measures (effluent reductions) based on the  model  predictions will  not
result in water quality exactly as predicted by the model.  Since  unneces-
sarily stringent measures may  result in costly  overbuilding  and inadequate
measures may fail  to protect the aquatic ecosystem and  achieve  established
water quality goals, model  selection must consider the  degree of risk to
be accepted.  Risks should be  minimized where large construction fund out-
lays are required  or where a particularly frail  or valuable  aquatic system
is at stake.  Conversely, complex models which  create a need  for high cost,
lengthy data collection are not justified where, on balance,  the conse-
quences of the probable degree of error would be relatively  minor.

D.  Select least sophisticated adequate modeling technique.

    The  least sophisticated modeling technique adequate for  water
quality analysis and prediction should be selected and  used  where
needed in water quality segments to allocate waste loads and estab-
lish effluent reduction needs  based on critical conditions for  each
parameter.

    Table B-1 I below summarizes the criteria for the selection  of an
analytical technique.  The table lists criteria for each of  the four
levels of complexity (A, B, C  and D).  As has been noted,  level D
studies should not generally be used.  For each level of complexity,
the table presents the type of problems and  water bodies for which the
level  is appropriate, the planning characteristics (complexity  and risk)
associated with that level and the time required for a  study.

    This table only serves as  starting place in the selection process.
Each of the criteria should be broken down and studied  in  more  detail
before making the final actual technique selection.

-------
                                                            B-5
CO
<
     CO
     LU
     O
     o
     LL
     O
      O
      O
      LU
      LU
      CO
      CC
      LU
      a:
      o
0
1- >.
— "O

CT4-
0 CO
a:
L.
0 O
i—


CO
u

4-
CD CO
C —
C 0
c 4—
CO U
— ro
Q- (-
co
_C
O

^^
-Q
o
m

L_
0
4-
ro




to
0

_Q
o
1- 0
Q_ —
.O
>- ro

. 	 £_
— ro
ro >

O "O
c
i- CO
0
4-
ro

4-

X
0

CL
E
O
O

—
0
T3
O




o

CO
I/) -M
s^ 0
ro 0
Q S

1 Q)
CO 4- CO
M- S_ T3 CO "O C
O O — CO C C O
^^ ro i— L_ ro • —
-*: -a 4- en 0 4-
t/)CC0 4- CO CL •
— ro 0 ~o — 000
L. E ro — —
— c ^ CD — JD
3roO4- O0oro
O 4- L — ' -Z. +- l~ —
_i — — — c ro 4- —
CL > CO O t- c fO
• ro c z> •— • 4- o >
CO U 0 CT4- -Q CO U ro
ro
c
O
— T3 >-
to c —
C (0 CO 0
0 04-
E CO — 0 •

"o ro ro CL "o
1 0 Z> E 0
0 U 4- O X
c 4- co u —
O U1 0 ^ E




T3
c
ro

c
o

L_ *~^
ro e
U 0
•^ CD
O

O 4-

Q 'c






~O '"^
0 - >~
CL— 1—
E ro —
— c
CO <




CTv CO
-C
O 4-
4- c
O
CM E
0
4- — 0
(o ro I —
! 	 4- CO CO -Q
0rocT3 0~ocro
-o4-0ro >co —
O — E s- •- ro — —
E CL c O) 4- 4- CO
ro O 0 ra i/i CL >
OOL--0 C0OCO
4- !_ —
H- > >- 0 CD — 0
3OC4- 4-0O-Q
O 0 — • 	 H t-
—i^: — c < ro 4- 4-
co T3 ro O i- c co
• — C ZJ — -4-03
roi-rocr4--CitoOE
1
3 01
4- V-
1 — CO 0
O ro 0 >
3 C —
4- O -. L
— CO
1- co E •• •
O c: co co co
0000
0 E 1- — ^
C — 4- !- CO
O "a 01 ro —

T3
C 1
ro ro 4- i-
s_ c o co
c 0 •— E
O Q- O -a L. 0
-Q E a. 00 —
t- 0 c 4- 4- -Q
10 4- O ro ro O
U C CL 3 U
•^ ^^ — Q_
C T3 U CD
• 0 C •—£=>.
O CD CO CD 4- — 4-
• O O C 4- —
D L. 0 L_ - L. CL
~o ro >-
(00 1—

1 	
~l
CO —


'*xT
CM CO
-C
O 4-
4- C
o
vo E

l l
CL c
ro O
O U s_ >~ 0 "0
4- — 4- > c
M- > — . — ro
0 O c — c 4-
4- 0 ra O ro co
ro ^ zi .— c 0
L- CO T3 CT 4- L —
0 — c ro 0 CD
"O L. ro — T) 4- 0
O ra ro — 4-
S -c — 4- L. < co
CD (0 C CD i-
• 	 h 0 0 • 4-
co -c — E ~a -Q c/i
*. •
to co
0 CB
V i 1
_i_ • 1
ro L o ro
— ro 3 c
=14-0
* 4- .-
CO CO 1- tO
L- 0 O C
0 0
> TJ 0 E
— C C —
a: ra o "a
3
O 1 O
CL —
Q E M-
00 L-
CD 0 H 	 — 0
c: u CL C — >
— L. -0 E O 3 O
>- D C — — U-
I- O (O CO 4- 1-
co co ra 0
> - U • 4-
4- to • — t/i ro
0 c — 0 jz — 3
E — 10 i- CL CO
— O >- => O >- E
h- CL— 4- i_ — l_
£= ro ro 4- ro O
• O c L Z! c 4-
ro c co 0 0 ro to
CO
ro co
0 >-
c — •
•- ro
	 £Z
ro ^
4- 0
C l/)
0 U 0
— — CL
0) 4- >-
C 0 t—
ro c --^
L_ • —











0
—
CO -Q
c ro
O —
. — • —
4- ro
CL >
O ro
— 0
O -Q
i_
4- 4-
C t/)
O 3
U E


















>,
4-
. —
—
ro
Z3
CT

CO 1_ CO
— 0 E
t/> 4- 0
>- CO —
— 3 -d
ro O
c • i_
ra -Q CL

















-------
                                       B-6
m
0
L >
— X)
CT4-
0 CO
Qi

0 O

—
H

w
u

4-
CO 10
c —

c 0
C 4-
ro u
— ro
0_ 1-
ro

0





XJ
&
L
0

,f
~s.



in
E
0

_o
O
D- —
-C

+- —

— n
ro >•

0X3
c
i- ro
0
ro





>
._
x
c

o
E
O
O

	
(
-i
c
*^-

v£)
K1


in









w»
O -c
4- -

CN





H-
o

.*: -
in
•_
i

(—
en
•—
X

•
ro





o
in
.—
-^j
o


.^
—
"*



1
o
_j 	

0

XJ
0

. —
ro

s

(D







0

c\
ro

s_
ro


0
E

I-
H
c
Q
£





i_
o •
~^
XJ -
fZ
ro

__
ro
4—
—
O-
ro
u









•
i
0

ro
s



U)
. —
to
	
ro
c
ro

c
O

4-
ro
u

a.










t_
ro
0
c
. —
	
I
c
o
c








ro 0
XJ 0 XJ -O
— ro > c
ro i- — ro 4-
h co 4- in
c 0 ro in n •
0 xj c 0 E 0
£ t_ .— 	
d >* 0) U) — J">
o 4- 4- 0 o ro
l_ — • 	 1- L —
	 c: < ro 4- —
> ro o i- c ro
C =J — • 4- O >
0 cr 4- -Q in u ro



















H—
>• o
_(_ •

— 4-0
ro s 4-
3 o u
cr i_0
• a)-— >
i- in o
• 0 E x: t-
— 4- 0 co Gi-
ro ro — —
3 .a in ro
O 0
(D .Q Q- (J (D









, — *
*
o
Ul 10
u — 0
— 10 Q-
4- >- >~
0 — 1-
c ro ^
j— C
.^ ^
f—
=K



























































.
in
_i 	
T
O
M-
H-
0

(~
O
L_
ro
0
10
0
i—


-------
                                  B-7
E.   Calibrate the selected model.

    After a model  is selected its  reaction coefficient and  other
parameters should be calculated and adjusted for the particular water
body being analyzed.

F.   Validate the model.
    Once a model  is calibrated its validity should be tested  so that
a measure of its  reliability is obtained.   Validation should  be done  using
an independent set of observations.   The calibrated model  is  then  used  to
predict water quality for conditions at the time of the validation  set
sampling.  The errors of estimate are then an indication of how well  the
model replicates  a particular state of the system.  An analysis of  errors
permits scaling the model reliability.


G.  Predict water quality.

    The model should be used to predict water quality for each parameter,
under the critical  conditions for the parameter, using 5 year projected
waste loads.  The first prediction should  use effluent limitations  based
on the best practicable technology ("BPT") and secondary treatment  pursuant
to sections 30l(b)(l)(A) and (B) of the Act, unless those limitations are
clearly inadequate for the parameter.  If  BPT/secondary treatment  is
inadequate, varying alternative load allocation/effluent reduction  combi-
nations should be tried.  A cost effective alternative calculated  to  achieve
all applicable water quality standards should be selected.

-------
                            C-l

                         Append!x C

                   Suggested Forms (Optional)


     This appendix suggests forms which  may  be used  in  303(e)  plan-
ning.  Use of these forms is optional.   Any  method of  presenting
the necessary planning information that  will  enable  public  and
governmental  information and review and  guide  ongoing  water quality
management is acceptable.

     The suggested forms show existing  water quality,  identify
required actions and describe the water  quality expected  to result
from these actions.  Thus in combination they  provide  the desired
plan product:  a quick-reference  guide  and supporting  rat-ionale
for making coordinated water quality management decisions in the
basi n.

     These forms may be used to present  the  following  information:

         Form I — Instream Water Quality; Identification of
                 Standards Violations.

         Form 2—Waste Source Inventories and  Rankings.

         Form 3—Load Allocations and Abatement Dates.

         Form 4—Abatement Program.

         Forms I  and 2 provide part of  the data base needed
         to determine the load allocations presented in Form 3.

      It is desirable that the information presented  on  each form  be
as complete as possible, but extensive  data  col lection  is not re-
commended in low priority areas or wherever  the marginal  usefulness
of the resulting data would not warrant  the  time and expense of  its
collection.  Where data are insignificant or unavailable, the
following symbols may be employed:

        NA—"Not applicable" indicates  that  amounts  of  the
             parameter are insignificant.

        UK—"Unknown" indicates that the parameter  has  not
             been measured and cannot be vaiidly estimated.

     While the forms are largely self-explanatory,  the following  discussion
may be he IpfuI.

-------
                            C-2
Instream Water Quality;  Identification  of  Standards  Violations.
(Form I)
     Form I  describes existing water quality.   It  is  helpful  for
water quality assessment to present information  for each  month.
At a minimum, the information  should illustrate  the critical  period
for each parameter.

     In completing this form,  the following  specific  points  are
recommended:

     I.  Monitoring stations should be entered starting at the
         uppermost point and moving downstream.   Location should
         be entered by grid map coordinate and/or  river mile.
         If no monitoring station exists at  either end of the
         segment, measurements should be made  and  entered.

     2.  All  constituents necessary to describe  instream  condi-
         tions caused by known sources should  be included.  The
         instream water quality data should  be compared with the
         criteria, and any constituent which is  in violation
         should be circled.  The period of time  of the violation
         should be estimated.

-------
•c
._t

o
O-


K



,
r~



•
!--
. J
O
i.J
<.n








a






LU
H
f—
LD


ll_
o
LiJ
o!





!iJ
H














O
S
en
UJ
<:
o
'Z.
UJ
o
L J
L£
U_
0
1 L)
h-



	 1 	
t - C7>

- - | —
ro —>
\-

T \
d. I
^
'J~> ^
Q O)
:vi
U. O
s|
n._
1- Ol
O E

o --.
2: Dl
E
„
n: -^
_
	
S "5)

CL "
S 0
[Jj 0
1 — —
O CO
1^ O
d
i—
Q_
DC
CJ
UJ
O


























"O
>~ -*- Q
+- C C L
— ._ (!) ._
— £ (D ^
"3 I- CJ C  H ^3 ^



X
OJ
X
a)
ri
o
X
nj
OJ
-C
X
•a
0)
X
o
"J
a;
5
a>
X
rj
 O
0)
[- l-
L 0)
O -c
H 	 1-
O c
^ 03


























1
CL
ro c
UJ
c
o e
— (D
-1- ffl
ro u
-H +-
00 U>
	



























CN



























ro
                                                                                    C-3

-------
                                 C-4
Waste Source Inventories and Rankings.   (Form 2)

     Form 2 is suggested for use in constructing  waste source  inven-
tories which the regulations require to be  presented,  in  some  form,
for all  segments.   The inventory should include all  point sources  of
pollutants which will  require a  permit  and/or construction grant,  but
analysis of non-significant sources is  not  needed.   Significant  non-
point sources, if  any, should be estimated  and noted on this  form,
together with their characteristics and location.   Separate inventories
should be constructed  for municipal  (M);  industrial  (I);  and  non-point
(N) sources.  Federal  facilities should be  entered  on  the inventory
which best characterizes the discharge  (municipal or industrial) and
should be identified (e.g., "FM" or "Fl").

     The form is designed to be  used as follows:

     I.   Significant sources should be  entered in order of
         abatement priority.

     2.   Each source (significant and other)  should be identifed
         and located by grid map corrdinate and  river mile and/or
         shore location (for bays, lakes, or oceans).

     3.   The type of sample is indicated as:

           "c"  - composite.

           "g"  - grab.

           "ci" - composite (industry supplied).

           "gi" - grab (industry supplied)

     4.   The flow should be the  discharge flow at which the con-
         stituent is sampled.  Note those cases where constituents
         are at different flows.

     5.   The applicable constituents for each source should be
         tabulated by maximum discharge during the  critical season
         for the parameter  involved.  Sum multiple  outfalls of
         the same source,  including drainage from all  areas served
         by the source, and enter the aggregated load for the
         parameter.

-------
O   LU
LJ_   >
    ~ZL

o
o
Q.


HI
H-
O




h-
LU
CD
UJ
to




z
CO
CO

h-
CO
















3 to
O Lu
— O
LL_ —
0)
cp —
CLM- d
>- O E
1— ra

CO
LU
O
or
o
LU
1—
to
<

















(J
o"
o
\—
o
o
_J
c5
E
ct
o
0
LU
Q
O
O








































































LU
§
LU
CD
X
0
to
	 1

•




Q
O
_J
LU
O
K
O
— I tl)
o 10
h- t-


















SOURCES
Q_
O
i3
	 i
LU
O
3
to


















SOURCES '
ALL INDUSTRIAL
U-
o
to


















SOURCES
i—
z
£
o
U-
0
to
                                                                                             C-5

-------
                                C-6
Load Allocations and Abatement Dates.   (Form 5-A and  3-B)

     These Series 3 forms are suggested for use in  displaying  the
selected waste load allocations.   Form 3-A presents the  allowable
load for all  significant waste sources.  Form 3-B summarizes abate-
ment timetables.

Form 3-A

     Form 3-A displays a load allocation alternative  for waste sources
in water quality segments.   In the course of planning, one such form
may be completed for each load allocation alternative being considered,
but rejected alternatives need not be  displayed in  the completed plan
if water quality standards  will  be achieved by the  alternative which is
selected.  The alternative  which is selected should be  included in the
completed basin plan.  Form 3-A may be used for this  purpose.   Loads
should be allocated to all  existing, significant point sources, non-point
sources where applicable, and to foreseeable new sources to be added in
the near future.

Form 3-B

     Form 3-B summarizes compliance schedules and target abatement
dates.  The information reflected on Form 3-B must  be displayed, in
some form, for both water quality and  effluent limitations segments.

-------
C-7

-------
                                                                                                   CO
                                                                                               -O

 -  *J  O
 •j  If. C_
—i  3  i
                       0>
                       I

-------
                                  C-9
Abatement Program (Form 4-A to 4-C)

     The Series 4 forms may be used  to identify  needed  actions,  provide
a management schedule for their implementation and display  the expected
resuIts.

Form 4-A

     Form 4-A identifies State or local  agency actions  provided  for  more
than one source, such as obtaining new legislation for  initiating  detailed
non-point source analysis.  All  significant multi-source actions,  including
those requiring State, regional  or national  decisions,  should  be set
forth.

Form 4-B

     Form 4-B identifies agency actions  required in connection with
specific sources, such as obtaining  an abatement commitment through  a
permit,  a construction grant award or an enforcement action.   Specific
problems which might hinder abatement (for example, socio-economic,
financial, institutional or technical  issues)  should be noted, accompanied
by a brief explanation of the planned resolution of the issue.   Single
source agency action schedules should be coordinated with the  abate-
ment targets for the source.  (See Form  3-B.)  Under "Resources  to
Accomplish Task," the estimated cost and man years should be separately
stated for each agency involved in each  task.

Form 4-C

    Form 4-C relates WQ segment load reductions  with water  quality
improvements over time.  A separate  form should  be used for each param-
eter for which load reductions are required.  The information  necessary  '
to develop this abatement summary form can be derived from  previous
detailed forms as follows:

     Total load in segment. - Form 2.

     Total allowable load.  - Form 3A.

     Reductions planned.    - Form 3B.

-------
                                      C-IO
     H
      j
 8
1<
_ UJ
RK11
LD.T.L
Al,Tr.RN,
                u -i u<:
                      Q
                      §
o   U, x
p5-^"
Nil
|g§§§
B^fcu.
< U 
-------
                           C-l I
KL

ACCO
OP
•u- d. >^

.  « o
  Cg


  o§
  « o
  11
  i-.«
  S^

-------
C-12











to
SHMENT
_J
Q-
?
V |
2 a:
e s
o
3
LJ
o:
u_
or
g
to




























1
C4
0
U




1










.5
S

rt
4-1
t/]

O
QO


-------
                                   C-13
     Comparison of the allowable load with the planned  reductions
over time will  illustrate the quarter when the applicable  water
quality standards for the parameter will  be met in  the  segment or,
in the exceptional instance,  it will  indicate where reductions beyond
those currently planned are required.  The need for such additional
planning should be reflected  on Form 4-A  and/or Form 4-B.

-------