WASHINGTON, 0. C.  20460
                        FEBRUARY 1975

                     WORK PLAN HANDBOOK



                   WASHINGTON, D.  C.   20460

                           FEBRUARY  1975
                         XI.?!. UnvJronmental Protection A;;" >
                         "f'. i-ii 6, Library (5PL-16)
                         j/K. 5- Dearborn Sti-eet, Boom 1670
                         thioago, IL   60604

          Section 208 of the Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments (I'.L.  92-500) provides financial support for areawide
waste treatment management planning.   In carrying out the
provisions of this Section, EPA has published:

          •  40 CFR Part 35 Subpart F -- Interim Grant Regula-
             tions for Areawide Waste Treatment Management
             Planning Agencies (May 1974).

          0  Draft Guidelines for Areawide  Waste Treatment
             Management Planning (May 1974).

          •  Area and Agency Designation Handbook for Section
             208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning
             (January 1975).

          The purpose of this handbook is to provide additional
details  on the preparation of areawide planning work plans.
Examples are provided in this handbook as further assistance to
locally  designated planning agencies  in preparing their 208
work plans.   Although the handbook is referred to as a Work
Plan Handbook, it covers several topics in  addition to the con-
tents of a work plan.  These additional topics are included
in the Application Requirements, Section 35.1054-2, of the
Interim  Grant Regulations.  The response to these application
requirements should be a logical extension  to the application
for areawide designation.

          This handbook was prepared  by Michael L. Frankel ,
Centaur  Management Consultants, Inc., under the direction and
support  of the EPA 208 planning staff.
                               Mark A.  Pisano
                               Director,  Water Planning Division
                               Washington,  D.C.

                      WORK PLAN HANDBOOK
                                                         Subsecti ons
                                                 Page   of 35.1054-2
      PREFACE                                     i
      INTRODUCTION                                1
  I.   OBJECTIVE OF THE PLANNING PROCESS           4      (f)(l),  (g)
 II.   OUTPUTS OF THE AREAWIDE PLAN                8
      A.  Scope of Plan                            10     (f)(3)
      B.  Work Performed to Date                   12     (f)(2)
      C.  Coordination with other Environmental
         Activities                               14     (f)(4)
      D.  Compatibility with other Plans           18      (c)
      E.  Public Participation                     20     (f)(9)
      F.  Detailed Schedule                        22     (f){5)
      G.  Resource Budget                          26     (f)(6)
      H.  Disbursement and Milestones              28     (f)(7)
 IV.   AREAWIDE ADVISORY COMMITTEE                 30      (d)
        PROCESS                                   32      (e)
 VI.   STATE CERTIFICATION                         34      (a)
VII.   OMB CIRCULAR A-95 CERTIFICATION             36      (b)
      40  CFR Part 35 Subpart F -- Interim Grant Regulations
      for Areawlde Waste Treatment Management Planning
      Agencies (May 1974)

     Through Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 19729 local ereas are provided a
unique opportunity to plan and manage a comprehensive pollution
control program for municipal end industrial wastewater, storm
and combined sewer runoffs nonpoint sourca pollutants, and
land use as it relates to water quality.  Through a locally
controlled planning agency, an area can select a cost-effsctiV2
and institutionally feasible plan to meet the 1933 goals of
the Act for "swimmable and fishable" waters.  The function of
the 208 planning process is to refine this goal for the spe-
cific conditions of the 208 area.  The plans should focus on
an integrated approach for identifying and controlling the
most serious water pollution problems initially and, over
time, resolving the remaining problems.  Particular emphssis
should be placed upon non-structural approaches to collution
control (fiscal policy, land management) rather than tradi-
tional structural  measures normally requiring large investments.

     The purpose of this handbook is to provide additional
guidance to designated Section 208 planning agencies on the
requirements for the preparation of work plans.

     The work plan should describe the activities, schedules,
resources, and procedures that a local planning agency will
bring to bear in preparing the Section 208 areawide plan.
Since it preceeds  a lengthy planning process., with many un-
anticipated problems, the work plan may undergo revisions
during the actual  planning period.  However, the work plan
should be initially well thought out and complete enough to
carry on the planning process.  The work plan should not
represent a simple exercise to start the planning process
only to be scrapped as soon as the planning gets underway.
Another common pitfall occurs when one group prepares the work
plan and another takes over the actual Section 208 planning.
Therefore, in addition to preparing a good and complete work
plan, the persons  responsible for the eventual 208 areawide
plan should also be involved in preparing the original work plan

     The work plan information follows tha submission of infor-
mation for area and agency designation.  It should amplify the
cbmmitments by local  units of government to the Section 208
program.   The work plan should emphasize the activities in a
two-year planning  period as well  as the local intent to carry
on with implementation of Lhe plan by continuing to expand,
revise., and update the plan.   This "downstream" commitment
must be considered in the early phases of developing a work plan,

     This handbook is arranged in a series of detailed expla-
nations and examples for the requirements of a work plan.
In most instances the examples are in abbreviated summary  form
to illustrate the required response.   The handbook covers:

        Objectives of the planning process
        Outputs of the areawide plan
        Work plan contents
        Areawide planning advisory committee
        Provisions for financially self-sustaining planning
        State Certification
        Coordination through the OMB  A-95 process

     The work plan recommended by this handbook is based on a
succinct plan of action rather than a rambling statement.  Care
should be taken to restrict the material to a plan for the
management of the planning process rather than the actual  con-
tents of the Section 208 areawide plan.

This handbook is designed to help local  planning agencies re-
spond to the application requirements for Section 208 area-
wide planning assistance.  The examples  in this handbook do
not constitute a uniform EPA standard of acceptability.   The
work plan submissions of local planning  agencies should  re-
flect local  conditions and levels of detail  that have been
coordinated  with the EPA Regional Office.

          The aim of the planning process is to formulate an
areawide waste treatment management plan that can be imple-
mented.  The planning process must integrate technical  means
for pollution control and management arrangements capable of
implementing the controls, and provide for public participation
in plan development.  The overall objective is to overcome the
complex water pollution problems for which the area was desig-
nated as a 208 planning area.  More specifically:

          •  Areawide planning objectives are to be
             directed at meeting the 1983 water quality
             goals.  Planning agencies must work with
             the States to be sure that planning
             efforts are directed at standards that
             incorporate these goals and the desires
             of the public.

          •  Planning efforts should be placed in priority,
             stressing outputs that relate to controlling
             the most serious water pollution sources in
             the area, especially outputs that can be
             reasonably implemented in the next five years.
             Those problem areas for which there are are
             no, or only limited, feasible solutions should
             be given lower planning priority.

          •  Interim planning outputs, especially those
             related to continuing municipal treatment
             works construction and land-use information,
             should be singled out for early completion.

          The areawide plan should incorporate all necessary
methods to protect or upgrade water quality to the levels that
correspond to the 1983 goals of the Act.

          By the summer of 1975, EPA will publish water quality
criteria information und •- Section 304(a) of the Act for the
establishment of Statt  -Miter quality standards.  The criteria
will generally repres  .  rinimum acceptable levels of water
quality for related uses, unless local circumstances are shown
to support less restrictive criteria for specific parameters.
Exceptions to the 1983 water quality goal of swimmable  and
fishable waters may be allowed under either :  (i) naturally
occurring conditions, (ii) mutually conflicting uses of the
waters or (iii) technological infeasibi1ity.

          Antidegradation statements included in present stan-
dards provide in general terms that no degradation of high
                                                continued  ...

quality waters will be allowed except for limited reductions
of water quality in justified cases.  The objectives of the 208
areawide plan should take into consideration the State's  policy
and the state's strategy for antidegradation.   For high quality
waters, the State has the opportunity of determining whether  to
allow degradation down to the 1983 goal  or to  provide for more
stringent levels of protection, up to no discharge in order to
protect present quality.  Alternatively, the State may choose
to allow degradation of waters with a water quality level
presently above the 1983 goal.  In no instance, however,  is the
water quality to be degraded to a  level  where  the 1983 goal is
no longer sustainable.  The State's planning process, in  coor-
dination with the local planning agencies, will be the basis
for applying these guidelines to individual bodies of water.

Objectives of the Planning Process

The following objectives have been adopted by the COG:

         •  Representing local interests in State reviews of
            water quality standards for the planning area.

         •  Achievement of these standards.

         •  Environmentally sound development of the plan-
            ning area.

More specifically, the COG will address these objectives
with the following program elements:

         1. Water Quality Standards.  The COG will consult
            with the State and with the public to determine
            the locally desired uses  of waters.   It will
            furnish the public with information  as to the
            types of actions or controls and the technical
            feasibility of achieving  these standards.  After
            this consultation, the COG will represent the
            area in the standard setting process with the
            State.  This activity has been given the highest
            pri ori ty.

         2. Municipal  Facilities.  During the standard
            setting process, the COG, in consultation with
            operational agencies and  local governments,
            will determine service areas for municipal
            treatment priorities.  Since 3 construction
            grants are needed prior to June of 1975,
            specific sub-priorities have been developed
            for this program.

         3. Haste Load Allocations.  The COG proposes to
            work with the State to obtain revisions,
            based on the tentative standards, to provide
            waste load allocations for all sources.  Re-
            vised allocations are planned for April 1975.

         4. Pretreatment Regulations.  The COG and the
            operating agencies will jointly develop a set
            of pretreatment requirements in coordination
            with EPA's pretreatment regulations, and a
            program to carry out those requirements.  This
            program is to be completed by the Spring of

                                                 continued ..

                                      EXAMPLE -i
     t hj? PI a n n i n g Pro c e s s  (continued)
5.  Land-Use .   In view  of the  rapid  growth  of  the
   f H nge area,  the  COG  believes  that  particular
   emphasis must be  placed  on (i) developing
   additional  land development controls  to guide
   subdivisions  and  to minimize the storm  drainage
   problem; (11) determining  preliminary routing,
   sizing and  timing of  major sewer Interceptors;
   and  (iii)  updating  land  use plans to  determine
   sewer  interceptors  and treatment facility  re-
   quirements  for each subarea.
     HjP o i n t S q u r ce s .   The  COG  does  not  anticipate
   any  w~o f IT o n  sTT vTc u 1 1 u re ,  mining,  and salt
   water  Intrusion since  these  problems  are  not
   encountered  in  the  area.   After consultation
   with the  State, it  has been  decided that  a
   full program,  regulating  construction activity
   and  controlling urban  runoff  and  runoff from
   solid  waste  disposal sites,  will  be completed
   during the planning  period.   The  COG  will col-
   lect sufficient data to  determine  the magnitude
   of  the remaining non-point source  problems  and
   their  possible  solutions.  The schedule for
   further  non-point  source  work will be determined
   jointly with  the State Water  Pollution Control
   Admi n1 strati on.

   PreservatJ on  and Protection.  The  COG 1s  mindful
   of  the streamsTTn  the area that presently have
   water  quality  above  the  1983  goal  for "swlmmable
   and  fishable" waters.  In  order to preserve and
   protect these waters, the  COG will include  in
   its  planning efforts the  Investigation of zoning
   which  permits no discharges  into  those streams,
   the  allowance of additional  discharges provided
   they are  equal  to  the quality of  the  water, and
   the  provision of growth  up to an  established
   maximum stream  load.

           The  specific outputs  of  the planning  process will
relate directly  to  the water quality objectives of  the  area,
the  institutional setting  of the  area,  and the particular
pollution  problems  encountered in  the area.   The  outputs  may
include  some  or  all  of the following items.

                 •  Identification of  anticipated  municipal  and
        industrial  collection  and treatment works to be  constructed
        over a 20-year  period.

                 •  Where  201 Step 1 planning is not in progress, plan-
        ning for facilities eligible  under 40 CFR 35.917-1(a)-(1) and
        40 CFR 35.1062  and for  which  Step 2 or Step 3 grant assistance
        is expected during the  five year period following  208  plan

                 •  Identification of  required urban stormwater runoff
        control  systems and management practices.

                 •  Establishment of construction  priorities over 5-
        and 20-year peri ods.

                 •  Establishment of a regulatory  program to: 1) pro-
        vide for waste  treatment management on an areawide  basis and
        for identification, evaluation, and control or treatment of
        all point and nonpoint  pollution sources; 2) regulate  the
        location,  modification,  and construction  of waste-discharging
        facilities; and 3) assure that industrial or commercial wastes
        discharged  into publicly-owned treatment  works meet applicable
        pretreatment requirements.

                 •  Identification of  agencies necessary  to  construct,
        operate, and maintain  facilities required by the plan  and
        otherwise carry out the  plan.

                 •  Identification of  nonpoint sources of pollution
        related  to  agriculture,  silviculture, mining, construction,
        and certain forms of salt water intrusion, and procedures and
        methods  (including land  use requirements) to control those
        sources  to  the  extent  feasible.

                 •  Processes to  control the disposition  of  residual
        waste and land  disposal  of pollutants to  protect ground and
        surface  water quality.

                 •  Selection of  a management agency(s) and  Institu-
        tional arrangements to  implement the plan and Identification
        of the major management  alternatives (including  enforcement,
        financing,  land use and  other regulatory  measures  and  associ-
        ated management authorities and practices).

                 •  A schedule  for implementing all elements of the plan,
        including identification of the monetary  costs and  economic,
        social,  and environmental impact of implementation.

                 •  Plan revisions and updates, especially for  those
        problems.not resolved  in the  2-year planning period.
            A  list  of analytic  steps  and  specific  outputs is  shown  in
the  accompanying  example.  Not included  in  this list  are outputs
related  to schedule of  implementation,  cost  of implementation,
recommendations of  local  government units,  required  certifica-
tions, and provisions for performance assessments.

  Analytical   Steps   and  Planning   Outputs
 A. Definition of  service  Areas,  planning treat, and wasteload
    IJeritutlons for  Municipal  treatment works.

 I. Inventory of point  source  discharges.

 C. Uastcload allocations  for  Industrial, municipal, and private

    (KPDES) and for  use  In  detailed design of Individual t>-e 111 u 11 o n a 1  Prog rag

A.  Identification of management agency(s)  t« carry out the plan.

t.  Description of management agency(s)' authorities needed to
    carry out (he  plan.

C.  Certification  that the  management  agency(s) have the authority
    to carry out the plan.

0.  Specification  of land  use controls  to carry out the plan

    1. Zoning
    2. Conservation easements
    3. Development permt ts
    4. Hillside development and  grading  regulations

    In those cases In  which the  necessary land use controls are
    not 1n use when the 203 plan is  certified, draft ordinances
    •ust, at B minimum, be  provided.

 E.  Specification  of nonpolnt source controls to carry out the

    1. Sanitary landfill regulations
    2. Antl-Htterlng  ordinances
    3. Construction permits

f.  Specification  of the institutional arrangements to carry
    out the plan.   For example:

    1. Description of  the  relationship between the management
      agency(s) and other  agencies  whose actions will s i gi* f i -
      cantly affect plan  implementation.
    2. Identification  of the agencies  responsible for.

      i. facilities construction    c,  planning
      b. regulatory control         f.  monitoring
      c. westewater treatment       g.  enf*rce>rent
      d. fiscal program             h.  laboratory support

    3. Inttragency mechanisms such as:

      a. contracts
      b. nenoranda of agreement and understanding
A. Legal opinion  from  agency(s)' counsel that the designated
   •anagement agencyts) have  the legal  authority to under-
   take the financing  necessary for plan Implementation.

6. Independent auditors report describing the financial capa-
   city of the designated management agcncy(s) to implement
   the plan.

C. Industrial cost  recovery provisions.

D. User charges provisions.

E. Provisions that  participating communities pay a proportionate
   share of treatment  costs.

F. Projection of  financial means to provide wastewater treatment
   works over 20  year  period, with detailed projections for
   f1rs t five yea rs.

6. Provisions for funding the continuing planning process

H. Description of the  relationship between the regulatory
   and financial  programs.

         The scope of an agency's planning should reflect
an understanding of the water quality problems in the area.
Recognition of these problems should reflect the statements
that were made during the designation process to substantiate
the complex water problems of the area.   Reference should
also be made to problem statements in the Section 303(e)
basin plans and the Section 106 State Programs.   The work
plan should state these specific problems related to priori-
ties for local action.
         In gene
receive the grea
industrial  point
lems that can be
tices.   For most
point source and
areas.   For each
priority attenti
which will  help
lessen  the  need
ral, the water quality problems that should
test priority initially are municipal  and
 source problems,  and non-point source prob-
 dealt with through better management  prac-
 areas lower priority can be placed on non-
 stormwater problems in the existing developed
 type of water quality problem, however,
on should be placed on regulatory approaches
prevent problems from occurring and, thereby,
for remedial pollution abatement.

Scope  of Plan

           The following  list of problem areas  define  the
scope  of the COG  planning  effort:
                  »   Inadequate  municipal treatment of waste-water
         for dry weather  flow.

                  •   A special  set  of problems of the Valley Sewerage
         Comtnission,  which  includes  thousands of industrial  discharges
         to the collection  system,  numerous combined sewer overflows,
         inadequate  treatment,  a massive sludge management dilemma,
         and the complex  organizational arrangement of VSC.

                  •   Combined  sewer  systems in many municipalities
         which  overflow frequently  to the streams and water  bodies
         of the region.

                  t   Sludge management in this area of high  air
         pollution,  meager  land  disposal areas, and sensitive ocean
         envi ronmen t.

                  •   Industrial  wastewater disposal and reuse in a
         highly industrialized  area  with low stream flows,

                  •   Inadequate  future water supply without the
         potential of wastewater reuse for industry and parkland

                  *   Pollution  resulting from the numerous landfills.

                  •   Thermal  pollution, present and future,  as the
         need for electric  power continues to increase.

                  •   Institutional  and management complications due
         to many municipalities, authorities, water purveyors, and
         inadequate  legislation.

                  •   Flood  control  plans and water supply plans have
         gone unimplemented,  both of which may ultimately affect water
         qua 1i ty p1 a nn i ng.

                  •   Rural  and  suburban runoff have developed into
         pollution concerns worthy  of immediate attention.

                  •   Uncontrolled development (aggravated by new
         Interstate  highways)  which  may override the carrying capacity
         of the natural environment  and result in degraded water
         qua 1i ty.

                  •   Present sewerage systems are on a municipal or
         very small  subregional  level due to  limited development.  As
         development increases,  these systems will most likely be unable
         to reliably maintain  the advanced degree of treatment necessary
         for watershed protection;  thus, sewerage development must
         match  or precede development  of the  area.

         The work plan should include a list of previous  or
on-going work and outputs that will  be available to  the  plan-
ning process.  For most metropolitan areas  a wide variety of
related planning work, data,  and pertinent  information  has
been accomplished and would prove useful  to the 208  areawide
planning.   These related activities  should  include  those  of
local  government units, State governments,  agencies  and  com-
missions,  and Federal or Federally sponsored activities.   Of
particular interest is information from completed and on-going
basin  planning, facilities planning, COE  Urban  Studies,  HUD  701
planning and NOAA Coastal Zone Management planning.

         The work plan response, as  shown in the example, is
a list of  activities, report  titles, maps,  computer  programs
or files,  etc.   Included is a brief  statement on the work
content.  If relevant studies exist  in the  area but  are  not
to be  used in the areawide plan, this should be noted with  a
justification for not using the information.

Work  Performed  to Date

       Several  plans and studies  have  been  prepared  or are  in
preparation  by  RCOG  and other agencies that will be  used  as
input  to the  208  planning  effort.    Included in  these are  the
following  items:

             (a)   The  1990 Regional  Sewer Plan by  the Valley  Sanitary
                 Sewer Commission is adopted  but  is in need  of updating
                 and  major expansion and revision.  It will  be used as
                 a source document for land-use  inputs and facility plans.

             (b)   The  Interim Mater Quality Management Plan by RCOG is
                 based 'on the regional plan and will be used as  a
                 source document  for the revision of waste load  allo-
                 cations and the  -standard setting process.

             (c)   The  1990 Regional  Land Use Plan  by the County Planning
                 Board is the basis for all functional elements  in that
                 it provides land use and population estimates and fore-
                 casts.  This plan is now undergoing major revisions.
                 It will be used  as the major source of area growth

             (d)   Current Population Estimates (1974) by the  State
                 Department of Water Resources will be used  as the
                 population source document for  estimates  of municipal
                 faci1i ty revi ews.

             (e)   Alternative Population and Employment Forecasts by the
                 Department of Labor will be  used as the source  document
                 for  control totals on future major employment sectors
                 and  population  (by age and sex).   It will be used as
                 an input to regional economic forecasts.

             (f)   Housing Market  Analysis (1974)  by  RCOG is the source
                 document for current housing stock and control  totals
                 for  future housing demand (by type of units).   It will
                 be used as a source of sewer service projections.

             (9)   Facility Plans  (1974) by the Sanitary Sewer Commission
                 are  currently in the planning phase at Store Point
                 and  Wilkes.  The data collected  for these studies will
                 be incorporated  in the areawide  plan.

             (h)   On-going studies describing  the  natural environment and
                 policies for the preservation thereof include the Moment,
                 Fountain, Sand  and Jimmy Camp Creeks Flood  Plain  analy-
                 ses,  the reports on land capability and ecology prepared
                 by RCOG, the various maps and unpublished work  on soils,
                 topography, drainage basins, developing areas,  etc.
      In  addition,  the following  information  will  be  obtained
from several  levels  of  local  and  State  governments:

      •   State  monitoring  programs
      •   Current 303(e)  plans
      •   Results from permit applications
      •   Development  information  from communities  including
          zoning  laws, land use  plans, sewerage maps, etc.


         The work plan must take into consideration other plan-
ning activities that may influence the water quality environment
of the area.  These include both EPA activities and those of
other State, local, and Federal assistance agencies.  The work
plan should identify proposed relationships to coordinate the 208
planning process with other planning efforts such as:
         Local and regional land
           use plans
         Ri ver Basi n pians
         Facilities plans
         Statewide 208 plans
         Air Quality Maintenance
           Area planning
         Solid Waste Management
HUD 701-Comprehensive Plans,
  land use elements
Areawide Transportation plans
State Coastal  Zone Management
  pi ans
COE-Urban Studies Program
USDA-Forest Service  and
  Soil Conservation  Service
         The coordination with these activities should include
the proposed use of (1) consistent data bases, including growth
projections (2) complimentary strategies (3) periodic 208 area-
wide plan reviews by other agencies to meet their environmental
environmentally related objectives, and (4) periodic reviews of
other areas' planning activities to ensure the consideration of
their impact on water quality.
         The response to this requirement, shown in
anying example, should list the specific steps that
to accomplish the coordination between the 208 areawide
and other environmentally related planning efforts.
              the accomp-
              are planned
         If the designated planning agency anticipates the need
for planning support from other local  or State agencies, then
those agencies and their contributions should be identified in
the work plan.  The work plan should indicate how the support
will be coordinated, either during the planning phase or during
both the planning and implementation phases.   The work plan
should also show the understanding (e.g., memorandum of under-
standing, etc.) between the planning agency and other agencies.

         The examples shown in response to this requirement are
letters of understanding between local and State agencies  and the
designated 208 planning agency agreeing to participate in  the area'
wide planning process.

                                                   EXAMPLE  -
Statement  of Coordination  with Other  Environmental Plans
     The  proposed work  plan  accounts  for  previous environmental
planning,  as  well as the  coordination with  on-going efforts.
              agency pledges  its support of  a coordinated  plan-
             ,  which will  account for, at  minimum, the  following
Ths planning
major environmental planning/study efforts  affecting  the  208 Area
201 F-.ri Cities Planning for
  Msioi  Treatment Warks
  - reny Harbor : .T.P.
  - Army Base S.T.P,
  .- Thomas Point S.T.P.
  - W?r?n (Western Branch)

•Jones River Bis-In Study

fiPOZC Permit Studies

Coasts1  Zone Mc>nao,?mpnt Study

Watfi" Quality Monitoring

Jcrces River Bar in Study

Norma River Basin Study

Aiea Transportation Plan

Air Quality Maintenance
    :« Studies
                                            L_e_ad Agency

                                    Sanitation District. Commission
         Regional  Cctiprehensi ve
           Planning Programs
                                    State Water Control  Board

                                    State Water Control  Board

                                    Division  of State Planning &
                                      Communi ty Affa i rs

                                    State Water Control  Board

                                    Corps of  Engineers

                                    State Water Quality  Agency

                                    Department of Highways

                                    State Air Pollution  Control

                                    Peninsula Planning District
      The  lead agencies  coordinate  their efforts with  applicable
Federal  egancn'ss  (e.g.,  Div. of State  Planning and  Community Af-
fairs  with NOAA on  Coastal Zone Management).

      Th«j  river basin  studies will  provide the inputs  for revisions
to  the waste load allocations and  the  area's water  quality stan-
dards.   The permit  study will support  the point source control
strategy  alternatives
major  point sources.
the  feedback mechanism  to evaluate  control actions.   Coordination
with  air  pollution  plans will establish consistent  projections
for  growth to meet  both  air and water  standards.   Coastal zone
and  regional plans  will  be used as  basic land use  inputs to de-
termine  patterns  of development and  projections of  land use,
Existing  201 facilities  plans will  form a major input of pollu-
tion  control actions  and their impacts  on the areawide plan.
                        with information on the  effluent loads  of
                        The monitoring program will  help establish
                                                     conti nued

Statement of Coordination with Other Environmental  Plans

TO:       Mr. T. Rolf, Director

FROM      County Planning Agency

SUBJECT:  Areawide 208 Planning Participation

          The County Planning Agency is pleased to support
your request for revised land use plans.  The Agency agrees
to participate with RPG in preparing the necessary inputs
to the Section 208 areawide plan and to make the applicable
changes to the 1977 county land use plap.  These changes con-
sist of revisions to current maps to show the areawide land
use features on a 1" = 2000 ft. scale on all census tracts
within the SMSA.

          The County Planning Agency will meet with the area-
wide planning advisory committee to lay the groundwork for
discussion of major land use policy issues.  Following these
meetings the County Planning Agency will work with the land
use task force of the RPG planning staff to develop the details
of recommended land use controls.  More specific land use plan-
ning activities to be performed by the County Planning Agency
will be defined in the on-going work with the task force.  The
results of these discussions will be factored into the overall
pianni ng schedule.
                                                    conti nued...

Statement of Coordination with Other Environmental  Plans
TO:       Mr. T. Rolf, Director
          Regional  Planning Groups

FROM:     State Water Control  Board

SUBJECT:  Areawide  208 Planning Participation

          The State Water Control  Board will  assist the
Regional Planning Group in providing river basin study inputs
to the 208 areawide planning program.   The initial  support
will be in revising the waste  load allocations,  in  schedules
of compliance, and  in the coordination of the water quality
standards to be achieved by the areawide plan.

          More specifically, the planning support to be
provided by the State will consist of  the following work

          •  Classify stream segments.

          •  Assemble existing water quality  data and note
             applicable standards.

          •  Assemble existing inventory of discharges.

          •  Assemble estimates of existing population, employ-
             ment,  and land use for the next  20  years.

          •  Disaggregate basin data by segments.

          •  Assemble existing water quality  models.

          •  Refine waste load allocations.

          0  Model  existing discharges and stream segments.

          •  Analyze results of revised waste load  allocations,

          •  Document allocations  and  compliance schedules.

          The Board, as a member of the Areawide Planning Ad-
visory Committee, will participate in  the policy sessions to
determine the priority of major control alternatives.


IfORK- PLAN CONTPTS:.. l^*1$t$t>-
         Several  environmental  planning  efforts  at  the  State,
local  and Federal  level  should  be  considered  in  the  work  plan
to assure compatibility  
C o m p a t i b i 1 i ty with 01 h e r E n v i r o n m e n t a 1 Plans

Basin Plans

     The State Water Quality Control Division is preparing
oection 303(e) plan for the South River Basin.  The Regional
Council of Governments has recently completed a Water Quality
Management Plan under Section 3(c) of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Act, as amended in 1965, which includes the urban area of
the five counties.

     A wasteload allocation study was also recently completed
by RCOG, in this case for the entire five-county area.  Extend-
ing the 3(c) plan to the balance of the mountains and plains
area of the five counties is now underway.  The 3(c) plan, with
the wasteload allocation study and the current mountains, is
basically consistent with the State's 303(e) requirements, and
is, therefore, basically consistent with the State's 303(e)
South River basin plan now being done.  The Section 208 planning
program will augment and improve the Section 3(c) Water Quality
Management Plan.

     The basis for coordinating Section 208 and 303(e) plans is,
therefore, already established, and the working relationships
between RCOG and the State Water Quality Control Division will
be maintained.

Air Quality Planning

     A State Implementation Plan has been completed for a region
that includes the 208 area.  The projections used 1n this plan
will be compared to the land-use segments of the 208 plan to
establish consistent estimates of population and Industrial
growth.  An assessment will be made of control strategies in the
208 plan to insure their compatibility with air quality objec-
tives.   Representatives of the State A1r Quality Board will
meet with the Areawide Advisory Committee.

Solid Waste Management
     The effects of sludge disposal for alternative facility
plans in the 208 area will be coordinated with the County Sani-
tation Commission which has overall solid waste management re-
sponsibility.  In addition, their land-use planning inputs will
be factored into the 208 plan for a consistent use of growth

Facilities Plans
     There are no existing facilities plans or on-going facility
planning efforts.  A facility planning start scheduled for FY 76
for the Wood Valley area will be initiated 1n close coordination
with early outputs of the areawlde plan.

         A program for public involvement should be  formulated  as  soon
after designation of the 208 agency as  possible.   The  program,  an
integral  part of the planning process,  should outline  the  specific
means for public participation at each  step in the process,  including
development and modification of the work.   The planning  process  should
be designed so that progression from one  stage to another  cannot take
place without .t WP", 1 -defined feedback from the public.

        •  The program should be an active one.   Since  the optimum de-
    gree  of public involvement will usually not  occur  spontaneously,
    simply providing information to those who ask for  it is  not  adequate.
    An active program is needed to seek out those who  can  provide  useful
    inputs, as well as those who will be  affected by the plan  (e.g.,
    League of Women Voters,  Chamber of  Commerce,  conservation  groups).

        •  The program should include adequate provision for disseminating
    information to the public.  One of  the greatest  inhibitors  to  active
    public involvement in planning programs is the lack  of readily avail-
    able  information.  To preclude this happening in 208 public  partici-
    pation programs, all data and information available  to planners  must
    be easily accessible to  the public.  Depositories  of documents and
    data  should be clearly identified to  the public.  Assistance should
    be provided in locating  specific documents or data  retained  in the
    depository; reproduction equipment  should be available for  use at  a
    moderate cost.  Mailing  lists and publications should  also  be  used
    if appropriate.

        •  The program should be allocated adequate  time and funding
    within the overall planning effort.  Planning and  operating  an
    effective program will probably require the  full-time  efforts  of
    one,  and perhaps more, persons.  Costs of the program  should be
    included in the planning budget.

        •  The planning agency should designate  and  identify to  the
    public the person or persons directly responsible  for  the  public
    involvement program.

        •  The program should be responsive to all interested  citizens.
    Participation in 208 planning should  not be  dominated  by any one
    interest group or individual.  This can best be  done by  including
    without exception in mailings, notifications, etc.,  all  parties  who
    express interest in the  project or  who have  been involved  in commu-
    nity  issues related to water quality  planning and  management.   Ano-
    ther  arrangement would feature a fully funded citizen's  advisory
    group acting in partnership with the  planning and  management agencies.

         The work plan schedule should  structure public  involvement
around key stages in the planning process, such  as establishment of
goals, design of alternatives, impact assessment, acceptance of final
plan, plan revision, etc.


Public  Participation  Summary
      •  Information Material

         Periodic press releases will  be made during the  Section  208
         planning program.

         public meetings on the plan and its progress will  be held.   Noti
         ficatlon of seiJ meetings '•.'ill  be published in thf local  news-
         paper t' r«?e times, on d^ys the  agency is advised that readersMo
         would bp :?-
         ports, programs, etc.

          The planning process is discussed in  great detail  in Chap-
ter  3  of the "Draft Guidelines for  Areawide Waste Treatment Manage-
ment  Planning."   Included  in this discussion  is  a suggested flow
chart  of the major activities to be  undertaken  during the  planning
period.   Based  on  this  flow  chart,  the  work plan  should  show a
systematic schedule of  activities,  each with  its  linkages  to other
activities, in-house or  consultant  resources,  time frame  for com-
pletion,  and milestones.

          The schedule should be set  up  to suit  the needs  and pre-
ferences  of the  planning area.  It  should follow  the basic  process,
which  includes:

                •  Identifying problems.  The pollution problems should
         be identified in terms of  thei r relative impact on water quality.

                •  Identifying constraints and  priorities.   Both technical
         and management constraints should be identified.  Priorities for
         solving water quality problems should be established.

                •  Identifying possible solutions to problems.  All reason-
         able regulatory and  management control methods should be identified.

                •  Developing alternative  plans.  Alternative integrated
         technical and regulatory control methods for municipal and indus-
         trial wastes, stormwater control, nonpoint source control, and
         growth and development should be combined into areawide plans.
         Comparable alternative options for  the management of  these plans
         should also be identified.

                •  Analyzing a 1ternative pians. The alternatives should  be
         evaluated in  terms of cost-effectiveness, maintaining environmental,
         social,  and economic values,  and assuring adequate management  author-
         ity, financial capacity, and implementation feasibility.

                •  S ej ecting an areawide plan.   The selection should  be
         based upon systematic comparisons of the alternatives.
                •  Peri odi c upd ating^of the plan.  A specific procedure
         should be defined for monitoring plan effects and developing annual
         revisions to the plan.

          These  basic activities  should  be  thought out in detail  to
permit an orderly  planning  schedule.   This will  require  a break-down
of  activities  into tasks.   By assigning time  and  resource needs  to
each  task,  their  schedule  and interrelationships  can  be  displayed
diagrammatically.   Several  techniques are  available  for  this, such  as

          The tasks listed  in the schedule  should  be  related to  the
budgets  (discussed in Section  I1I.G and especially  to the outputs  of
the  planning process discussed  in Section  II.).   The  work plan  is  to
be  an  output oriented process with  activities  leading towards products

          In the  accompanying example,  only  a  top  level  block  diagram
is  shown.   Also,  only a portion  of  the   task  schedule  is  shown with
one  of the  items  expanded  to  include the task description.   The  level
of  detail in the diagrams  or  task descriptions should be worked  out
between  the local  planning  agency and  the  EPA Regional  office.


                                                              EXAMPLE    -T
Detailed Schedule
           The COG has developed  a  detailed  CPM  network  for  day-
to-day  management  of the  program.   The  following  block diagram
represents  the  major work  elements  under which there  are  many
hundreds of tasks.   The detailed  CPM  network  1s  available  for EPA
                                UAT1  ACQUISITION AND ANALYSIS
                                                           PLAN FORMULATION-
     IDENTIFY —|
     PROBLEM   I




              DEVELOP DATA
              AND ANALYTICALJ
              BASE *
             I A.
                         -]   rLAND USE


                              Establish   1
                              basis and   !
                              methods of  ,
                                 data and
                                 Prepare    |
                                 analytic    I
                                 memoranda   j
       - SOURCEl


       yPLANS 	^
                 PLAN EVALUATION-
                                                   -PLAN REVIEW AND ADOPTION
                    ..PLAN 	->



*  Task Element Number II  is  expanded in  more detail  in  the  follow
   ing  example.
                                                                       conti nued .

. ,..,.... JDJVAJVIFI^U/
Detailed Schedule (Continued)
Accompanying the CPM network the COG has prepared a
project work schedule by title of project task and by task
descrl pti on.
Project Task

Periodic Milestones
I. Program Initiation
A. Establish the Water Quality
Task Force
B. Establish program management
and recruit staff
C. Prepare consultants work scope
II. Development of Data & Analytical
A. Establish basis and methods of
analysi s
1. Evaluate and extend sub-area
de 1 i neati on
2. Develop and enhance data
process! ng
3. Developm small area allo-
cation method
4. Establish a surveillance
B. Acquire data and information
1. Collect population, employ-
ment and land use data
2. Acquire NPDES data
3. Acquire water quality
sampling data
Man-Months Months from Project Start













123456789 10
o • • •








• - Reports to State, EPA, Advisory Committee
o - Public Information Report
0 - Public Meeting
* - Program Review

Detailed Schedule (Continued)

         For each of the items in the preceding project task
list, the COG work plan contains a description of the activity.


 B.1  Collect Population, Employment and Land Use Data

           This information is available at scattered locations
in the area.  The COG maintains such files, but they will be
supplemented by additional collection efforts through the County
Sanitation District, State Department of Labor Statistics, and
the  four county planning organizations.

           Manpower - 6 man months @ $l,500/mm = $9,000

 B.2  Acquire NPDES Data

           Information from the U.S. EPA and State discharge
permits will be acquired early in the project> and at intervals
thereafter, for data regarding present dischargers and actions
required during the permit period.

           Manpower - 3 man months @ $1,500/mm = $4,500

 B.3  Acquire Water Quality Sampling Data

           The proposed sampling program consists of determining
the water quality runoff from each of the eight identified hydro-
logic watersheds within the planning area.   The existing continu-
ous water quality recorder operated by the  State on mile 46.2 of
the Green River will be supplemented by the planning agency with
two more continuous recorders - one at the  mouth of Sand Creek and
the other at the mouth of Mud Creek.  These three recorders will
divide the planning area into approximately three equal areas and
will  provide diurnal and seasonal water quality data together with
data over a range of hydrologic events throughout the two year
planning period.  In addition, grab samples will be taken period-
ically (an average of once a month) at 8 other locations within
the planning area during the first year to  determine more localized
water quality information.  The State University laboratories will
be used to analyze the samples taken.

           Equipment - 2 continuous recorders and operation $ 8,000
                     - lab tests - 100 samples @ 50/sample    5,000
           Manpower  - 14 man months @ $l,500/mm =           21,OOP
                                                   Total    P47000

         The budget for the planning process should be
itemized in accordance with the project tasks defined in the
detailed schedule.   For each task in the schedule estimates
should be made of the types of skills and man-days necessary
to complete the task.  These estimates should then be converted
into costs by tasks with appropriate personnel  salary rates,
fringe benefits, travel expenses, special equipment, materials,
and supplies.  Contracts or consulting services should be
identified separately from local  planning agency staff.   The
consulting services must also be  related to specific tasks
and products.

         All cost information included in a grant application
is subject to a cost analysis.  Therefore, it should be  spe-
cific and complete and in accordance with OMB form number
158 R0110.  The EPA Regional offices have additional guidance
and examples for the preparation  of cost information.

         The accompanying example represents the summary sheet
of a work plan budget.  Under each of the major headings a
detailed itemization must be submitted in accordance with the
tasks described in Section III.F.  The detailed itemization
should conform to the summary example in terms of the cost
categories listed.

Resource  Budget *

                                               OTHER  TOTAL  INDIRECT
I'l "gram Hunigtmt At
U«ta Aiqu1»1t10H
* Analyst «
T|) 1 Pbp
         In order to be effective, a work plan must have a
target completion date as well as several interim milestones.
These milestones can be used to evaluate program progress and,
where necessary, to make the changes to the work plan.  The
milestones should also be related to the disbursement schedule
to insure the responsible expenditure of Federal funds.

         The disbursement from the planning agency to the local
staff, contractors, consultants, and other agencies should
track the progress being made on the schedule with the available
funds.  The work plan should indicate a quarterly progress report
of plan accomplishments submitted to the EPA Regional Adminis-
         The accompanying example shows the relationship between
disbursements and progress.  Each item in the milestone list
should be related to a project task in the detailed project
schedule.  This type of information can provide the basis for a
quarterly progress report.

D1sbursements  and Milestones

          Disbursements  will  be on a  quarterly  basis  and related
to the  following milestones:
                Project Tasks

                    I. A.B.C,










  IX. A

Complete consultant selection and  sub-
contract work scope.  Establish task force
and management coordination
Complete inventories for point sources
and major non-point sources.
Complete land use constraints.

Complete alternative land use plans and
evaluation process.  Update waste  load
allocati ons.

Catalogue available technology and existing
systems.  Select management agencies.

Complete sub-plans.  Complete technical and
management plan alternatives.

Complete alternative and evaluate  plans.

Select and document final plan.
        Submit plan for State review.
          The  cumulative disbursements  during  the  planning  period
are  shown below by quarter.   A letter  progress report will  be sub-
mitted to the  EPA Regional  Administrator following  each quarter
referencing  the milestones  achieved  (or slipped)  and the actual
versus the planned budget.
         ^    3    ?   s    6

         The work plan must provide for an Areawide Planning
Advisory Committee to coordinate with the appropriate programs
carried out by the participating members.  This committee must
include representatives of the State and public.   It may also
include representatives of the Department of Agriculture, Depart-
ment of Interior, and other Federal or local agencies that can
contribute to the areawide planning process.

         This committee may already be in existence, or it may
be necessary to reconstitute an existing committee to include
the appropriate representatives.

         As shown in the accompanying example, the statement
concerning this committee in the work plan includes:

         •  the name of the committee

         •  the composition of the committee with the name of
            member agencies

         •  the anticipated frequency of meetings or schedules
            of meetings related to key milestones in the
            planning process

         •  the function of the committee

         •  the organizational location of the committee with
            respect to the planning agency.

Areawide Planning Advisory Committee
                                                EXAMPLE —r
         An Areawide Planning  Advisory  Committee  has  been
created in conformance with  the  208 program requirements.   As
stated in these requirements,  the  public  and Federal  and  State
agencies must also be given  the  opportunity to  participate;
thus, the following agencies have  agreed  to become  actively
involved in the planning process  through  the Advisory Committee:

Federal:  U.S.  Department of Agriculture-Soil  Conservation  Service
          U.S.  Army- Corps of  Engineers
          U.S.  Department of Interior-Bureau of Outdoor  Recreation-
               National  Park Service

State:    State Water Control  Board
          State Health Department

Local:    Division of State  Planning &  Community  Affairs
          Regional Planning  Agency
          County Sanitation  Department

Public:   Metro League of Women  Voters
          Chamber of Commerce

         The functions of the  Committee  include:  approving  public
coordination and information programs,  providing  overall  policy
decision making inputs,  assisting  in identifying  major problem
areas and primary alternatives,  reviewing alternative recommen-
dations and projections, advising  on data acquisition programs,
reviewing major milestones,  and  reviewing inputs  from related
programs (e.g., land use plans).

         The Committee will  report directly to  the  Director  of
the 208 Regional Planning Agency.   It will meet monthly  during
the first year of the planning period to  review initial  policy
alternatives and control strategies.  Thereafter, the Committee
will meet quarterly.  The quarterly meetings will coincide  with
the progress reports submitted to  EPA and will  provide the  Com-
mittee with planning progress  for  their  review.

         The 208 program requirements call  for a statement to
be included in the work plan which indicates that the continuing
planning process, after the initial  preparation and approval  of
an areawide plan, will  be financially self-sustaining.   The work
plan should indicate the mechanisms  to achieve this goal.

         The approved plan must be reviewed and updated annually.
If substantial revisions result, the entire planning report
should be reviewed accordingly.  Relatively minor revisions re-
sulting from such an update can be documented in an addendum to
the initial report.   The continuing  planning may be performed by
a planning staff attached to the designated management  agency or
by the designated planning agency in coordination with  the manage-
ment agency.  The applicable organizational structure must be
documented in the final plan along with the financial arrangements
to pay for the continuing planning process.

         Some of the financial  mechanisms to be considered are:

         •  funding  contributions of member agency or
            government  uni ts

         t  general  revenue funds allocated to planning and
            related  activities

         •  user charges for waste treatment facilities

         •  general  obligation  bonds

         A brief discussion of  the funding  mechanisms to be
considered, as shown in the accompanying example, should empha-
size the intent of the  planning agency to accomplish a  finan-
cially self-sustaining  planning effort.  This discussion should
also relate the funding to the  agency that  will be conducting
the continuing planning in concert with the management  agency.

Continuing Planning

         In support of the continuing areawide planning by the
COG, both :>f the Planning District Commissions in the 208 area
pursue programs of comprehensive planning for their respective
sub-regions, under the authority of the State Area Development
Act.  This Act requires the maintenance of continuing process
by each Commission established under the Act.  The funds for
this planning effort are established by charter agreement among
the participating units of local government in each sub-region.
The Sanitation District also carries out. a number of elements o,
the continuing planning program, particularly in the areas of
water quality monitoring to supplement State data, special prob-
lem studies, and un-goiny facilities planning and design.  The
funds for operation of these functions come from the normal
user revenues generated r
           "','  •   ••'  STATE till! FICW W  ']'••

         The State certification is intended to assure EPA
that the work plan has been coordinated between the designated
local planning agency and the chief officials of the State
reviewing agency designated by the Governor of the State.   The
coordination assured by the certification is to cover: all
State requirements that may be applicable to the activities
recommended in the work plan, including relationship with  the
State river basin plans and other State water resource and
water quality requirements.  The certification should acknow-

         •  The technical and procedural adequacy of the
            work plan to accomplish the objectives of the
            208 areawide planning.  The determination of
            adequacy should evaluate if the work plan
            includes such things as sufficient technical
            staff, awareness of major problems, sufficient
            public participation, and consideration of
            alternative solutions.

         •  The assurance that the work plan activities do
            not duplicate past or existing water quality
            management activities, including facilities
            planning activities.

         •  The actual State recommendation that the work
            plan should be approved by EPA.

         Although only the positive aspects of the State
certification have been listed, the certification may also
call for any disapproval and statements suggesting that a
State does not recommend the work plan for approval by EPA.
These statements should be accompanied by reasons for the

         The State response should be a brief statement similar
to the accompanying example.  This statement is the acknowledge-
ment of the State review and its summary findings as to ap-
proval  or disapproval of the work plan.

State Certification

Regional Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III
Curtis Building
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106

Dear Sir:

         I have reviewed the Warden County application for a
grant under Section 208 of the Federal  Water Pollution Control
Act, and find:

         (i)    that the proposed work  complies with all
                State requirements, including the applicable
                303(e) plan prepared under 40 CFR Part 131;

        (ii)    that the proposed planning work program is
                adequate and necessary  to accomplish the
                development of a plan under Section 208;

       (iii)    that, insofar as is known, the planning will
                not duplicate any work  which has been done
                or is being done to meet the facilities plan-
                ning requirements of Sections 35.917-35.917-9
                of 40 CFR, Part 35.

        (iv)    that the State certifies that the work plan
                should be approved by EPA.

                                    Si ncerely yours ,
                                    R.  Smi th ,  Di rector
                                    Environmental  Control
                                    State of  Delaware
                                    Dover,  Delaware

          OMB Circular A-95 establishes  rules  and regulations
governing the formulation, evaluation,  and review of Federal
programs and projects having a significant impact on area and
community development, including programs providing Federal
assistance to State and localities.   A  network of State and
areawide planning and development clearinghouses has been es-
tablished to aid in the coordination of  this review.

          Part I of this Circular refers to the notification
and review system.   Review of the work  plan by the clearing-
house establishes early contact in the  local 208 planning
process between the designated planning  agency and other
governmental units  in the furtherance of intergovernmental
coordination and review of the areawide  208 plans.

          The local planning agency  must nofify the State and
areawide planning and development clearinghouse in the juris-
diction of the planning area of its  intent to  apply for plan-
ning assistance.  The work plan should  satisfy the summary
information required in the notification including: geographic
location, description of work, environmental considerations,
title of Federal program providing assistance, and the date
of formal application.

          Part IV of this Circular refers to coordination of
planning in multijurisdictional areas.   The objectives of this
part include the encouragement of effective use of resources,
minimizing inconsistencies, and eliminating duplication in local
planning activities.  This coordination  can be helpful in pre-
cluding the funding of other projects that may conflict with
the 208 areawide plan.

          The planning agency response  to this requirement,
as shown in the accompanying example, is a statement from the
A-95 Clearinghouse  Agency(s) acknowledging review of the work
plan and recommending its approval by EPA.

          If the 208 planning agency is  also the regional A-95
clearinghouse, then only state A-95  clearinghouse review is

QBM Circular A-95 Requirements

TO:        Mr. John Green, Regional Administrator
           Environmental Protection Agency

FROM:      Harbor Area Council of Governments

SUBJECT:   A-95 Review Comments
           Section 208 Water Quality Management
            Grant Application
           The Harbor Area Council of Governments has reviewed
the above noted application and finds it consistent with
regional plans.  HACG wishes to submit favorable review comments
on this proposal and recommends its favorable and expeditious
review by the EPA as a matter of high regional concern.

           Prior to the June 12 meeting, at which the project
was reviewed, conferences were held, or written and verbal
communications were had, with the following staff personnel:
     City of Collingswood
     Tuller County
     City and County Health
     Town of Woodland Park
     Teller County
     City of Fountain
     City of Manitou Springs
Planning Director
Waste Water Division
Director of Public Works
City Manager's Office

Planning Director
Administrative Assistant
Hydrologi st

Director of Environmental
Town Manager
Administrative Assistant
Town Clerk
City Manager
           From these conferences and communications no adverse
comments were received, either verbally or in writing.

MONDAY, MAY 13, 1974


Volume 39 • Number 93


   Interim Grant Regulation!

    Title 40—Protection of Environment


 Subpart F—Grants to Designated Araawlde
   Waste Treatment Management Planning
   Agenelea;  Grant  Application!; Grant*;
   Plan Content and Approval

   The following regulations are promul-
 gated as Interim regulations by the En-
 vironmental Protection Agency.  These
 regulations set  forth the procedures for
 providing grants to approved designated
 planning agency (les) for the  develop-
 ment  and  operation of  a  continuing
 planning process Intrinsic to the develop-
 ment of an  approvable areawlde waste
 treatment management plan and provide
 criteria for the designation of manage-
 ment agencies to carry out the plan. *(he
 regulations also specify the  supporting
 data  needed In a grant application as
 well as  to the content and output of the
 areawlde plan  to  be developed. Due to
 the fact that area and agency  designa-
 tions are in the process of being approved
 and grant applications from the approved
 designated agencies are Imminent, these-
 regulations are hereby  adopted as In-
 terim. Interested partlen and government
agencies are  encouraged to submit writ-
 ten comments,  suggestions or objection/)
to the Director, Grants Administration
Division,   Environmental    Protection
Agency.  Washington,  DC.   20460.  All
comment*, suggestions or objections re-
 ceived on or  before June 27. 1974 will be
  The purpose of section 208 of the Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments of 1872 (the Act) ta to encourage
and facilitate the development  and  Im-
plementation of areawlde waste  treat-
ment management plans at the local level
 In  designated areas, and  by the State
 outside such areas. Regulations for area
 and agency  designations (40 CFR Part
 120) were promulgated on September 14,
 1973,  In accordance  with section 208(a)
of the Act.
  Section 208 establishes  a  mechanism
 for intensive water quality/waste control
 planning  and  management.  Through
 the Federal assistance provisions, funds
 are provided to assist local areas in ad-
 dressing In a sophisticated manner diffi-
cult  urban/Industrial  and   nonpoint
source water quality problems that can-
not be solved through the application of
statutory base  level  effluent limitations.
  Under the Interim  regulations and in
 accordance with sections  208
                                             RULES  AND  REGULATIONS
 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
 trol Act Amendments of 1972.
 § 35.1052  Allocation* and allotmrnla.
   (a) Upon approval of a planning area
 and agency designation pursuant to Part
 126 of this chapter, th*re will be reserved.
 fnr RUbaequent Issuance to the Regional
 Administrator, an amount  of contract
 authority estimated to cover the reason-
 ablc  cost  of  the continuing  planning
 process for a designated area.
   (hi  Uixni completion  of  rrvlpw  HIM!
 negotiation of a  grant application  for
 the  continuing  planning   procmw Tor a
 designated  area,  and at  such  time us
 the   Regional  Administrator  \H  pre-
 pared to  make   n  grant award.   the
 Regional Administrator shall request nn
 Advice of Allowance authorizing the obli -
 gallon of contract authority to cover the
 amount of  the negotiated grant agree-
 ment. In no case will a grant agreement
 be executed before an Advice of Allow-
 ance Is Issued.

 §35.1053   Kll«lhiliir.
  An applicant agency must be the agency
 designated by the Governor or appropri-
 ate local  officials In conformance  with
 t: 126.11 or 126.16 of this chapter and
 approved by the  Administrator  as the
 official areawlde  waste treatment man-
 agement planning agency for  the  area
 and must agree  to develop a plan and
 a  continuing  planning process meeting
 the requirements of  this subpart for the
 entire designated area.
 {135.1054   Application*.
 8 35.1054-1   I'rrnppllralion    Require-
   Any agency applying for an  areawlde
 waste treatment  management  planning
 grant shall •
   IB) Comply with all applicable require-
 ments of Office  of  Management  and
 Budget (OMU) Circular No A-Bfi.
   (bl In thr case of an area designated
by the Oovernor(s),  the application and
supporting data shall be submitted to the
State agency'les)  designated by the Oov-
crnor(s)  as havirjg  review jurisdiction
over the planning area. In addition, In
such cases in interstate planning areas.
 the applicant  shall submit the applica-
tion to the Governor of the State wherein
the greatest portion of the  population
 within the planning area resides.
   (c) In the case of an area designated
 by the chief elected officials, the appli-
 cation shall be submitted  directly to the
 appropriate Regional  Administrator of
 EPA  and the appropriate Governor'si
 shall  be notified of the submission.
 fi 35.1054—2  Appliriition  Requirement.
   Applications to  EPA .shall  be made In
 triplicate on such forms as the Admin-
 istrator may prescribe and shall Include
 the following substantiating data:
   (a) In the case of an area designated
 by the Governoi is). a statement of certi-
 fication or  refusal of  certification  sub-
 mitted by the chief official(s> of  the  re-
 viewing  agency (les)  designated  by the
 Governor's) of the 8uite  that the proposed
 Planning work program is or Is not ade-
 quate and necessary to accomplish  the
 development of a plan under Mention 1!OH;
 I'M  that, Inn if HI' UK IN known,  the plan-
 ning will or will not duplic ilr  uny work
 which has been done or IN bring  done to
 meet the, facilities planning requirements
 of  l{ 38 BI7- 35.817 ». and <4> Mint  the
 State either certifies or doc* not ee.t  'ly
 that the grant application should be ap-
 proved by EPA
     Evidence thai all roqulremi'iitN of
 OMB Circular  No  A tib have been met.
   ic>  A statement liy i.he applicant tlmt
 the  proposed activity IK conwlstent with
 and will be In  coordination with other
 environmental  plans < which Include land
 use plans > and  has been coordinated with
 related planning and development that IK
 being done under other Federal assist-
 ance programs and any State and local
 programs which  affect the designated
   (d)  A statement by the applicant that
 provisions have been, or will be, made for
 an Areawlde Planning Advisory Commit-
 tee which  must Include repersentatives
 of the State and public  and may  Include
 representatives of the U.S Departments
 of Agriculture,  Army and the  Interior
 and such other Federal and local agencies
 as may be appropriate in the opinion of
 EPA. the  Statc(s)  and the  applicant
   A work plan  which contains  the
  (1) Description of the objwitlvcw, and
scope of the waste  treatment  manage-
 ment planning process;
  <2) Description of all work performed
to date which  will be used in  tlie  plan
  <3> Description of the proposed plan-
ning process which will be utilized to U)
Identify and evaluate feasible measures
to control point and  nonpoint pollution
sources, which  measures may take into
account all  source location and  review
measures  necessary to  meet State im-
plementation plan  requirements  in the
area, (ID  select an integrated areawlde
plan to control these sources, and  (ill)
establish an areawide management pro-
cram  (including  financing)  for  plan
  <4> Description of any necessary action
 in the planning to be taken by agencies
 other than the  applicant and procedures
 to be used in coordination of  such Ac-
 tivities  (Documentation of the accept-
 ance by the affected responsible  agency
 of such required work or action shall be
 Included and  presented with the work
   (5> Detailed schedule showing required
 interrelationships of work to be accom-
 plished  and anticipated dates of com-
 pletion ;
   (6) Detailed cost and resource budget.
 Including work to be done under contract
 or by interagency agreement;
   <7>  Proposed  disbursement  schedule
 with specific progress milestones related
 to disbursements;
   (H)  Description of  how compatibility
 with applicable  plans  prepared or  In
 preparation under sections 209 and  30.)
 ic'  will be attained, and
   <9> Description of dm proccUuu.s to be
 followed In an.surliiR adequate public par-
 ticipation  diiriuu the  plan development.
 review and adoption In accordance with
 Part 10ft of thin chapter
   (g>  A statement  that  the planning
 proc»Mi will develop H.v.'tU-iii8 for prevcn
 lion of degradation of surface and ground
 water quality In  the area In accordance
 with the requirements of the  Act  and
 with the applicable  Federal/State water
 quality standards.
 § 35.1055   Kcvixion  or unicmlmciii  of
   If, in  the judgment of the  applicant
 or  the  EPA  Regional Administrator,
 substantial changes have occurred which
 warrant  revision  or amendment, the ap-
 plication shall be revised or amended and
 submitted for review In the same manner
 as specified for the original application.

 § 35.1056   Itrvirw, frrliiiration untl  ap-
     proval of grant application.
 035.1056-1  Slate review ami certifica-
     tion of nppliration* from area* <>«rrnor(a).
   (ttt  Iritrastate  planning area*. The
 State reviewing agency designated by the
 Governor shall, within 45 days after  re-
 ceipt of the application, review the ap-
 plication and either certify or refti.'.e  to
certify the application and proposed work
 program  as wt forth  In I 38.1054 2(a).
 Upon certification or refusal thereof, the
 reviewing agency will  either, at the ap-
 plicant's  direction, return the applica-
 tion to the, applicant  for forwarding of
 two  copies to  the appropriate  EPA Re-
 gional Administrator,  together with  all
certifications, or  forward two  copies of
 the application and  certifications  or re-
fusals thereof  to the appropriate EPA
 Regional Administrator. If the applica-
 tion Is not certified, the reviewing agency
 shall notify both the appropriate EPA
 Regional Administrator and the  appli-
 cant as to the specific reasons for non-
 certification  and specify  the  changes
 which are needed for State certification
 of the application.
                                               RULES AND REGULATIONS
  view. Each State shall review the appli-
  cation  and within 43  days provide  the
  State coordinating  the review with its
  certification  or  refusal  thereof  aa  set
  forth in 9 35 1064-2'a). The coordinating
  State shall within 15 days forward two
  roplei  nt  the  application, supporting
  document.') and all State certifications or
  refusal*, thereof to the applicant for for-
  warding to the appropriate EPA Regional
  Administrator In the event that  one or
  more Htates dors not ceitlfy the  appli-
  cation,  each Stnte refusing certification
  shall sprrlfy  Its  rennom  In writing and
  advise HIP applicant through the coordi-
  nating  State, of the  specific  changes
  npeded  to gain 1U certification. The  co-
  ordinating State.  In turn. shall forward
  such notlco  of non-certification to
  the  applicant nnd (he  appropriate B)PA
  Rejridnal Administrator  At  the request
  iitfS of the States Involved and with the
  approval of thp appropriate Regional Ad-
  mlnlMratOTt.-o. an exi.stinu. recognized,
  interstate agency may act in the coordi-
  nating role on behalf of those States.
  § 35.1056—2   Stair rommriiln on  appli-
      cation*  frnni arena  dcftiftnatrd  by
      lornl official".
   In all cases concerning  applications In
  areas designated by locally elected offi-
  cials, the State shall review and comment
  upon the application  as provided for by
  OMB Circular A-95.
  fj 35.1056—3   KI'A review nnil approval.
   (a) EPA shall not accept for review for
  the purpose of making a  Krunt liny In-
  complete application  or an application
  unaccompanied by all State certifications
  or refuels thereof  which  have   been
    Generally  within 45 days  after
 receiving the  application  the Regional
 Administrator shall:
   (1) Award a grant to the applicant  In
 the amount that he finds  meets the re-
 quirement* of 8 35 1057
   (2) Notify the applicant  that the grant
 application is  deficient  In one  or  more
.respects  and specify in  which ways the
 application must be modified to receive
 EPA  approval. Copies of such notifica-
 tions  will be forwarded to  all concerned
 States at the time the applicant is  noti-
 fied of EPA action
 § 35.1057  Amount of KI-HMI.
  For grants awarded during the fiscal
years ending on June 30. 1974. and  June
30, 1975. the rate of Federal  assistance
furnished to a grantee shall be  100 per
centum of  the KPA approved  eligible
and reasonable conts  of developing  or
modifying  an  Initial   ureawlde waste
treatment management plan meeting the
requirements of this subpart and, operat-
ing an approved planning  process
  § 35.1058  Period of grant.
    Federal assistance shall be for a budget
  period beginning the date of execution of
  the grant agreement and ending the date
  which the plan Is approved by the appro-
  priate Regional Administrator or within
  24 months, whichever period Is lew.
  ft 35.J0S1'  IVm-nl..
  fi 3S.IO.W-1   K.tubll.liment   of  initial

    Payment will be  mud" in advance  to
  the grantee by the establishment and  at
  leant quarU-ily replenishment of a fund
  thnt nlutll  be  based  on  a  negotiated
  amount net forth In the grant agreement
  and which Miould not exceed 10  percent
  of the Kratit amount, unlom a larger trjl-
  tlul percentage  Is necessary  for  the ac-
  complishment of the grant objective*.
  S 35.IO.W-2   RrqurM  for replenishment
      of Cumin.
    Bequests for  replcnishmejit of funds
  shall be made by  the grantee on  such
  form as prescribed by the Administrator
  Each request for replenishment of funds
  shall include a statement on the status
  of the project related to the approved
  milestones set forth in the grant appli-
  cation. If the project is behind schedule,
  the statement should identify the specific
  tasks that have been  delayed and give
  the reasons for the delay.
 9 35.1059-3:
Federal mention of  grunt
   In accordance  with  the  provisions of
 8 30 602-1 of this chapter, an amount not
 to exceed  10 percent of the grant award
 amount may be withheld for noncompll-
 unce  with u  program  objective,  grant
 condition or re|>orUng requirement.
 fi .'If.. IOM)  HennrU.

   Within  30 days following the end of
 each i! month period after the effective
 date of the grant, the grantee agency
 Hhnll prepare and submit for  review by
 KPA u Kenit-unnunl  report of proems*
 mid  expenditures us compared to  the
 scheduling of approved milestones in the
 work plan. Lack  of  scheduled progrcxs
 and  other  problems   shall  be  fully
 §35.106)   SunprnMoii  and terminHtion
     of grant.
   In accordance with the provisions of
 §5 30.902 and 30.903 of this Chapter, the
 Regional Administrator may suspend or
 terminate  any grant awarded  pursuant
 to this Subpart.

 § 35.10<>2   Allowable roMn.

   In general, eligible and ineligible  costs
 shall be determined In  accordance  with
 5 30.701 of this Chapter and by demon-
 stration that the type and degree of work
 IN  necessary for successful completion of
 the project, and that the costs are rea-
 sonable with respect  to the product or
 service  t.o be obtained.  While  costs in-
 curred UN a result of following an ap-
 proved work program  would generally be
 allowable,  provided that they  are not
prohibited  elsewhere  by Federal, State
or local law, regulations or rule,  the costs
  Incurred by activity related  to the fol-
  lowing shall be ineligible:
    (a) All costs incurred in development
  of a grant application  for an areawlde
  waste treatment  management planning
    (b> All costs Incurred In sewer evalua-
  tion surveys as required under I 36.837-2
      All costs related to sewage collec-
  tion systems at lent than the trunk line
      All could related  to  obtaining  or
  providing Information for newer lystemx
  other than the touts of  determining the
  following Hems  in sufficient detail  to
  make Informed judgments on the cost ef-
  fectiveness of available  alternatives:
  tributary or service area*,  routes.  «tee«,
  capacities  and flows,  critical  control
  elevations required to  show ability  to
  serve tributary arean, length*, staging,
  major Impedimenta to construction, and
  costs of construction and operation. Data
  concerning lift stations  shall  be  limited
  to location, size, energy requirements and
  capital  and operating  costs.  (Costs   of
  gathering and analyzing information re-
  quired for economic, environmental and
  social evaluations  shall be eligible.)
     All costs related to obtaining or
  providing  treatment  works other  than
  the  costs of determining the following
  items In  sufficient detail to  make in-
  formed  Judgments on the cost effective-
  ness of  available alternatives: Location.
  site  plot plan  which shows  adequacy of
  the hltc including  provision for expan-
  sion, process flow diagram, identification
  ol unit process, type, number Snd size of
  major units, capacities and flows, antic-
  ipated  effect of treatment,  staging and
  cnpltiil and operating  costs and energy
  rcqulrnmenU.  (Cost*  of   gathering and
  analysing information required for eco-
  nomic, environmental and social evalua-
  tlotis filial! be eligible. >
                                              RUlfS AND REGULATIONS
   (b) Has  found the plan to be inter-
 nally consistent with the water quality
 control ncedi of the area;
   f c) HM found the plan consistent with
 afl State and  local  legislation,  retalia-
 tion* or other requirement* or plan*  re-
 garding  land »F.P and protection of  the
   (d> Has found that the plan provides
 adequate hn.ils for selection and deslgnn-
 tlon of management agencies to be desig-
 nated under section  208 Has approved  the  plan. If disap-
 proval is necessary, that Is if no certi-
 fication of approval can be Issued by  the
 Governor UUP to  fixilure of the grantee to
 comply with one or more of  these pro-
 visions,  the  Governor  shall  notify  the
 Regional Administrator and the grantee
 In wrttin« that the plan Is deficient, and
 specify in which ways the plan must be
 modified to receive State  certification of

 § 35.10n.1-2   Plans for  inlerftlntr ami).

   No later than two years af Jer the plan-
 ning  process Is In operation, three copies
 of the plan and local governmental rec-
 ommendations thereon  and  one addi-
 tional copy of the plan and recommen-
 dations for each concerned  State  shall
 be submitted to  the reviewing  agency
 designated by the Governor of the State
 wherein  the  greatest  portion of popula-
 tion   within  the  planning area resides.
 That agency shull act a*  the coordinat-
 ing agency  and  shall forward one  copy
 of the plan to the reviewing agency des-
 ignated by the Governor of  each other
 State wherein a portion of the planning;
 area Is located. Each  State shall review
 the plan and shall,  on behalf of  that
 State, furnish the coordinating  agency
 with  certifications  as set  forth In 8 3B -
 1003-1  The coordinating State  ugency
 shall  forward copies of each certification
 to the grantee agency and shall, at that
 time,  forward two copies  of the  certifi-
 cations  and the  plan  and local govern-
 mental recommendations  thereon to the
 appropriate EPA Regional Administra-
 tor. At the request of all  the  States In-
 volved, and with the approval of the Re-
 gional Administrators, an existing, rec-
 ognized, interstate agency may act In the
 coordinating role  on behalf  of  those
 § 35.1064  Ari-awiiir   wantr   treatment
    management plmming: ('.onlrnt and
  The of areawide planning ac-
tivities Is the development of a coor-
dinated,  viable,   management  system
capable of  organizing, directing,  imple
mentlnK  Hud maintaining an effective
program of  pollution  abatement  aii«l
preservation  of   exlr.tlng   high  quality
water In area.', huvlng substantial water
 quality contiol problems

 §35.1064—I  ('.otitrni of  nrri«wl The Identification of required ur-
 ban storm water runoff control systems;
   (d) The establishment of construction
 priorities for treatment works for the
 five-year period  following the year of
 plan approval  and a proposed schedule
 of   completion  of   major   treatment
 works over the twenty-year  period fol-
 lowing submission of the plan;
   (e) The establishment of a  regulatory
 program to:
   (1) Provide that waste treatment man-
 agement shall  be  on an areawide  basis
 and provide identification and  evaluation
 of and control or treatment for all point
 and non-point sources of pollution. In-
 cluding inplace or accumulated pollu-
 tion sources, as shall be required under
 guidelines published by the Administra-
 tor pursuant to sections  208 and 304(e)
 of the Act, (Special regulatory consider-
 ation, Including land use controls, is re-
 quired  for  sources  further  specified
 under paragraphs    through (1)  of
 thin nectlon);
   (2) Regulate the  location,  modifica-
 tion,  and construction of any facilities
 within such  area  which may result  In
 any discharge  In  such  area  Including,
 as appropriate, regulation of any future
 increase in waste loads and sources; and
  (3) Assure  that any industrial or com-
 mercial  wastes  discharged   into  any
publicly owned treatment works in such
area must meet applicable pretreatment
requirements established in the plan.
  (f)  The identification  of those agen-
cies necessary to (1) construct, operate.
and maintain all  facilities required by
the plan, and  (2) otherwise  carry out
the plan;
  (g) A process to  (1) Identify, if appro-
priate, agriculturally and sllvlculturally
related non-point  sources  of  pollution,
Including runoff from manure  disposal
areas, and from land used for livestock
and crop  production, and (2) set forth
procedures and methods  (Including  land
UHC requirements)  to control to the ex-
tent feasible  «uch  source»r
  ih) A process to  (1) Identify, If appio-
prlate, mine-related source* of pollution
 Including new,  current, and abandoned
surface and  underground mine runolT,
and (2) set forth procedures and mcth-
odn (Including land use requirements)  to
control  to  the  extent  feasible   such
   (i) A process to (It identify construc-
 tion activity related sources of pollution,
 and (2) set forth procedures and meth-
 ods (including land use requirements* to
 control  to  the  extent  feasible  such
   (J)  A process to < 1' identify, if appro-
 priate, salt water Intrusion into rivers.
 lakes and estuaries resulting from reduc-
 tion of fresh water flow from any cause,
 including Irrigation, obstruction, ground
 water extraction, and diversion, and 
 set forth procedures and methods to con-
 trol such intrusion to the extent feasible
 where such procedures and methods are
 otherwise a part of the waste treatment
 management plan;
   (Jc>  A process to control the disposi-
 tion of  all  residual waste  generated In
 such area or  imported into  sucb area
 which  could  affect  either surface  or
 ground water quality;
   (1) A process to control the disposal of
 pollutants on land or in subsurface  ex-
 cavations within such area  to  protect
 ground and surface water quality;
   (m) The identification  of all major
 alternative measures, including enforce-
 ment activities, financing, land use and
 other development controls and regula-
 tory actions,  administrative  and man-
 agement authorities and practice* neces-
 sary to carry out each of the alternatives,
 and selection of the  recommended sys-
   (n)  The  period of time  necessary to
 carry out the plan and major alterna-
 tives, the costs of carrying out the plan
 and major alternatives within such time,
 and economic, social,  and environmental
 impacts  of  carrying  out the  plan  and
 major alternatives within tuch time;
   (o) Certification of the consistency of
 the plan with plans prepared or In prep-
 aration under  sections 309 and BOS  of
 the  Act. (Any 201 plan developed In the
 area or  any application for a Step 1
 grant  for such plan received prior  to
 the  approval of  the 208 plan shall  re-
 quire review and comment* by the desig-
 nated 308 agency which shall be trans-
 mitted to the  State  agency  processing
 the Title n  grant applications. After the
 section 208 plan has  been  approved,  all
 201  plans for the area  that may previ-
 ously  have  been developed   shall  be
 brought  into conformance  with the 208
   (p) Certification and description  of
 public  participation,  in  the  planning
 process and adoption  of the plan, in ac-
 cordance with Part 105 of this Chapter,
   (q) Recommendations  by  governing
bodies  of local governments having re-
sponsibility  for, or which  would be  di-
rectly affected by. implementation of the
plan and having jurisdiction in the plan-
 ning area as to State certification and
KPA approval of the plan. In the event
 that a local unit of government falls to
provide  a  recommendation within  30
days of  receiving such a  request from
the planning agency,  it shall be consid-
ered that the plan has  been  favorably
recommended by that unit  of local gov-
                                HD»Al  MOUTH, VOL »», NO. fl-^MONPAr, MAT 1», 1*74

§ .15.1064-2   Krvl.ion. of plan..
  If,  In the  Judgment of the  Regional
Administrator,  State  Oovemor(s)   or
applicant, substantial changes  have  oc-
curred which warrant revision or amend-
ment of the  approved plan,  the plan
shall  be revised or amended  and sub-
mitted for review In the same manner
specified In this Bubpart for the original
| 35.1065   Authority of  Slate*  for non-
    point (ource planning in designated
  Whenever the Governor of any State
determines (and notifies the Regional
Administrator) that consistency  with a
Statewide regulator}' program under sec-
tion 303 so requires, the requirements of
I 36.1084-1 (g)  through   (1)  shall  be
developed and submitted by the Gov-
ernor to the Regional Administrator  for
application to all regions within such
State. All  requirements  of  such State
program* shall be Incorporated Into each
affected areuwlde plan The plan shall
net forth such additional local actions
and program* aa may  be«ary  for
Implementation of the plan developed by
the 8Ut*.

fj 3.1.1066  Dpnlfjnalion <>f nmn«Kriiinit
g 55.1066—1   InlmMiitc planning arvai.
  The Governor of the State In consulta-
tion  with  '.he  designated  planning
agency, affected local governments and
following the public partlcatlon require-
ments set forth under Part 10B  of this
chapter, at the time the plan  is sub-
mitted to the Administrator shall desig-
nate one or more waste treatment man-
agement agencies  (which may  be  an
existing or newly created local, regional
or State agency or political subdivision)
for the designated area. Such agency or
agencies shall, individually or In  aggre-
gate,  have adequate authority  to meet
the requirements to carry out  the pro-
visions of section 208'c> (2)  of  the Act.

8 35.1066—2   Inli-rMtile pliinning nr<>i».
  The Governors of the Slates wherein
the planning area In located shall either
mutually  designate one  or  more waste
treatment management agencies aa «et
forth In | 3B.1088-1 or shall, alter agree-
ment among the Governors  and the ap-
propriate EPA Regional Administrator*.
Individually designate one or more waste
treatment management agencies within
each State pursuant to the requirement*
of 135.1008-1.
§ 35.1067  EPA review of plan and de»-
     ignatlon of management agencies.
§35.1067-1  Submittal of certified  plan
     and designation of proposed manage-
     ment agency (ies).
  The Regional Administrator shall not
receive for  tl\e purpose  of  review  and
approval either proposed designations of
management agency (Ies) in the  absence
of a plan certified by the  appropriate
Governor (s)  or a  plan certified by the
appropriate  Governor (s)  In  the  absence
of proposed designations of management
agency (Ies).
0 35.1067-2  Dual approval required.
  The appropriate Regional  Adminis-
trator  shall  neither approve a certified
plan unless  concurrently approving all
designated  management  agencies,  nor
approve the designation of management
agencies  unless concurrently approving
a certified plan.
§ 35.1067-4  Review  and  approval of
  The  Regional   Administrator's  ap-
proval of the plan will  be  based upon
the  State (s) certification of approval
and EPA's review of the submission for
oonformance with  provisions of section
201 and 208 of the Act and the require-
ments  of this Part and other applicable
regulations.  Within 120  days  after re-
ceiving the submlttal, the Regional  Ad-
ministrator shall:
  (a)  Notify  the State (s)  and  the
grantee of approval of the plan; or
  (b)  Notify  the State(s)  and  the
grantee that the submlttal  Is deficient
In one or more respects and specify the
ways  In  which the submlttal must be
modified  to receive EPA approval; or
   (o>   Notify  the  grantee  and  the