WORK PLAN HANDBOOK
FOR
SECTION 208 AREAWIDE WASTE TREATMENT MANAGEMENT PLANNING
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460
FEBRUARY 1975
-------
WORK PLAN HANDBOOK
FOR
SECTION 208 AREAWIDE WASTE TREATMENT MANAGEMENT PLANNING
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460
FEBRUARY 1975
,Y
viis&'ft. i {
-------
PREFACE
Section 208 of the Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments (P.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).
• 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
FOR
SECTION 208 AREAWIDE WASTE TREATMENT MANAGEMENT PLANNING
CONTENTS
Subsections
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
III. WORK PLAN CONTENTS
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)
V. FINANCIALLY SELF-SUSTAINING PLANNING
PROCESS 32 (e)
VI. STATE CERTIFICATION 34 (a)
VII. OMB CIRCULAR A-95 CERTIFICATION 36 (b)
APPENDIX:
40 CFR Part 35 Subpart F -- Interim Grant Regulations
for Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning
Agencies (May 1974)
-------
INTRODUCTION
Through Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972, local areas are provided a
unique opportunity to plan and manage a comprehensive pollution
control program for municipal and industrial wastewater, storm
and combined sewer runoff, nonpoint source pollutants, and
land use as it relates to water quality. Through a locally
controlled planning agency, an area can select a cost-effective
and institutionally feasible plan to meet the 1983 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 emphasis
should be placed upon non-structural approaches to pollution
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 the 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 the 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.
1
-------
NOTE
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.
-------
OF THE
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-.r Section 304(a) of the Act for the
establishment of Stat> ^tar quality standards. The criteria
will generally repres< . minimum 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 (•" i i ) technological i nfeasibi 1 i ty .
Antidegradation statements included in present stan-
dards provide in general terms that no degradation of high
continued ...
1
-------
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.
-------
EXAMPLE
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
1975.
conti nued ..
-------
Objectives of the Planning Process (continued)
5. Land-Use. In view of the rapid growth of the
fringe 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; (ii) 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.
6. Non-Point Sources. The COG does not anticipate
any work on silviculture, 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 ni strati on.
7. Preservation and Protection. The COG is mindful
of the streams in the area that presently have
water quality above the 1983 goal for "swimmable
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.
t 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)-(i) 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
approval.
• Identification of required urban stormwater runoff
control systems and management practices.
• Establishment of construction priorities over 5-
and 20-year periods.
• 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.
o ^^
-------
Analytical Steps and Planning Outputs
Point Source
A. Definition of service areas, planning areas, and wasteload
H»ltat1on$ for municipal treatment works.
I. Inventory of point source discharges.
C. Wasteload allocations for Industrial, municipal, and private
wastewater dischargers for use In the permitting system
(NPDES) and for use In detailed design of individual treat-
ment facilities.
0. PreHainary cost estimates for municipal waste-water systems
Including system configurations, locations and capacities.
and treatment levels and typos for the 20-year planning
period.
t. Establishment of construction priorities for municipal
treatment works and the time schedule for their initiation
and completion.
F. Hookup schedule to municlpal treatment works.
6. Identification of industrial treatment works construction
•nd schedule of discharges from such works to receiving
waters or to municipal treatment works.
H. Industrial pretreatment requirements and ordinances.
I. Specification of controls of residual waste and land
disposal of pollutants.
J. Specification of urban stormwater systems including design
requlrements and flow retardation and storage structures.
K. Identification of corrective measures for combined sewer
problems.
Monpoint Source
A. Identification of major nonpolnt sources and their impact
on water quality.
B. Identification of those nonpoint source, problems which can
be nost etsily and immediately solved.
C. Specification of nonpoint source control mechanisms.
1. Temporary s torage areas 1n new development areas
2. Street sweeping program
3. Nonpoint source regulatory controls
A. Tables showing population and economic project ions for the
fifth, tenth, and twentieth year of the planning period
disaggregated to the sub-municipal or equivalent level.
B. Working maps based on zoning and other applicable ordinances
showing residential, eonme re i a 1 , industrial, and other land
uses. These maps should also include major transportation
arteries and major public facilities.
C. Working maps showing critical water quality/environmental
areas including steep slopes, poorly drained soils, wetlands,
and flood plains,
D. Working maps depicting the type, pattern, amount, and loca-
tion of growth, disaggregated by sub-areas and extent of
development for the fifth, tenth and twentieth year of the
plannlng period.
(.. Identlflcatlon of land use regulatory controls to meet
water quality objectives.
RegulatQiy-Institutlonal Program
A. Identification of management agency(s) to carry out the plan.
B. Description of management agency(s)' authorities needed to
carry out the 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
. Development permits
, Hillside development and grading regulations
n those cases in which the necessary land use controls are
ot 1n use when the ?03 plan is certified, draft ordinances
us t, at a minimum, be provided.
E. Specification of nonpoint source controls to carry out the
plan.
I. Sanitary JandfiII
2. Anti-littering ord
3. Construction permi
F. Specification of the
out the plan. For ex
emulations
nstitutional arrangements to carry
mple:
1. Description of the relationship between the management
agency(s) and other agencies whose actions will signlfi-
cantly affect plan implementation.
2. Identification of the agencies responsible for.
a. facilities construction
b. regulatory control
c. wastewater treatment
d. fiscal program
e. pianni ng
f. muni tor ing
g. enforcement
h. laboratory support
3. Inttragency mechanisms such as:
a. contracts
b. nemoranda of agreement and understanding
financial frogram
A. Legal opinion from agency(s)1 counsel that the designated
management agency(s) have the legal authority to under-
take the financing necessary for plan implementation.
B. Independent auditors report describing the financial capa-
city of the designated management agency(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 moans to provide wastcwater treatment
works over 20 year period, with detailed projections for
firs t f i ve yea rs.
G. Provisions for funding
nuing 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 general, the water quality problems that should
receive the greatest priority initially are municipal and
industrial point source problems, and non-point source prob-
lems that can be dealt with through better management prac-
tices. For most areas lower priority can be placed on non-
point source and stormwater problems in the existing developed
areas. For each type of water quality problem, however,
priority attention should be placed on regulatory approaches
which will help prevent problems from occurring and, thereby,
lessen the need for remedial pollution abatement.
10
-------
Scope of Plan
The following list of problem areas define the
scope of the COG planning effort:
• Inadequate municipal
for dry weather flow.
treatment of waste-water
• A special set of problems of the Valley Sewerage
Commission, 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 regi on.
• Sludge management in this area
pollution, meager land disposal areas, and
envi ronmen t.
of high air
sensitive ocean
• 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 indusiry and parkland
irrigation.
• Pollution resulting from the numerous landfills.
i Thermal pollution, present and future, as
need for electric power continues to increase.
the
• Institutional and management complications due
to many municipalities, authorities, water purveyors, and
inadequate legislation.
* Flood control plans and water supply plans have
gone unimpl ernented , both of which may ultimately affect water
quality planning.
• Rural and suburban runoff have developed into
pollution concerns worthy of immediate attention.
• Uncontrolled development (aggravated by new
highways) which may override the carrying capacity
environment and result in degraded water
Interstate
of the natural
qua! i 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.
11
-------
III. ! ttOJtK PLAN CONTENTS
. S.
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.
1
12
-------
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 adoptea~~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 Water Quality Management Plan by RCOG is
has ed 'on the regi onal 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
patterns.
(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 JJ974) 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.
(g) 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.
13
-------
.
Ji-^V, 'f.. ••.£*. ;,C0or4tifty«tHi»n «1th -8th|er £** vl raiment a V Activities
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
River Basin plans
Facilities plans
Statewide 208 plans
Air Quality Maintenance
Area planning
Solid Waste Management
Plans
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 or
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 the accomp-
anying example, should list the specific steps that are planned
to accomplish the coordination between the 208 areawide planning
and other environmentally related planning efforts.
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
letters of understanding between local and
designated 208 planning agency agreeing to
wide planning process.
this requirement are
State agencies and the
participate in the area-
14
-------
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.
The planning agency pledges its support of a coordinated plan-
ning program, which will account for, at minimum, the following
major environmental planning/study efforts affecting the 208 Area:
Study Title
201 Facilities Planning for
Major Treatment Works
- Peny Harbor S.T.P.
- Army Base S.T.P.
- Thomas Point S.T.P.
- Waren (Western Branch)
S.T.P.
Jones River Basin Study
NPDES Permit Studies
Coastal Zone Management Study
Water Quality Monitoring
Program
Jones River Basin Study
Norma River Basin Study
Area Transportation Plan
Air Quality Maintenance
Area Studies
Regional Comprehensive
Planning Programs
Lead Agency
Sanitation District Commission
State Water Control Board
State Water Control Board
Division of State Planning I
Community Affairs
State Water Control Board
Corps of Engineers
State Water Quality Agency
Department of Highways
State Air Pollution Control
Board
Peninsula Planning District
The lead agencies coordinate their efforts with applicable
Federal agencies (e.g., Div. of State Planning and Community Af-
fairs with NOAA on Coastal Zone Management).
The 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 with information on the effluent loads of
major point sources. The monitoring program will help establish
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.
15
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 plan. 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
planning schedule.
conti nued...
16
-------
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
elements:
• 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.
t Assemble existing water quality models.
t Refine waste load allocations.
• 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.
_
-------
III. W08K PLAH CONTENTS (Continued)
0. Compatibility with other Plans
Several environmental planning efforts at the State,
local and Federal level should be considered in the work plan
to assure compatibility of the Section 208 areawide plan with
related environmental plans.
• River Basin Plans
303(e) basin plans constitute the overall framework
within which 208 plans are developed for specific portions
of a basin with complex pollution control problems. Basin
plans: 1) provide water quality standards and goals; 2) de-
fine critical water quality conditions; 3) provide waste
load constraints; and 4) may help delineate 208 area bound-
aries. The 208 plans must be consistent with Phase I basin
plans, and will constitute an integral part of these basin
plans.
• Facilities Plans
Facilities planning under Section 201 of the Act con-
sists of those necessary plans and studies related to the
construction of publicly owned treatment works. A facili-
ties plan is an integral part of the construction grants
program and is a prerequisite to the award of grant assis-
tance for the detailed design and construction of specific
facilities. Prior to the development of interim Section 208
areawide plan outputs, on-going and new facilities plans
snould be closely coordinated with areawide planning. After
the completion of the Section 208 areawide plan, facilities
plans will be carried out by the designated management agency.
Solid Waste Management Plans
State plans for solid waste management should be exa-
mined for recommended organizational and technological
solutions pertaining to the area. Local agencies having
primary responsibility for regulating and implementing SWM
controls should be identified and appropriate measures
taken to cooperate in the development of compatible plans.
• Ai r Quali ty Plans
During the 208 planning process, planners should
acquire a general familiarity with the requirements of
State Implementation Plans (SIP) in the Air Quality Region
in which the 208 area is located. Planners should coordinate
their activities with the air quality plans and the implemen-
tation process.
18
-------
Compatibility with Other Environmental Plans
Bas in Plans
The State Water Quality Control Division is preparing
Section 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 in 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 Air 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
patterns.
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 in close coordination
with early outputs of the areawide plan.
19
-------
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 a WP!1-defined feedback from the public.
t 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
group acting in partnership with
fully funded
the planning
citizen's advisory
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.
20
-------
Publi c Parti ci pati on 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-
fication of said meetings will be published in the local news-
paper three times, on days the agency is advised that readership
would be best. Thirty days notice will be given before, the hearing
is held.
Summaries of the plan and program reports will be made available
to the public and media.
• Assistance to the Public
Upon request, the designated agency will provide, insofar as possi-
ble, any group or individual with information and technical material
• Consultation
Each affected jurisdiction will be contacted and given copies of
the resolutions. A Citizen's Advisory Committee will be esta-
blished, composed of representatives of affected agencies, and
will be enlarged on commencement of the planning program. During
the project, it is expected that the Committee will meet at least
bimonthly to review progress and to provide feedback to the plan-
ning process.
* Notification
A list of interested and affected people and agencies will be
maintained in the offices of the designated agency. This list
will be used to send out information, etc., on the project.
• Access to Information
Copies of all pertinent data and water quality material are being
and will continue to be kept on file with the designated agency.
Reasonable cost reproduction is already available.
• Enforcement
Should any citizen wish to make suggestions or report violation
of water quality management regulations, they will be welcome.
The item will be reviewed by the staff of the designated agency
and its consultant. If imminent danger to life and limb exists,
the appropriate regulatory body will be notified. The suggestion
or report will be placed on the agenda for the next regular Citi-
zen's Advisory Committee meeting. If necessary, a report will
be made to the governing board of the RCOG, but in any event,
disposition of the item will be reported to the individual or
agency involved.
• Rule Making
Prior to the adoption of any rule or regulations, a public
meeting will be held (more than one if deemed necessary) and
the proposal will be made available to the public.
• Public Information Assistance
To ensure that the public and elected officials understand the
plan and the planning process, a public educational consultant
will be retained to assist in the preparation of releases, re*
ports, programs, etc.
21
-------
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.
• Developjng 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 alternative plans. 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.
• Selecting an areawido plan. The selection should be
based upon systematic comparisons of the alternatives.
• Periodic updating^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
PERT, GANNT and CPM.
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.
22
-------
Detailed Schedule
EXAMPLE
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 is available for EPA
revi ew.
rrwunnri r*ni»Aul-
1C"! VH ' *bl^U J 0 i t i U!* fnL- M'Jrtl f ^ i :> Pl^'N r UKnU L/* 1 ] \J't
ESTABLISH
"MAN A
COOR
GEMENT
D'. NATION 1 POINT
OEVEl OP DETERMINE ,- SOURCE 1
IDENTIFY — | ORGA
PROBLEM L'STAF
j
DETERMINE J ,SELE
OBJECTIVES CONS
|CONTRO'S ' NPS
ULTAN1S LANG ANALYTITALJ !LOAD AILOCA- : ' SUP
[ — ^
1
I
BASE * "TIONS " FLANS
SCHE
LPUBL
DUU -p.
1C -* _f'_ _ XN DETERMINE ALTERNATE
MEETINGS ! " "" i ALFLKNAriVE MANAGEMENT
i A, Establish 1 1 I-MANA5EMENT ?.PLANS
b3S'S and j AGENCIES
metlods cf
a n j ! .y s i s
B. Ace J ' »-e ,
d a t a a n d
•.n format ion '
i
C. Prepare- j
analytic >
memoranda
\_ ^ j
^
i
PtANEV/UilATTnN - niflKnrifTr-iiflu, nrr. n^-tnii
i UAH UH^LUAIIUIM - --.- _ - .... - - i LMn KL V i t W nN U MLKJr i J UN —
ADOPT
j- BY COG -]
i APPROVE BY !
COMBINE ASSESS SELECT REPORT (--ADVISORY — i DESIGNATION
[^ALTERNATIVE ^IMPACT >PLAN ->PLAN >• COi'MITTtF i ^CF MANAGEMENT
PLANS OF
PLAI4J | ' AGENCY
^-CERTIFICATION H
! SY STATE !
APPROVAL BV EPA-
* Task Element Number II is expanded in more detail in the follow-
ing example.
conti nued.
23
-------
Detailed Schedule (Continued)
Accompanying the CPM network the COG has prepared a
project work schedule by title of project task and by task
descripti on .
PROJECT WORK SCHEDULE
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
Base
A. Establish basis and methods of
analysis
1. Evaluate and extend sub-area
del i neati on
2. Develop and enhance data
processi ng
3. Developm small area allo-
cation method
4. Establish a surveillance
system
B. Acquire data and information
1. Collect population, employ-
ment and land use data
2. Acquire NPDES data
3. Acquire water quality
samp! ing data
Man-Months Months from Project Start
In-
House
"*
Consul-
tant
i
-
0.5
0.5
1.0
-
3.0
14.0
4.0
2.0
-
6.0
3.0
6.0
-
6.0
•
1.0
2.0
0.0
3.0
-
0.0
0.0
8.0
123456789 10
*
0 • • •
-------
Detailed Schedule (Continued)
For each of the items in the preceding project task
list, the COG work plan contains a description of the activity.
II.B ACQUIRE DATA AND INFORMATION
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 @ $l,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 = 21,000
Total $34,000
25
-------
in, , . mm PU« cosrais
The budget for the planning process should be
itemized in accordance with the project tasks defined in the
detailed schedule. For each task in the schedule estimates
should be made of the types of skills and man-days necessary
to complete the task. These estimates should then be converted
into costs by tasks with appropriate personnel salary rates,
fringe benefits, travel expenses, special equipment, materials,
and supplies. Contracts or consulting services should be
identified separately from local planning agency staff. The
consulting services must also be related to specific tasks
and products.
All cost information included in a grant application
is subject to a cost analysis. Therefore, it should be spe-
cific and complete and in accordance with OMB form number
158 R0110. The EPA Regional offices have additional guidance
and examples for the preparation of cost information.
The accompanying example represents the summary sheet
of a work plan budget. Under each of the major headings a
detailed itemization must be submitted in accordance with the
tasks described in Section III.F. The detailed itemization
should conform to the summary example in terms of the cost
categories listed.
26
-------
Resource Budget
PROPOSED BUDGET BY WORK ELEMENT
WORK ELEMENTS
Program Management
Data Acquisition
4 Analysis
TB.l Population,
1 Employment &
; Land Use Data
's.2 NPDES Data
IB. 3 Water Quality
1 Samol 1n£ Data
Plan Formulation
Plan Evaluation
Plan Review &
Adopti on
TOTAL
FRINGE SUPPLIES i OTHER TOTAL INDIRECT
SALARIES (13. 55!) TRAVEL EQUIPMENT CONTRACTUAL DIRECT DIRECT (302)
9,000 1,215 270 -- -- -- 10,485 3,146
4,500 608 300 -- -- -- 5,408 1,622
9,000 1,215 950 13,000 12X000 -- 36,185 10^56
TOTAL
1
1
13,631|
7,030|
I
47,0411
* A separate handbook is being prepared for financial planning
and cost analysis.
27
-------
mm PM* CONTOIS, tc«!rtii»iit$}v<
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-
trator.
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.
28
-------
-EXAMPLE
Disbursements and Milestones
Disbursements will be on a quarterly basis and related
to the following milestones:
Project Tasks
I. A.B.C,
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
II.
IV.
II.
III.
V.
VI.
A,B
A
C,D
A,B
A,B
A
V. C
VI. B
VII. A
VII. B,C
VIII. A
IX. A
Hi lestone
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
al1ocati 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.
10"
LO
/ 2 3 * S
QUARTERS
8
29
-------
AREAWIDg.PUHIUNS AOVISOfiY, COMMITTEE
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:
t 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.
30
-------
- EXAMPLE —,
Areawide Planning Advisory Commi ttee
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.
31
-------
V, FI8AHC1AU? SELF-SUSTAININS PlAHJU.Iffi PROCESS
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 units
• general revenue funds allocated to planning and
related acti vi ti es
t 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.
32
-------
EXAMPLE —,
Continuing Planning
In support of the continuing areawide planning by the
COG, both of 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 of
the continuing planning program, particularly in the areas of
water quality monitoring to supplement State data, special prob-
lem studies, and on-going facilities planning and design. The
funds for operation of these functions come from the normal
user revenues generated by the District services.
The COG budget is also supported by grants from State
and Federal agencies, but approximately 50% of the budget is
provided by local member contributions. This local contribution
can be used to fund continuing planning process. During the
preparation of the plan, a number of management alternatives
will be examined. The chosen management scheme will address
the question of continued funding of the planning process
(e.g., industrial user charges).
The annual update of the plan will be performed by
the COG in conjunction with the selected management agency
or agencies. The effectiveness of the update will depend on
the evaluation and monitoring tools developed as part of the
plan. Changes in land use and socio-economic parameters,
together with appropriate water quality and facility variables,
will be used in the update and a public hearing will be held
prior to adoption of the updated plan.
The COG recognizes the need for and financial require-
ments of the basic elements of a continuing planning process
and pledges to cooperatively pursue the establishment of such
processes for the 208 program.
33
-------
JMU ;...... , . . STATE CEBTlHCATIOfi
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-
ledge :
9 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
disapproval.
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.
34
-------
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. Smith, Director
Environmental Control
State of Delaware
Dover, Delaware
35
-------
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
necessary.
36
-------
EXAMPLE
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
Department
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
Health
Town Manager
Administrative Assistant
Town Clerk
City Manager
From these conferences and communications no adverse
comments were received, either verbally or in writing.
37
-------
MONDAY, MAY 13, 1974
WASHINGTON. D.C,
Volume 39 • Number 93
PART IV
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
AREAWIDE WASTE
TREATMENT
MANAGEMENT
PLANNING AGENCIES
Interim Grant Regulations
-------
17202
RULES AND REGULATIONS
Title 40—Protection of Environment
CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
PART 35—STATE AND LOCAL
ASSISTANCE
Subpart F—Grants to Designated Areawide
Waste Treatment Management Planning
Agencies; Grant Applications; Grants;
Plan Content and Approval
INTERIM REGULATIONS
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 (ies) for the develop-
ment and operation of a continuing
planning process intrinsic to the develop-
ment of an approvable areawide waste
treatment management plan and provide
criteria for the designation of manage-
ment agencies to carry out the plan. TJie
regulations also specify the supporting
data needed in a grant application as
well as to the content and output of the
areawide 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 parties and government
agencies are encouraged to submit writ-
ten comments, suggestions or objections
to the Director, Grants Administration
Division, Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460. All
comments, suggestions or objections re-
ceived on or before June 27, 1974 will be
considered.
The purpose of section 208 of the Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments of 1972 (the Act) is to encourage
and facilitate the development and im-
plementation of areawide 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
126) 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(f)(l) of
the Act, funds will be provided to desig-
nated local planning agencies for a pe-
riod of up to 24 months to develop an
initial plan for a designated area with
concurrent further development of the
planning process. For obligations made
during FY 1974 and FY 1975, the Federal
share shall be 100 percent of the eligi-
ble costs of the project.
Planning grants under section 208 of
the Act will not be awarded to States
for 208 planning in nondesignated areas.
Funds provided under section 106 of the
Act, however, may be used for this
purpose.
The regulations also provide for the
involvement of the States in the grant
application process and in the develop-
ment and review of the 208 plan. It was
felt that to have a useful areawide waste
treatment management plan, the local
planning effort should be closely coordi-
nated with the overall State planning
effort.
In addition, the interim regulations
require that the planning agency make
provisions for an Areawide Planning
Advisory Committee which must include
representatives 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.
With respect to the facilities planning
conducted during the development of an
areawide waste treatment management
plan, the regulations provide that gener-
ally such planning for construction an-
ticipated within the five year period fol-
lowing approval of the plan must be
accomplished within the scope of the 208
planning process and within the scope of
the 208 grant assistance provided that
detailed engineering shall be required
only to the extent deemed necessary by
the EPA Regional Administrator. How-
ever, where facilities planning has been
initiated and is substantially underway
at the time of award of a 208 grant, such
planning may be continued and incor-
porated in the areawide waste treatment
management planning process and plan.
Where the Regional Administrator deter-
mines that Step 1 construction grant
assistance should be utilized for facil-
ities planning activities during the 208
planning process he may award Step 1
grant assistance for such facilities plan-
ning, provided that such planning does
not duplicate any work funded by the
208 grant. The designated planning
agency must be afforded opportunity to
comment prior to award of any Step 2
or Step 3 construction grant assistance
within the designated 208 area during
the, 208 planning process. Upon approval
of the 208 plan, no construction grant
assistance may be awarded within the
208 area until the project has been
brought into conformity with such plan.
Effective date: May 13, 1974.
MAY 7, 1974.
JOHN QUARLES,
Acting Administrator.
Subpart F—Grants to Designated Areawide Waste
Treatment Management Planning Agencies;
Grant Applications; Grants; Plan Content and
Approval
Sec.
35.1050 Purpose.
36.1051 Authority.
35.1052 Allocation and allotments.
35.1053 Eligibility.
35.1054 Applications.
35.1O54-1 Preapplicatlon requirements.
35.1054-2 Application requirements.
35.1055 Revision or amendment of ap-
plication.
Sec.
36.1058 Review, certification and approval
of grant application.
35.1056-1 State review and certification of
applications from areas desig-
nated by the governor(s).
35.1056-2 State comments on applications
from areas designated by local
officials.
35.1056-3 EPA review and approval.
35.1057 Amount of grant.
36.1058 Period of grant.
36.1059 Payments.
35.1059-1 Establishment of Initial fund.
35.1059-2 Request for replenishment of
funds.
36.1059-3 Federal retention of grant funds.
36.1060 Reports.
35.1061 Suspension and termination of
grant.
35.1062 Allowable costs.
36.1063 Submission of the plan,
36.1063-1 Plans for Intrastate areas.
36.1063-2 Plans for Interstate areas.
35.1064 Areawide waste treatment man-
agement Planning: Content and
outputs.
35.1064-1 Content of areawide waste treat-
ment management plan.
35.1064-2 Revisions of plans.
36.1065 Authority of States for non-point
source planning in designated
areas.
35.1066 Designation of management agen-
cies.
36.1066-1 Intrastate planning areas.
36.1066-2 Interstate planning areas.
35.1067 EPA review of plan and designa-
tion of management agencies.
35.1067-1 Submlttal of certified plan and
designation of proposed man-
agement agency (Ies).
36.1067-2 Dual approval required.
35.1067-3 Review and approval of plan.
35.1067-4 Review and approval of waste
treatment management agen-
cies.
35.1068 Disputes.
35.1070 Annual update of plan [Re-
served ].
35.1080 Grants for update of plan [Re-
served].
AUTHORITY: Sec. 208, Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act Amendments of 1972.
Subpart F—Grants to Designated Areawide
Waste Treatment Management Planning
Agencies; Grant Applications; Grants;
Plan Content and Approval
§ 35.1050 Purpose.
The purpose of section 208 of the Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments of 1972 is to encourage and facili-
tate the development and implementa-
tion of areawide waste treatment man-
agement plans at the local level. This
subpart supplements the EPA general
grant regulations and procedures (Part
30 of this chapter) and establishes and
codifies policies and procedures for
grants to an approved planning agency,
upon approval of applications, for the
development and operation of a continu-
ing planning process required for the
development of an approvable areawide
waste treatment management plan.
§ 35.1051 Authority.
These provisions for grants to support
the development and operation of an
areawide waste treatment management.
planning process are issued under section
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 39, NO. 93—MONDAY, MAY 13, 1974
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
17208
208 of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act Amendments of 1972.
§ 35.1052 Allocations and allotments.
(a) Upon approval of a planning area
and agency designation pursuant to Part
126 of this chapter, there will be reserved,
for subsequent issuance to the Regional
Administrator, an amount of contract
authority estimated to cover the reason-
able cost of the continuing planning
process for a designated area.
(b) Upon completion of review and
negotiation of a grant application for
the continuing planning process for a
designated area, and at such time as
the Regional Administrator is pre-
pared to make a grant award, the
Regional Administrator shall request an
Advice of Allowance authorizing the obli-
gation 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 Eligibility.
An applicant agency must be the agency
designated by the Governor or appropri-
ate local officials in conformance with
§f 126.11 or 126.16 of this chapter and
approved by the Administrator as the
official areawide 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.
§ 35.1054 Applications.
g 35.1054—1 Preapplication Require-
nients.
Any agency applying for an areawide
waste treatment management planning
grant shall:
(a) Comply with all applicable require-
ments of Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-95.
(b) In the case of an area designated
by the Governor(s), the application and
supporting data shall be submitted to the
State agency(ies) designated by the Gov-
ernor(s) as haviijg 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 (s)
shall be notified of the submission.
§ 35.1054—2 Application 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 Governor(s), a statement of certi-
fication or refusal of certification sub-
mitted by the chief official (s) of the re-
viewing agency (ies) designated by the
Governor(s) of the State(s) wherein the
area is located. Each certificatior. or re-
fusal thereof, shall include a statement
that the State has reviewed the applica-
tion and finds: (1) That the proposed
work complies or does not comply with all
State requirements, including any appli-
cable 303(e) plan(s) prepared under 40
CPR Part 131; (2) that the proposed
Planning work program is or is not ade-
quate and necessary to accomplish the
development of a plan under Section 208;
(3) that, insofar as is known, the plan-
ning will or will not duplicate any work
which has been done or is being done to
meet the facilities planning requirements
of §§35.917-35.917-9; and (4) that the
State either certifies or does not cer::fy
that the grant application should be ap-
proved by EPA.
(b) Evidence that all requirements of
OMB Circular No. A-95 have been met.
(c) A statement by uhe applicant that
the proposed activity is consistent 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 is
being done under other Federal assist-
ance programs and any State and local
programs which affect the designated
area.
(d) A statement by the applicant that
provisions have been, or will be, made for
an Areawide 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 State(s) and the applicant
agency.
(e) A statement by the applicant that
the planning process will become finan-
cially self-sustaining and provide for an-
nual update of the plan once the initial
plan is developed and approved.
(f) A work plan which contains the
following:
(1) Description of the objectives and
scope of the waste treatment manage-
ment planning process;
(2) Description of all work performed
to date which will be used in the plan
development;
(3) Description of the proposed plan-
ning process which will be utilized to (i)
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, (ii) select an integrated areawide
plan to control these sources, and (iii>-
establish an areawide management pro-
gram (including financing) for plan
implementation;
(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
plan.);
(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;
(8) Description of how compatibility
with applicable plans prepared or in
preparation under sections 209 and 303
(e) will be attained; and
(9) Description of the procedures to be
followed in assuring adequate public par-
ticipation during the plan development,
review and adoption in accordance with
Part 105 of this chapter.
(g) A statement that the planning
process will develop systems for preven-
tion 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 Revision or amendment of
application.
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 Review, certification and ap-
proval of grant application.
S 35.1056— 1 State review and certifica-
tion of applications from areas des-
ignated by the Governor(s).
-------
17204
RULES AND REGULATIONS
view. Each State shall review the appli-
cation and within 45 days provide the
State coordinating the review with its
certification or refusal thereof as set
forth in 5 35.1054-2(a). The coordinating
State shall within 15 days forward two
copies of the application, supporting
documents and all State certifications or
refusals thereof to the applicant for for-
warding to the appropriate EPA Regional
Administrator. In the event that one or
more States does not certify the appli-
cation, each State refusing certification
shall specify its reasons in writing and
advise the applicant through the coordi-
nating State, of the specific changes
needed to gain its certification. The co-
ordinating State, in turn, shall forward
such notice(s) of non-certification to
the applicant and the appropriate EPA
Regional Administrator. At the request
of all of the States involved and with the
approval of the appropriate Regional Ad-
ministrator (s), an existing, recognized,
interstate agency may act in the coordi-
nating role on behalf of those States.
§ 35.1056-2 Slate comments on appli-
cations from areas designated by
local officials.
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.
§ 35.1056-3 EPA review and approval.
(a) EPA shall not accept for review for
the purpose of making a grant any in-
complete application or an application
unaccompanied by all State certifications
or refusals thereof which have been
submitted.
(b) The Regional Administrator shall
review the application and supporting
documentation to determine its compli-
ance with the applicable requirements of
the Act and this subpart, the suitability
of the proposed programs to successfully
meet the required outputs of section 208
of the Act and this subpart and the
costs of the proposed program.
(c) '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-
quirements of 5 35.106T
(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 grant.
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 EPA approved eligible
and reasonable costs of developing or
modifying an initial areawide 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 less.
§ 35.1059 Payments.
§ 35.1059-1 Establishment of initial
fund.
Payment will be made in advance to
the grantee by the establishment and at
least quarterly replenishment of a fund
that shall be based on a negotiated
amount set forth in the grant agreement
and which should not exceed 10 percent
of the grant amount, unless a larger ini-
tial percentage is necessary for the ac-
complishment of the grant objectives.
§ 35.1059-2 Request for replenishment
of funds.
Requests for replenishment 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.
§ 35.1059—3 Federal retention of grant
funds.
In accordance with the provisions of
5 30.602-1 of this chapter, an amount not
to exceed 10 percent of the grant award
amount may be withheld for noncompli-
ance with a program objective, grant
condition or reporting requirement.
§ 35.1060 Reports.
Within 30 days following the end of
each 6 month period after the effective
date of the grant, the grantee agency
shall prepare and submit for review by
EPA a semi-annual report of progress
and expenditures as compared to the
scheduling of approved milestones in the
work plan. Lack of scheduled progress
and other problems shall be fully
explained.
§ 35.1061 Suspension and termination
of grant.
In accordance with the provisions of
§§ 30.902 and 30.903 of this Chapter, the
Regional Administrator may suspend or
terminate any grant awarded pursuant
to this Subpart.
§ 35.1062 Allowable costs.
In general, eligible and ineligible costs
shall be determined in accordance with
§ 30.701 of this Chapter and by demon-
stration that the type and degree of work
is necessary for successful completion of
the project, and that the costs are rea-
sonable with respect to the product or
service to be obtained. While costs in-
curred as 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 areawide
waste treatment management planning
grant.
(b) All costs incurred in sewer evalua-
tion surveys as required under 5 35.927-2.
(c) All costs incurred in detailed
sewer system mapping and surveys there-
for.
(d) All costs related to sewage collec-
tion systems at less than the trunk line
level.
(e) All costs related to obtaining or
providing information for sewer systems
other than the costs of determining the
following items in sufficient detail to
make informed judgments on the cost ef-
fectiveness of available alternatives:
tributary or service areas, routes, sizes,
capacities and flows, critical control
elevations required to show ability to
serve tributary areas, lengths, staging,
major impediments 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.)
(f) 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 site including provision for expan-
sion, process flow diagram, identification
of unit process, type, number and size of
major units, capacities and flows, antic-
ipated effect of treatment, staging and
capital and operating costs and energy
requirements. (Costs of gathering and
analyzing information required for eco-
nomic, environmental and social evalua-
tions shall be eligible.)
(g) All costs of special studies for the
specific benefit of individual, industrial
or commercial establishments.
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
17205
(b) Has found the plan to be inter-
nally consistent with the water quality
control needs of the area;
(c) Has found the plan consistent with
all State and local legislation, regula-
tions or other requirements or plans re-
garding land use and protection of the
environment;
-------
17206
RULES AND REGULATIONS
§ 35.1064-2 Revisions of plans.
If, In the judgment of the Regional
Administrator, State Oovernor(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 Subpart for the original
plan.
§ 35.1065 Authority of States for non-
point source planning in designated
areas.
Whenever the Governor of any State
determines (and notifies the Regional
Administrator) that consistency with a
Statewide regulatory program under sec-
tion 303 so requires, the requirements of
! 35.1064-1 (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
programs shall be incorporated into each
affected areawide plan. The plan shall
set forth such additional local actions
and programs as may be necessary for
implementation of the plan developed by
the State.
§ 35.1066 Designation of management
agencies.
§ 35.1066-1 Intrastate planning areas.
Tile Governor of the State in consulta-
tion with '.he designated planning
agency, affected local governments and
following the public partication require-
ments set forth under Fart 105 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.
§ 35.1066—2 Interstate planning areas.
The Governors of the States wherein
the planning area is located shall either
mutually designate one or more waste
treatment management agencies as set
forth in { 35.1066-1 or shall, after agree-
ment among the Governors and the ap-
propriate EPA Regional Administrators,
individually designate one or more waste
treatment management agencies within
each State pursuant to the requirements
of S 35.1066-1.
§ 35.1067 EPA review of plan and des-
ignation 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 the 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).
§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.
§ 35.1067-3 Review and approval of
plan.
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
conformance 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 submittal, 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 submittal is deficient
In one or more respects and specify the
•ways in which the submittal must be
modified to receive EPA approval; or
(c) Notify the grantee and the
State(s) that the designation of waste
treatment management agencies cannot
be approved, thereby delaying further
consideration of the plan until such time
as deficiencies In such designations are
rectified.
§ 35.1067-4 Review and approval of
waste treatment management agen-
cies.
The Regional Administrator's ap-
proval will be based upon the require-
ments set forth in section 208(c) (2) of
the Act. Within 120 days after receiving
the submittal of the designations the Re-
gional Administrator shall:
(a) Notify the Governor (s) and
grantee of approval of the designations;
or
(b) Notify the Governor(s) and
grantee that the designation submittal
Is deficient in one or more respects and
specify the ways in which the submit-
tal must be modified to receive EPA ap-
proval; or
(c) Notify the Governor(s) and
grantee that the plan cannot be ap-
proved until modified, thereby delaying
further consideration qf the designa-
tions until such time deficiencies in the
plan are corrected.
§ 35.1068 Disputes.
Final determinations by the Regional
Administrator concerning applicant in-
ellgibility and final determinations by
the Regional Administrator concerning
disputes arising under a grant pursuant
to this Subpart shall be final and con-
clusive unless appealed by the appli-
cant or grantee within 30 days from the
date of receipt of such final determina-
tion in accordance with the "Disputes"
article of the General Grant Conditions
(Article 7 of Appendix A to this Sub-
chapter) .
§ 35.1070 Annual Update of Plan. [Re-
served]
§ 35.1080 Grants for Update of Plan.
[Reserved]
(FR Doc.74-10977 Filed 6-10-74:8:45 am]
FEDIftAl MOISTH, VOL 39, NO. 93—MONDAY, MAY 13, 1974
»US. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1975 582-420/229 1-3
------- |