WASHINGTON,  D.  C.   20460

                         FEBRUARY  1975

                   WORK PLAN HANDBOOK




                  WASHINGTON,  D.  C.   20460

                         FEBRUARY 1975
                    viis&'ft. i  {

          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




                                                 Page   of 35.1054-2

      PREFACE                                     i

      INTRODUCTION                                1

  I.  OBJECTIVE OF THE PLANNING PROCESS           4      (f)(l), (g)



      A. Scope of Plan                            10     (f)(3)
      B. Work Performed to Date                   12     (f)(2)
      C. Coordination with other Environmental
         Activities                               14     (f)(4)
      D. Compatibility with other Plans           18      (c)
      E. Public Participation                     20     (f)(9)
      F. Detailed Schedule                        22     (f)(5)
      G. Resource Budget                          26     (f)(6)
      H. Disbursement and Milestones              28     (f)(7)

 IV.  AREAWIDE ADVISORY COMMITTEE                 30      (d)

        PROCESS                                   32      (e)

 VI.  STATE CERTIFICATION                         34      (a)

VII.  OMB CIRCULAR A-95 CERTIFICATION             36      (b)


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

     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.

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 ...

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

Objectives of the Planning Process

The following objectives have been adopted by the COG:

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

         •  Achievement of these standards.

         •  Environmentally sound development of the plan-
            ning area.

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

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

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

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

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

                                                 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

                 • 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

 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
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
   I. Sanitary JandfiII
   2. Anti-littering  ord
   3. Construction  permi

F. Specification  of the
   out the plan.   For ex
nstitutional  arrangements  to  carry
   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.

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

                  •  Pollution  resulting  from  the  numerous landfills.
                  i  Thermal  pollution,  present and future, as
         need for electric power continues  to  increase.
         •   Institutional and management complications due
to many  municipalities,  authorities, water purveyors,  and
inadequate  legislation.

         *   Flood  control plans and water supply plans have
gone 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
         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.

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.

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

            (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.


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
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-

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)

         Jones River Basin Study

         NPDES Permit Studies

         Coastal Zone Management Study

         Water Quality Monitoring

         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

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.
                                                     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...

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

FROM:     State Water Control  Board

SUBJECT:  Areawide 208 Planning Participation

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

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

          •  Classify stream segments.

          •  Assemble existing water quality  data and note
             applicable standards.

          •  Assemble existing inventory of discharges.

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

          •  Disaggregate basin data by segments.

          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

          •   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.


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

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.

         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.

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.

          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

          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.


Detailed Schedule
         The COG has  developed a  detailed  CPM  network  for day-
to-day management of  the program.   The  following block diagram
represents the major  work elements  under which there  are many
hundreds of tasks.   The detailed  CPM network  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


[ — ^
DUU -p.

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 '
C. Prepare- j
analytic >
\_ 	 	 	 	 	 ^ j

PtANEV/UilATTnN - niflKnrifTr-iiflu, nrr. n^-tnii
i UAH UH^LUAIIUIM - --.- _ - .... - - i LMn KL V i t W nN U MLKJr i J UN 	 —

j- BY COG -]



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


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 Task

Periodic Milestones

I. Program Initiation
A. Establish the Water Quality
Task Force
B. Establish program management
and recruit staff
C. Prepare consultants work scope
II. Development of Data & Analytical
A. Establish basis and methods of
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
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

















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.


 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

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.

Resource  Budget
                         PROPOSED BUDGET BY WORK ELEMENT
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

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



  * A separate handbook  is  being prepared  for financial  planning
    and  cost  analysis.

               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-

         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.

Disbursements  and Milestones

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

                    I. A.B.C,









   V. C
  VI. B



  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.
    /    2    3    *   S


         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.

                                              - 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.


         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.

                                                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.

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

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

State Certification

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

Dear Sir:

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

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

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

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

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

                                    Si ncerely yours ,
                                    R.  Smith,  Director
                                    Environmental  Control
                                    State  of Delaware
                                    Dover,  Delaware

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

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

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

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

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

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

QBM Circular A-95 Requirements

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

FROM:       Harbor Area Council of Governments

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

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

Planning Director
Administrative Assistant
Hydrologi st

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

MONDAY, MAY 13, 1974
Volume 39 • Number 93

    Interim Grant Regulations

    Title 40—Protection of Environment
 Subpart F—Grants to Designated Areawide
   Waste Treatment Management Planning
   Agencies;  Grant Applications; Grants;
   Plan Content and Approval
   The following regulations are promul-
 gated  as interim regulations by the En-
 vironmental  Protection  Agency.  These
 regulations set forth the procedures for
 providing grants to approved designated
 planning  agency (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
  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
  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
  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
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-
 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
 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
 36.1059-3  Federal retention of grant funds.
 36.1060    Reports.
35.1061    Suspension  and termination  of
 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
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
 35.1066    Designation of management agen-
 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-
 35.1068    Disputes.
 35.1070    Annual  update of  plan  [Re-
            served ].
 35.1080    Grants  for update of plan [Re-

  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
 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-
  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
   (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
  (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
  (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
  (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
  (4) Description of any necessary action
 in the planning to be taken by agencies
 other than the applicant and procedures
 to be used in coordination of such ac-
 tivities. (Documentation of the  accept-
 ance by the affected responsible  agency
 of such required  work or action  shall be
 included  and presented with the work
   (5) Detailed schedule showing required
 interrelationships of work to be accom-
 plished and anticipated  dates  of  com-
 pletion ;
   (6) Detailed cost and resource budget,
 including work to be done under contract
 or by interagency agreement;
   (7)  Proposed  disbursement  schedule
 with specific progress milestones related
 to disbursements;
   (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
  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).

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
  (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

  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

  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

§ 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
   (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-
   (d) All costs related to sewage collec-
tion systems at less than the trunk line
   (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
   (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
§ 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
§ 35.1065  Authority of  States for non-
    point source planning in designated
  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
§ 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
  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
§ 35.1067-4   Review  and  approval  of
    waste treatment management agen-
  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;
  (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-
§ 35.1080  Grants for Update of Plan.
  (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