United State*
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
Washington. DC 20460
906R90103
Much 1990
A Primer on the Office of
Water Enforcement and
Permits and Its Programs
. :;.. .... .
t » t » * . «
* *
' v->\ M
\
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
The cover illustration was provided courtesy of Marlon LeCount
of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC),
McLean, Virginia.
-------
906R90103
A Primer on the
Office of Water Enforcement and Permits
and Its Programs
Prepared by:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water Enforcement and Permits (EN-335)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
March 1990
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
NOTE TO THE READER
In the 20 years since the creation of EPA our Nation has made significant progress in restoring
and maintaining water quality. In the early 1970s the Nation recognized the impact of conventional
pollutants on surface waters and developed programs for their control. EPA and the States have
established and implemented a major program of permitting municipal and industrial dischargers and
undertaking subsequent enforcement actions where necessary. This program to restore and maintain
our surface waters is working. State and Federal data indicate that our efforts have made significant
headway, and many rivers that were once heavily degraded by municipal and industrial discharges now
are safe for fishing and swimming. Our water quality programs are now striving to maintain the
progress to date while moving forward to meet new challenges, such as combined sewer overflow
problems and toxic pollutants, especially those that bioaccumulate and persist in the environment.
The Office of Water Enforcement and Permits (OWEP) at EPA is responsible for administering
the programs aimed at reducing and eliminating pollution to the Nation's waters from point sources.
We are accomplishing this through implementation of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit, pretreatment and sludge programs, and aggressive enforcement of these
programs' requirements. The States have joined with the Federal government to implement these
control programs.
This Primer explains in a straight-forward manner the problems we are dealing with and the
programs for which OWEP is responsible as we work to achieve the goals of the Clean Water Act.
While we have made significant gains in our water quality situation, today's problems are fundamentally
different than the problems confronting us 20 years ago. Therefore, our program is evolving to meet
these new demands for science, technical assistance, and training needed to prevent and control the
more complex pollution problems we must address today.
I hope this document arouses your interest, answers your questions, and encourages you to get
involved in our common goal of cleaner water.
James R. Elder, Director
Office of Water Enforcement and Permits
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1-1
OVERVIEW OF THE WATER POLLUTION PROBLEM 1-1
ORGANIZATION OF THE PRIMER 1-4
2. OFFICE OF WATER ENFORCEMENT AND PERMITS ORGANIZATION 2-1
3. THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM 3-1
INTRODUCTION TO THE NPDES PERMIT PROGRAM . 3-1
CONTENTS OF NPDES PERMITS 3-7
CURRENT PERMITTING PRIORITIES . 3-11
THE PERMIT ISSUANCE PROCESS 3-13
PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 3-13
PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 3-14
4. NATIONAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM 4-1
OVERVIEW 4-1
HISTORY OF THE PROGRAM 4-1
GOALS OF THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM 4-3
RESPONSIBILITIES OF POTWs, STATES, AND EPA 4-3
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS 4-5
PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 4-5
5. SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 5-1
OVERVIEW 5-1
INTERIM PROGRAM 5-2
LONG-TERM PROGRAM 5-2
6. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM 6-1
OVERVIEW OF EPA'S WATER ENFORCEMENT PROCESS 6-1
ADMINISTRATION OF THE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM 6-3
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS USED IN THIS MANUAL
APPENDIX B - CITATIONS TO NPDES, PRETREATMENT, AND SLUDGE REGULATIONS
-------
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Tables Page
3-1 CHRONOLOGY OF THE NPDES PROGRAM 3-2
3-2 TYPES OF REGULATED POLLUTANTS 3-6
3-3 SUMMARY OF TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS 3-8
4-1 ORGANIZATION OF THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF
RESPONSIBILITIES 4-4
Figures
1-1 SOURCES OF WATER POLLUTION 1-2
2-1 OFFICE OF WATER ORGANIZATION 2-2
2-2 OWEP ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE 2-3
2-3 OWEP DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIES 2-4
3-1 STATUS OF STATE AND NPDES PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
DELEGATION 3-15
4-1 PROBLEMS THAT MAY OCCUR WHEN INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATERS ARE
DISCHARGED INTO MUNICIPAL SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEMS 4-2
6-1 NPDES COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS 6-5
6-2 CATEGORIES OF DATA STORED IN PCS 6-7
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
OVERVIEW OF THE WATER POLLUTION PROBLEM
Pollutants in our water can impair or destroy aquatic life, threaten human health, and ruin recreational
opportunities and aesthetic potential. Fishing bans, beach closings, restrictions on shellfish beds, and
algae-coated lakes and rivers are only the most obvious symptoms of water pollution.
The job of cleaning and protecting the nation's surface waters is a complex one because of the variety
of sources of pollution. In general, pollution is caused by one of three sources: municipal point source dis-
charges, industrial point source discharges, and nonpoint source discharges. A body of water may be affected
by one of these sources, or more often, by a combination of the three. This is illustrated in Figure 1-1.
Municipal Point Sources
Municipal wastewater consists primarily of domestic wastes from households and industrial wastes from
manufacturing and commercial activities. This wastewater is collected in sanitary sewers and is usually
treated at a municipal wastewater treatment plant, and is then discharged by the treatment plant into a river,
stream, or ocean. The discharge by the municipal treatment plant is known as a point source discharge.
Under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program, each point source is
required to obtain a permit which specifies monitoring and reporting provisions and establishes limits on the
pollutants that are discharged by the source.
Wastewater entering the treatment plant may be contaminated by organic pollutants, metals, nutrients,
sediment, bacteria, and viruses. Toxic substances used hi the home, including motor oil, paint, household
cleaners, and pesticides, also make then* way into sewers. Storm water from downspouts, streets, and parking
lots generally is discharged directly to surface waters. In some instances, the storm water enters the
municipal system through street sewers and may carry with it residues, toxic chemicals, and sediments.
Industrial wastes entering municipal wastewater treatment plants and sludge generated by the treatment
of such wastes are regulated under the Clean Water Act by the pretreatment and sludge programs. Under
the pretreatment program, industrial dischargers into municipal sewage treatment plants must "pretreat" their
wastes to the extent required to prevent interference with the operation of the municipal plant or pass
through of pollutants from the plant into receiving waters. Actual limits on the amount of industrial
pollutants discharged into municipal treatment plants are set by both the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and by municipal authorities.
Sludge, the residue left from municipal wastewater treatment, may also cause pollution problems if
improperly managed. Since 1972, the volume of the domestic, commercial, and municipal sludge has
doubled, and quantities are expected to double again by the year 2000. The toxic properties of sewage sludge
1-1
-------
§
M
H
-
2
tf
a
Ct,
O
U
O
C/3
H
1-2
-------
depend largely upon the extent of the domestic, commercial, and industrial wastes entering a municipal
treatment plant. Some sludges are relatively free from toxic substances and can be used for beneficial
purposes such as soil conditioners. Other sludges may contain toxic pollutants and pathogens which present
disposal difficulties because of high costs and limited disposal options.
Municipal sewage sludge use and disposal is also regulated under the Clean Water Act by the sludge
program. Under the program, sewage sludge must be disposed of in a manner which protects human health
and the environment.
Industrial Point Sources
The use of water in industrial processes, such as the manufacturing of steel or chemicals, produces
billions of gallons of wastewater daily. Some industrial pollutants are similar to those in municipal sewage
but often are more concentrated. Others are more exotic and include a great variety of heavy metals and
synthetic organic substances. In sufficient dosages, these pollutants may present serious hazards to human
health and aquatic organisms. While as many as 100,000 significant industrial facilities discharge to municipal
treatment plants, over 50,000 discharge their wastewaters directly to a waterbody.
Similar to municipal sources, industrial point sources discharging pollutants directly into a receiving
stream are also governed under the Clean Water Act by the NPDES program.
For a number of industries, the discharge limits are established by EPA and are known as "effluent
limitations guidelines." Permit limits are designed to implement a two-pronged control strategy outlined in
the Clean Water Act. First, limits are developed (either on a case-by-case basis or in National effluent
guidelines) on the basis of available technology. Generally speaking, the Clean Water Act provides that, at a
minimum, point sources must meet limits that represent the greatest reductions economically achievable with
available technology. For industries not currently covered by such National guidelines, such limits are set on
a case-by-case basis by the permitting authority (either EPA or a State authorized to administer the NPDES
program).
In addition to so called "technology-based limits," permits may also include limits known as "water
quality-based limits." These limits are established to achieve or maintain State-designated water quality
standards for a particular receiving stream.
Nonpoint Sources
Nonpoint sources of water pollution are multiple, diffuse sources of pollution, as opposed to a single
"point" source such as a discharge pipe from a factory. For example, rainwater washing over farmlands and
carrying top soil and chemical fertilizer residues into nearby streams is a major nonpoint source of water
pollution. Primary nonpoint sources of pollution also include water runoff from urban areas, mining,
1-3
-------
heavy metals, and other toxic substances, as well as bacteria, viruses, and oxygen-demanding compounds.
Nonpoint sources now comprise the largest source of uncontrolled water pollution. These nonpoint sources
are generally regulated by EPA's Office of Water Regulations and Standards (OWRS). Although frequently
grouped with nonpoint sources, storm water from municipal separate storm water sewers and storm water
associated with industrial point sources are considered point source discharges under the Clean Water Act
and, thus, are addressed by the Office of Water Enforcement and Permits (OWEP) under the NPDES
program.
ORGANIZATION OF THE PRIMER
This Primer is designed to provide general information about OWEP and the programs it oversees and
enforces. Chapter 2 of the Primer describes OWEP's organization. Chapters 3, 4, and 5 provide a discussion
of the NPDES, Pretreatment, and Sludge Programs. Chapter 6 closes with a discussion of EPA's enforcement
process and strategies. Appendix A provides a glossary of acronyms used throughout this manual as well as
others relevant to the programs; and Appendix B provides citations to applicable regulations.
1-4
-------
2. OFFICE OF WATER ENFORCEMENT
AND PERMITS ORGANIZATION
OWEP is one of seven offices within EPA's Office of Water. Figure 2-1 shows the Office of Water's
organization. OWEP consists of two divisions ~ Permits and Enforcement with branches and sections
further subdividing the Office's responsibilities. Figure 2-2 shows OWEP's organizational structure.
The Office's activities can be broadly grouped into five areas:
Implementation of existing water pollution control programs, including strong oversight and quality
assurance/quality control measures
Development of new programs under the 1987 Water Quality Act
Improved control of toxic pollutants by expanding the use of existing control strategies and
developing new initiatives to reduce whole-effluent toxicity
Enforcement of both new and existing programs .
Integration of water programs with other agency activities, such as air pollution and hazardous
wastes.
Figure 2-3 shows the program activities handled by the Permits and Enforcement Divisions. Due in
part to the Water Quality Act of 1987, OWEP's mission in administering water pollution control programs
under the Clean Water Act has increased substantially. Currently, the range of programs directed by the
Office include both older, established programs such as the NPDES program, and newer, emerging
components of the NPDES program designed to strengthen controls in such areas as sewage sludge
management and storm water discharges. In carrying out its mission under the Clean Water Act, OWEP
must maintain and improve traditional programs while meeting the demands of new program development.
2-1
-------
ASSISTANT
ADMINISTRATOR FOR WATER
Office of Water
Enforcement and Permits
Office of Water
Regulations and Standards
Office of Municipal
Pollution Control
Office of
Drinking Water
Office of Marine and
Estuarine Protection
Office of Ground
Water Protection
Office of Wetlands
Protection
FIGURE 2-1. OFFICE OF WATER ORGANIZATION
2-2
-------
ss
w
Policy
Development
Pretreatment/
1 RCRA
Compliance
8*8
C J .«
'a g s
ill
^* -^^ ^ t
u
c«
§
E 2
2 g
I 1
S -Q,
M
tw
«£
E
2
|
N
i <
g
a.
I
O
I
2-3
-------
z
2
23
Q
Ed
u
as
Ed
Cfi
H
Z
2
©
z
Z
2
Q
O
)<
fe
2-4
-------
3. THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
INTRODUCTION TO THE NPDES PERMIT PROGRAM
The NPDES permit program is one of the centerpieces of the Clean Water Act's water pollution
programs. A chronology of the program's development is set out in Table 3-1. According to the Act, all
discrete sources of wastewater (known as "point sources") must obtain a permit which regulates the facility's
discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States. NPDES permits can be issued to individual
dischargers (individual NPDES permits) or to a group of similarly-situated dischargers subject to the same
terms and conditions (general NPDES permits). The Act's approach to control and eliminate water pollution
is focused on the pollutants determined to be harmful to receiving waters and on the sources of such
pollutants. Regulated pollutants are conventional pollutants, such as suspended solids; nonconventional
pollutants, such as ammonia; and toxic pollutants, such as individual heavy metals and toxic organic
compounds as well as groups of pollutants to regulate effluent toxicity. Table 3-2 briefly describes these
three types of pollutants.
Definition of Point Source
Over 64,000 point sources are regulated by individual NPDES permits. Any source discharging
wastewater into waters of the United States through a discrete conveyance, such as a pipe, or a system of
conveyances, is a point source. In addition, EPA regulations designate several classes of sources as point
sources for NPDES purposes even though they may not have a discrete discharge.1
Point sources are generally divided into two types: "industrial" and "municipal." There are
approximately 49,000 industrial sources which include commercial and manufacturing facilities. Municipal
sources, also known as Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs), number about 15,000. Wastewater from
municipal sources results from domestic wastewater discharged to POTWs as well as the "indirect" discharge
of industrial wastes to sewers.
For purposes of prioritizing permit issuance and oversight, industrial and municipal sources are further
divided into "major" and "minor" sources. Major municipal facilities are those which have a design or actual
flow of one Million Gallons Per Day (MGD) or greater, a service population of 10,000 or greater, or a
significant impact on water quality (i.e., with a potential for toxic discharge; located close to a drinking water
intake; discharging into stressed receiving waters; or requiring advanced waste treatment). Municipal
facilities that do not meet the above criteria are categorized as minors. There are approximately 3,800 major
and 11,200 minor municipal permits. Industrial facilities are classified as "majors" through a rating system
which allocates points in various categories, such as flow, pollutant loadings, potential public health impacts,
sources include: (1) animal feedlots; (2) fish farms and other aquatic animal production facilities;
and (3) aquacultural operations.
3-1
-------
Q
4)
O
O
"5
C§
u
6
M -0
^J ^
fib C
8 2
CM QJ
£ «
* OS
en
W c
o s
S 'c
Z a
M S
g
fa
O
TABLE 3-1. CHRONOLOGY
Statute
2
^v
cj o
ederal Water Pollution Control Act (FWP
fater Quality Act (Amending FWPCA)
State water quality standards approach I
control of water pollution.
WPCA Amendments of 1972
b > UL,
IS"
3
Establishes NPDES permit program to
control direct discharge of pollutants inl
water.
£
8
ca
60
3
I
a.
1
**
1
oo
3
HI
t2
Q
Ok
Z
+*
Technology-based treatment established
minimum level of control to be
supplemented where necessary to protec
water quality.
3
i^
e
u
S f^
4> r^l
'3 «
P -s
s "8
2 S
2 &
i; °"
Q- «
U 2
*rf C
CQ B
" 1
a w
cd u.
&o o
« «
'= -
g v
1 2
V "->
ftn tt*
lean Water Act Amendments
U
^
^
Q
^
Emphasizes control of toxic pollutants.
S2
0
~o
G
2
g
"S
.S
"8
1
e
0
T3
CQ
h
fli
1
ft.
_C
"o
VI
2 I
S $
Indicates that Federal facilities are subj<
State regulation.
rograms are discussed in their respective s
. 0.
00
o
_3
"S3
o
c
a
e
u
E
1
J?
3-2
-------
S PROGRAM1 (Continued)
w
Q
cu
2
U
g
fa
0
5
s
o
£j
o
tf
5=
U
a
gnificant Regulatory and Other Develoomen
18
« CK
^Z
I c
0.2
.S -22 gv
JG W »
I-2
* 2 ,j
^'sc
^^-u
- 19,
gia
UJ oo co
.
&
OH
oposed Consolidated Permit Regulations (C
ft.
c & "
O 4) "Q
11= ^
Attempt to standardize procedures and reg
for NPDES, Resource Conservation and Ri
Act (RCRA), Underground Injection Conti
(UIC) Program, Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) (air quality), and 404
and fill) programs.
.
NPDES regulations essentially unchanged.
.
1
e3
_00
inal Consolidated Permit Regulations Promu
Pu
a.
s
2
EPA sued by industry and environmental g
(joined with June 1979 suit).
.
his chronology.
ncluded
er and no
te P
o
u
8
00
o
4-1
I
O| oo
3 S
C
o
CO
u
i
I
Q-
3-3
-------
?
9
tz
^rf
1
i 1
5
^5
^c
f^>
s
aj
ON
2
Q
ft.
z
u
B
c
u
c
Q
_o
"w
u
J=
6
o
e
«J
S
2
03
"a
Oj
w
o;
*!
a
(C
1
t/5
3
w
O
o
o
9
-------
"8
i
1
«^
3
O
1
en
Ed
Q
U
e
b
0
>-
o
s
0
z
o
06
n
u
^H
fO
U
J
§
H
8
^
§
&
j=
o
o
n
&
o
«
1
'i
*rf
1
1C
g
35
s>
3
S
S
0-
S
o
.B
5
3>
£
e
i
u
S
3
1 NPDES
S
E
2
9
3
CO
Jw
s
i
8.
3
o
l>
ironmental
?
e
4)
g
a if
fc-g5
i &
gi
~ u
»
I
3
!
anagement
gely through
t!
.2
Z3
n NPDES 1
o
1
is
«
ft«
S
1
e
a
u
os
>'
g
OS
2
if
« ^
ei) g
Q
s
i
S's
OS S
»"H
5 "
2 >»
-d
|X
I-
j -^
«
NPDES Li
.S
e
o
'e
'S.
CQ
£
«j
1
C
a
s, includini
£
.3
w
S
o
<:
a.
W
<2
00
£
£>
*n
a
2
u
-------
TABLE 3-2. TYPES OF REGULATED POLLUTANTS
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS. Conventional pollutants are contained in the sanitary wastes of
households, commercial establishments, and industries. These wastes include human wastes, sand,
leaves, trash, ground-up food from sink disposals, and laundry and bath waters. Five specific pollutants
are considered "conventional pollutants":
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) - This parameter measures the quantity of oxygen used
in aerobic oxidation of the organic matter in a sample of wastewater.
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) - This parameter is a measure of the concentration of solid
particles suspended in wastewater.
Fecal Coliform - The bacteriological quality of water is based on testing for nonpathogenic
indicator organisms, principally the coliform group. Fecal coliform bacteria are used as a
measure of health risk since they are more easily detected than pathogens. Fecal coliform
bacteria are found in the digestive tracts of humans and animals. Their presence in water
indicates the potential presence of pathogenic organisms.
* pH - pH is a measure of acidity or alkalinity. pH is measured on a scale of 1 to 14; 1 being
extremely acidic, 7 neutral, and 14 extremely alkaline. Most healthy surface waters have a
nearly neutral pH; i.e., they are neither strongly acidic nor alkaline.
Oil and Grease - This parameter is a measure of the concentration of a variety of organic
substances including hydrocarbons, fats, oils, waxes, and high-molecular fatty acids. These
pollutants degrade receiving water quality when present in excessive amounts. They are also
a concern to municipal and industrial waste treatment because they reduce the biological
treatability of the waste and produce sludge solids that are difficult to process.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS. Toxic pollutants represent a list of 126 pollutants that are particularly
harmful to one or more forms of animal or plant life. They are primarily grouped into organics and
metals.
^y Pollutants - These pollutants include pesticides, solvents, Polychlorinated Biphynols
(PCBs), and dioxins.
Metals - The metals of concern include lead, silver, mercury, copper, chromium, zinc, nickel,
and
NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS. Nonconventional pollutants are any additional substances
that are not in the groupings "conventional" or "toxic" that may require regulation. These include
nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus.
3-6
-------
and water quality factors. There are approximately 3,400 major and 45,600 minor industrial permits. In
total, there are approximately 7,200 major and 56,800 minor industrial and municipal sources.
CONTENTS OF NPDES PERMITS
Permits for both industrial and municipal sources contain the following terms and conditions:
Standard conditions common to all permits
Site-specific discharge or "effluenflimits
Standard and site-specific compliance monitoring and reporting requirements
Other site-specific conditions that EPA may deem necessary to adequately control the discharge.
Each of these elements is briefly discussed below.
Standard Conditions in All Permits
EPA regulations require standard or "boilerplate"conditions to be included in every NPDES permit.
These conditions are set out in the NPDES regulations [40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 122].
There are several reasons for placing these conditions in permits. First, the standard conditions describe the
legal effect of the permit and its revocability. These conditions also explain the affirmative defenses which
may be available to a noncompliant permittee.
Second, the conditions describe the permittee's duties and obligations during the effective period of the
permit. For example, the conditions require the permittee to report changed conditions at the facility,
mitigate noncompliance, allow compliance inspections, and reapply for a permit renewal. Finally, the
conditions put the permittee on notice of penalties which may be assessed if the permit is violated.
Effluent Limits
Each effluent limit imposed on a NPDES permittee is established using technology-based or water
quality-based standard methodology. Generally, technology-based limits define a floor or minimum level of
control and are imposed at the point of discharge or "end-of-the-pipe,"whereas water quality standards
define ambient water quality targets and usually are applied after the wastewater has mixed with the receiving
stream. The levels of technology to be applied through effluent guidelines for direct dischargers are
summarized in Table 3-3.
Technology-Based Limits for Industrial Sources
There are two ways to establish technology-based effluent limitations for industrial sources: 1) National
effluent limitation guidelines; and 2) the permit writer's Best Professional Judgment (BPJ). Effluent
limitation guidelines are developed by the Industrial Technology Division (ITD) of OWRS and appear in 40
3-7
-------
Q/&I21/OWEPTBL33
TABLE 3-3. SUMMARY OF TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS
Best Practicable Control Technology (BPT) was required to be installed by all industries by July 1,
1W7. In determining BPT, EPA considered:
the total cost of application of technology in relation to the effluent reduction,
benefits to be achieved..., the age of the equipment and facilities involved, the
process employed, the engineering aspects of...various types of control techniques,
process changes, non-water quality environmental impact and such other factors as
deem[ed] appropriate.
Best Conventional Pollutn
'T'?*
-------
CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N. These uniform National standards are developed on an industry-by-industry
basis and are generally expressed as maximum daily and monthly mass loading or concentration limits.
When promulgating these regulations, EPA first surveys the target industry for information on its
typical wastewater characteristics and model technologies used to treat the discharge. EPA then determines
the best economically achievable technology for toxic and nonconventional pollutant treatment available to
that industry.2 A guideline indicating the best treatment for conventional pollutants is also established.
These initial Agency conclusions undergo public notice and comment through the rulemaking process before
becoming final requirements. OWRS is studying an additional dozen industries for future guideline
development. At this time, EPA has established Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
(BATEA) and Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT) guidelines for about 28 industrial
categories. EPA has also promulgated technology-based guidelines for approximately 15 additional secondary
industries which represent Best Practicable Control Technology (BPT) levels.
In the absence of effluent limitation guidelines, industrial permit writers establish technology-based
controls using BPJ. In essence, the permit writer undertakes a guideline-type analysis for a single facility. In
order for the permit writer's judgment to be defensible, it must be based on the best information reasonably
available at the time of permit issuance and adequately documented in the fact sheet or statement of basis.
Although BPJ methodology may be used to supplement an effluent guideline (e.g., where the regulation does
not address a particular pollutant of concern at the specific facility), it may not be used in lieu of the existing
guideline. Many tools are available to the permit writer to assist in the development of permit limits based
on BPJ. These tools include permit limits for similar facilities using similar treatment technology,
performance data from actual operating facilities [Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) data], and the
scientific literature. The permit writer should consider the same factors as those required for the
development of effluent limitations guidelines in developing permit limits based on BPJ (e.g., age and size of
facility and treatment employed).
Technology-Based Limits for Municipal Sources
All municipal sources must achieve an effluent quality at least as high as "secondary treatment." These
technology-based standards represent effluent quality expected from well-operated municipal treatment
plants. The secondary treatment regulations are set out in 40 CFR Part 133 and address conventional
pollutants [Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), Total Suspended Solids (TSS), pH, and oil and grease].
The limits may be expressed in maximum concentration limits for daily, 7-day, and 30-day periods as well as
an average percent removal (at least 85 percent removal of BOD and suspended solids).
2While permittees need not install the model technology identified by EPA, they must achieve the same
effluent quality.
3-9
-------
Water Quality-Based Limits for Municipal/Industrial Point Sources
In addition to the technology-based limits applicable to all sources, permittees must also comply with
limits derived from additional or more stringent State water quality standards. These pollutant-specific
standards are established pursuant to the Clean Water Act to achieve or maintain the beneficial uses of a
particular waterway as determined by the State. Therefore, they take precedence over generally less stringent
technology-based controls. Water quality standards do not usually apply at the end-of-the-discharge pipe.
Consequently, permit writers must first calculate available dilution and determine the proper mixing zone (if
allowed by the State) in order to develop an effluent limit. For more information on water quality-based
toxic controls, see The Permit Writer's Guide to W^fer Qyalitv-Based Permjtt'ng fnr Toxic Pollutants (July
1987), and thf. Teyh"«ya| %p,port Pocw^ent for Water Quality-Based Toxics Control (September 1985).
EPA and States have been concerned that traditional pollutant-specific regulatory approaches control
only a limited number of substances. This is due, in part, to the prohibitive costs of monitoring for hundreds
of pollutants. Therefore, many water quality standards also address the overall toxicity of wastewater
discharges. Typically, this is done through a prohibition of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts. This prohibition
is inserted in NPDES permits as a narrative prohibition and/or a numeric limit which corresponds to the
precise level of acceptable whole-effluent toxicity. Permit limits to control whole-effluent toxicity (i.e., toxicity
testing using live organisms) are required of all sources known or suspected of exhibiting whole-effluent
toxicity.
Compliance Monitoring and Reporting Requirements
To a large extent, NPDES permittees police themselves. Permits instruct each permittee on the
frequency for collecting wastewater samples, the location for sample collection, the pollutants to be analyzed,
and the laboratory procedures to be used in conducting the analysis. Detailed records of these
"self-monitoring" activities must be retained by the permittee for at least 3 years. Furthermore, each
permittee is required to submit, on a periodic basis, the results of these analyses in a DMR.3
Other Conditions in NPDES Permits
Other site-specific conditions and requirements may be imposed on both industrial and municipal
sources through their NPDES permits. These additional conditions include:
Construction schedules
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Additional monitoring for nonregulated pollutants of concern
Spill prevention plans
Compliance schedules for pretreatment program development or implementation.
A
For most facilities, this reporting requirement is monthly or quarterly but in no case less than once per year.
3-10
-------
CURRENT PERMITTING PRIORITIES
At the time of this writing, there are a number of activities being pursued which will strengthen the
effectiveness of the NPDES program. These priorities include the following:
Toxicity elimination
Storm water permitting
Combined sewer overflow permitting
Sewage sludge use and disposal permitting
Secondary industries permitting.
These activities are described briefly in the sections below.
Toxicity Elimination
Section 304(1) of the 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act required all States to submit a list of
waterways which have not achieved compliance with water quality standards due to the continued presence of
toxic discharges. Following submission of this list, States are to develop and implement a toxicity control
plan (called "individual control strategies") to eliminate these toxic discharges by no later than 1992. EPA
will review, approve, and oversee these State plans. In States unable to develop an approvable plan, EPA
will implement such a plan on the State's behalf. EPA revised the NPDES regulations to clarify its surface
water toxics control program. These rules also serve as the basis for implementation of Section 304(1)
requirements described above (see 54 Fed. Reg. 1300, June 12, 1989).
Storm Water Permitting
"Storm water" is the term used to represent large volumes of water that can result from rain, snow
melt, surface runoff, street washing, and other drainage. For over a decade, EPA has attempted to develop a
workable program to control storm water discharges. Due to the large number of storm water discharge
sources, the diffuse nature of urban runoff, difficulties in controlling and treating storm water pollutants,
resource constraints, and numerous legal challenges and court decisions have frustrated previous regulatory
initiatives by EPA. Under the requirements of the 1987 Water Quality Act, the following storm water
discharges will require NPDES permits:
Discharges associated with industrial activity
Discharges from separate sewers serving populations greater than 250,000 persons ("large" municipal
discharges)
Discharges from separate sewers serving populations of between 100,000 and 250,000 persons
("medium" municipal discharges)
Discharges contributing to violations of water quality standards or constituting significant
contributors of pollutants to United States waters.
3-11
-------
Combined Sewer Overflow Permitting
Combined sewers are those which collect both storm water and domestic sewage. During periods of
prolonged rainfall, combined sewers frequently convey more wastewater than the treatment plant can
accommodate. To prevent a hydraulic overload at the treatment plant, many combined sewers have relief
outlets which discharge untreated wastes during peak flows. These point sources are known as Combined
Sewer Overflows (CSOs).
CSOs have historically not been a high priority for permit writers. However, recent studies indicate
that in many cities, CSOs are a major contributor to water quality degradation. Therefore, EPA has
developed a National Combined Sewer Overflow Control Strategy and guidance document. The strategy
emphasizes that CSOs which are discharging without a permit are unlawful and must be issued permits or
eliminated.
The objectives of the strategy are threefold:
- To ensure that if CSO discharges occur, they are only as a result of wet weather
- To bring all wet weather CSO discharge points into compliance with the technology-based
requirements of the CWA and applicable State water quality standards
- To minimize water quality, aquatic biota, and human health impacts from wet weather overflows.
Additionally, the strategy requires each NPDES-approved State with CSOs to develop a state-wide CSO
strategy for managing its CSOs. The state-wide strategy consists of three parts:
An inventory of all CSO points in the State
The current permit status of each CSO point
A list of the State's CSO priorities for permitting unpermitted or inadequately permitted CSOs.
The strategy addresses six technology-based requirements for CSOs as well as several additional control
measures that will be implemented through the use of technology-based and water quality-based permits
issued for specific or multiple (i.e., system-wide or jurisdiction-wide) CSOs. The minimum technology-based
requirements are:
Proper operation and regular maintenance programs for the sewer system and CSO points
Maximum use of the collection system for storage
* Review/modification of pretreatment programs to assure that CSO impacts are minimized
Maximize flows to POTW for subsequent storage
Prohibition of dry weather overflows
Control of solids/floatables in discharges.
3-12
-------
Sewage Sludge Use and Disposal Permitting
The management of sewage sludge is controlled by conditions in NPDES permits. Permits for
treatment works generating sewage sludge contain pollutant limitations, management practices, and
self-monitoring and reporting requirements. For more information on this activity, see Chapter 5.
Secondary Industries Permitting
Like storm water and CSOs, many secondary or minor industries have been a low priority. However,
as the primary industries (i.e., those for which effluent limitation guidelines have been developed) achieve
compliance with NPDES requirements, minor industries will remain a significant cause of water pollution.
OWEP adopted a permitting strategy for minor industrial sources in January 1986. To complement this
strategy, model permits have been developed to assist permit writers with the BPJ process of establishing
limitations for these sources.
THE PERMIT ISSUANCE PROCESS
The first step in permit issuance is taken by the owner or operator of a point source when he/she files
a permit application form. This form is reviewed by the permit writer who then prepares a draft permit.
Once the draft is ready, it is sent to the applicant and published in a manner which notifies the general public
of the proposed permitting activity. The permit writer then accepts comments on the draft permit from all
interested persons. A response is prepared for all significant comments and then the permit is issued in its
final form. Any person who has participated in the process has a right to appeal or challenge the permit's
conditions as too lenient or too stringent.
PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
EPA is responsible for implementing and enforcing the NPDES program. However, States may
perform these functions in lieu of EPA thereby shifting EPA's role to one of oversight in that jurisdiction.
Where EPA is the "Permitting Authority," OWEP is responsible for the overall development and
implementation of the NPDES program. The Permits Division of OWEP conducts program development
and implementation activities such as provision of technical assistance to permit writers, development of
budget guidance and program strategies, and oversight of EPA Regional and State programs. The
Enforcement Division conducts NPDES compliance activities which include development of technical
guidance on facility inspections, management and review of compliance data, and oversight of EPA Regional
and State enforcement activities. The EPA Regional Offices undertake day-to-day permitting and enforce-
ment activities and act as principal liaisons with approved NPDES States.
4If warranted, a public hearing may also be held to take additional verbal or written comments on the permit.
3-13
-------
Any State, U.S. Territory, or recognized Indian Tribe may apply to administer its own NPDES
program. To obtain approval, the State must submit an application explaining the State program and its legal
authority. Upon approval, a memorandum of agreement defining program roles and responsibilities is
executed by the appropriate Regional Administrator and the State Program Director. Currently, 39 out of 57
States and Territories have received NPDES program approval from EPA (see Figure 3-1).
The Strategic Planning and Management System (SPMS), under which States and Regions annually
commit to particular program goals, reflects the status of certain program activities. SPMS includes
information such as number of permits to be issued and number of permit appeals to resolve. As part of
EPA Headquarters' oversight activities, OWEP then evaluates whether States and Regions are meeting their
SPMS commitments by tracking numbers of permits issued and number of permit appeals resolved, auditing
programs, and performing Permit Quality Reviews (PQRs).
PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Substantial efforts in NPDES program development and implementation have produced significant
improvements in the quality of United States waters. Current estimates indicate that the NPDES program
has succeeded in meeting the fishable/swimmable water quality objectives of the Clean Water Act in 70 to
75 percent of all United States waters. Over 47,000 stream miles and 390,000 lake acres have shown
significant improvement in water quality over the pollutant loadings measured in 1972.
3-14
-------
93
U
* «
< 13
£S
r~ i * i
2 2
1 1 H 5
3
V, 1
>J
* V
1
r
< -c
w S
3 a
J 05
^ c
Q §
S ^
< >>
L I cs g
1 « £
3
QI
O H
S i
g»^ w
2 »o
a 8
3 Q,
sa
J < 5
1
s
/^
EC] 5-
ai 2
Si
as 2
a, S,
is
< ^
c« -f
Ed 2
gl
Z 'E
>V
f\ §
\v
o
w a
£-« TS w'
^ ra
Cfl 2i p*
§^§
w
-------
4. NATIONAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
OVERVIEW
Industrial plants are only one of many sources of wastewater discharged into municipal sewers.
However, the wastewater discharged by industry often contains a variety of toxic or otherwise harmful
substances at concentrations not common to domestic sources of wastewater. These pollutants include
metals and cyanide from electroplating and metal finishing shops, organic wastes from the manufacture of
pesticides and chemicals, and lead from the manufacture of batteries. These wastes can pose serious hazards
to the municipal sewer system and treatment plant (Figure 4-1). Most sewage collection and treatment
systems have not been designed to treat industrial wastes. As a result, these wastes can damage the
collection system; interfere with the operation of treatment plants; pass through the systems untreated,
resulting in contamination of nearby water bodies; threaten worker health and safety, and could increase the
cost and environmental risks of sludge treatment and disposal.
The undesirable effects resulting from the discharge of industrial wastewater into municipal sewers can
be prevented. Industrial plants, using proven pollution control technologies and practices that promote reuse
and recycling of material, can remove or eliminate pollutants from their wastewaters before discharging them
into the municipal sewage treatment system. This practice is known as "pretreatment."
Currently, industries are pretreating its wastewater in many communities. The National Pretreatment
Program, a cooperative effort of Federal, State, and local officials, is implementing this practice on a
nationwide basis. By reducing the level of pollutants discharged by industry into municipal sewage systems,
the program ensures that industrial development vital to the economic well-being of a community will be
compatible with a healthy environment.
HISTORY OF THE PROGRAM
In 1972, Congress enacted Section 307 of the Clean Water Act which required EPA to promulgate
pretreatment standards for pollutants not susceptible to treatment by POTWs. As a response to this
statutory requirement, EPA promulgated 40 CFR Part 128 (at the end of 1973). While these regulations
contained general prohibitions against interference with treatment plant operation and pass through of
pollutants to receiving waters, they were not specific about pollutants of concern or potential problem
industries. In 1977, as Congress amended the Clean Water Act, two particular issues concerning
pretreatment surfaced: 1) an emphasis on control of pollutants through National technology-based
categorical standards; and 2) a determination that the local governmental agency (POTWs) would be
primarily responsible for enforcing these standards. On June 26, 1978, EPA promulgated the General
Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR Part 403). These regulations maintained the general and specific
prohibitions of Part 128, but in addition, required local program development, established the need for local
limits, and set out various other procedures and requirements. These regulations underwent revision on
4-1
-------
Exposure of Workers to
TOXIC Substances and
Hazardous Fumes
Limited or More
Exoensive Sludge
Disoosai Ootions
1 Corrosion of Collection
System or of the
Sewage Treatment Plant
Interference with
Piant Treatment
Svsterr
6 Pass-Through of
TOXIC Pollutants
into Surface Waters
FIGURE 4-1.
PROBLEMS THAT MAY OCCUR WHEN INDUSTRIAL
WASTEWATERS ARE DISCHARGED INTO MUNICIPAL SEWAGE
TREATMENT SYSTEMS. All These Problems Can Be
Controlled Through Pretreatment.
4-2
-------
January 28,1981 and most recently were updated on October 17,1988 [commonly referred to as the "PIRT
(Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force) revisions; see S3 Fed. Reg. 40562]. EPA also proposed
amendments on November 23, 1988 (53 Fed. Reg. 47632) that will strengthen controls on hazardous wastes
discharged to sanitary sewers.
GOALS OF THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
The General Pretreatment Regulations state three primary objectives of the pretreatment program:
Prevention of the introduction of pollutants into POTWs which will interfere with the operation of a
POTW, including interference with its use or with the disposal of municipal sludge
Prevention of the introduction of pollutants into POTWs which will pass through the treatment
works or otherwise be incompatible with such works
Improvement of opportunities to recycle and reclaim municipal and industrial wastewaters and
sludges.
These regulations establish the overall framework for the National Pretreatment Program. The regulations
provide for the application and enforcement of pretreatment standards and requirements upon industrial
users and they establish specific responsibilities for EPA, States, and POTWs. The roles and responsibilities
of each party is summarized in Table 4-1.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF POTWs, STATES, AND EPA
The General Pretreatment Regulations require any POTW with a design flow of more than five MGD,
and smaller POTWs receiving industrial discharges causing pass through or interference, to establish an
approved local pretreatment program. EPA has required 1,481 POTWs to develop local pretreatment
programs. As of September 30,1988, 1,429 of these programs had been approved. Each local program must
enforce all National pretreatment standards. The local POTW, which is termed the "Control Authority,"
must also enforce more stringent discharge requirements (i.e., local limits) to prevent disruption of the
sewage treatment system, adverse environmental impacts, or disruption of sludge use or disposal.
The pretreatment program is built, to a large extent, upon the framework of the NPDES program. The
POTWs NPDES permit typically includes a provision requiring the POTW to implement its approved
program. NPDES-approved States can also receive pretreatment program approval and then are expected to
exercise program oversight responsibilities as the "Approval Authorities." Figure 3-1 shows the 27 States that
have approved State pretreatment programs. Where States are approved for pretreatment, the EPA Regions
oversee the implementation of the State programs. Where a State has not been approved, EPA continues to
serve as the Approval Authority. In addition, NPDES States may elect to administer the program directly in
lieu of requiring a POTW to do so. Five States (i.e., Vermont, Connecticut, Alabama, Mississippi, and
Nebraska) have elected to administer State-wide programs in lieu of approved local programs in accordance
with 40 CFR 403.10(e). Oversight of POTW programs is accomplished through a number of mechanisms,
4-3
-------
TABLE 4-1. ORGANIZATION OF THE PRETREATMENT
PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF RESPONSIBILITIES
EPA Headquarters (1)
Oversee Program Implementation at All Levels
Develop and Modify Regulations for the Pretreatment Program
Develop Policies to Clarify and Further Define the Program
Develop Technical Guidance for Program Implementation and Training
Develop Enforcement Policy and Guidance.
EPA Regions (10)
Fulfill Approval Authority Responsibilities for States without Program Delegation
Oversee State Program Implementation
Initiate Enforcement Actions
Serve as Control Authorities for Industries in Unapproved States and Cities.
State Approval Authorities (27)
(NPDES States with Pretreatment Program Delegation)
Notify POTWs of Their Responsibilities
Review and Approve POTW Pretreatment Programs
Review Modifications to Categorical Pretreatment Standards
Oversee POTW Program Implementation
Provide Technical Guidance to POTWs
Regulate Industries in Nonpretreatment Cities
Initiates Enforcement Action Against Noncompliant POTWs or Industries.
Control Authorities (Approximately 1,450)
(POTWs with Approved Pretreatment Program)
Develop and Maintain an Approved Pretreatment Program
Evaluate Compliance of Regulated Industrial Users
Initiate Enforcement Action Against Noncompliant Industries
Submit Reports to Approval Authority.
Industrial Users (As Many As 200,000)
Comply with Applicable Pretreatment Standards: Prohibited Discharge Standards, Categorical
Standards, State Requirements, and Local Limits
Comply with Federal and POTW Reporting Requirements.
4-4
-------
including comprehensive pretreatment program audits and Pretreatment Compliance Inspections (PCIs)
conducted by the Approval Authority.
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
To accomplish its objectives, the National Pretreatment Program relies on three types of standards that
apply to industry:
Prohibited Discbygg Standards -
- General Prohibitions [40 CFR 403.5(a)] - National prohibitions against pollutant discharges from
any nondomestic user which cause pass through or interference.
- Specific Prohibitions [40 CFR 403.5(b)] - National prohibitions against pollutant discharges from
any nondomestic user causing: (1) Ore or explosion hazard; (2) corrosive structural damage; (3)
interference due to flow obstruction; (4) interference due to flow rate or concentration; and (5)
interference due to heat.
National Categorical Standards - National technology-based standards developed by EPA
Headquarters, setting industry-specific effluent limits.
Local Limits - Enforceable local requirements developed by POTWs to address Federal standards
as well as State and local regulations.
The rationale behind the three types of standards is, first, that categorical standards provide nationally
uniform effluent limits affording a technology-based degree of environmental protection for discharges from
particular categories of industry. Second, the prohibited discharge standards recognize the site-specific
nature of the. problems at sewage treatment works and provide a broader baseline level of control that
applies to all industrial users discharging to POTWs, whether or not they fall within particular industrial
categories. Third, local limits are specific requirements developed and enforced by individual POTWs
implementing the general and specific prohibitions, and superseding them as necessary to meet State and
local regulations. This approach ensures that site-specific protections necessary to meet pretreatment
objectives are developed by those agencies best placed to understand local concerns ~ namely, POTWs.
PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Several achievements have contributed to the success of the pretreatment program. Examples are:
Over 95 percent of the nearly 1,500 POTWs required by EPA or approved States to administer the
pretreatment program are approved.
EPA has promulgated effluent guideline limitations for over 20 industrial categories covering about
15,000 industrial users.
EPA and the approved States conduct regular oversight of and assistance to (e.g., training) POTWs
to ensure effective implementation of pretreatment standards and requirements. Although these
activities are important, environmental improvements represent the greatest measure of the
pretreatment programs success. POTWs across the country are documenting improved treatment
plant operations, water quality of the receiving stream, and sludge quality as well as other benefits.
4-5
-------
5. SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
OVERVIEW
For many years, Federal water pollution control programs have been directed principally at preventing
pollutants from reaching the waters of the United States. In turn, this effort has promoted the development
of wastewater technologies capable of significant pollutant removal However, the nation's success in treating
its wastewater has given rise to another challenge - proper management and disposal of sludges (the solids
that are removed from wastewater during treatment) which may contain concentrations of toxic and
nonconventional pollutants.
Sewage sludge is both a waste and a resource. Used properly, it can be recycled as a fertilizer and soil
conditioner. However, contaminated sludge or poor disposal practices can threaten air, surface water,
ground water, or the food chain. It is important to regulate sewage sludge to ensure that it is handled
properly and is of sufficient quality to enhance its use as a soil conditioner and a source of energy.
EPA adopted its first policy on municipal sludge management on May 31, 1984. The policy stated that
sludge management represented a responsibility to be shared by EPA, States, and local governments, and
established roles and duties for each of the parties. EPA's primary responsibility is to develop and enforce
the technical standards and oversee State programs. The States are responsible for direct implementation of
the sludge program. The local governments must select sludge management options and maintain sludge
quality in accordance with Federal requirements.
In early 1987, Congress reemphasized EPA's obligation to address sludge management comprehensively
by amending Section 405 of the Clean Water Act. The new provisions made it clear that NPDES permits (or
other permits affording equivalent regulation) are to be used to regulate the use and disposal of sewage
sludge. The new statutory language also requires the Agency to undertake the following activities:
Promulgate technical use and disposal regulations.
Protect public health and the environment from any reasonably anticipated adverse effects of
pollutants in sewage sludge.
Require compliance with these technical standards within one year of promulgation (unless
construction of pollution control faculties is necessary, in which case, within 2 years of
promulgation).
Address sludge in municipal NPDES permits. Prior to promulgation of the technical standards, this
may be done on a BPJ basis, or other appropriate measures must be taken to protect the
environment from contaminated sludge or poor disposal practices.
5-1
-------
INTERIM PROGRAM
To implement the last of these Congressional directives, OWEP has issued a "Sewage Sludge Interim
Permitting Strategy" (September 1989) and has prepared guidance (see Guidance for Writing Case-bv-Case
Permit Requirements for Municipal fiew^ge Sludge. June 1988) to assist Federal and State permit writers.
The Interim Strategy states that the following three types of POTW facilities should generally be considered
priority POTWs":
POTWs with known problems with sludge or sludge disposal practices
POTWs which incinerate sludge
POTWs with approved local pretreatment programs.
Priority POTWs are to have special permit conditions for sludge developed on a case-by-case basis. The
strategy also includes guidance to assist permit writers in developing standard conditions as well as
monitoring and reporting requirements for all POTWs (priority and nonpriority), and describes the process
by which EPA intends to coordinate sludge permit issuance with States. In addition, on May 2, 1989, EPA
issued regulations (54 Fed. Reg. 18716) which, among other things, sets requirements for the issuance of
sludge permits to NPDES and non-NPDES facilities and the development of State sludge programs. These
requirements may be either a subcomponent of the NPDES program or a separate regulatory program.
In addition to the Interim Strategy, EPA is continuing its efforts to promulgate the technical sludge
regulations mandated by the Clean Water Act. Regulations were proposed by EPA on February 6, 1989, (54
FR 5746). These regulations will address controls for a large universe of pollutants of concern for the five
common sludge use and disposal practices: 1) incineration; 2) land application; 3) distribution and
marketing; 4) landfilling; and 5) surface disposal.
Until the technical regulations are promulgated, the Interim Strategy is designed only to bridge the gap
with controls essential to protect public health and the environment. Thereafter, technical regulations will
form the cornerstone for sludge conditions in NPDES permits or equivalent permits issued under other EPA
programs and other approved State sludge programs.
LONG-TERM PROGRAM
Once the technical regulations are promulgated, OWEP will be responsible for ensuring that these
regulations are properly incorporated in permits and enforced as necessary. As with the interim program,
final implementation may require a permitting strategy, including identification of permit modification
priorities and additional development of training and guidance. At the same time, OWEP will have to
address the need for approved cities to modify local limits under the pretreatment program to satisfy sludge
requirements.
5-2
-------
6. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM
OVERVIEW OF EPA'S WATER ENFORCEMENT PROCESS
The ultimate goal of the water enforcement program is to improve environmental quality through
compliance with environmental laws. More specifically, EPA's water enforcement program is designed to
accomplish four major objectives:
Identify instances of noncompliance
Return the violator to compliance
Recover any economic advantage obtained by the violator's noncompliance
Deter other regulated facilities from noncompliance.
In order to achieve these objectives, the water enforcement program relies on several tools; an extensive
network of compliance monitoring techniques and protocols to screen compliance information; a data
management system; and enforcement response strategies. Combined, these tools facilitate rapid compliance
assessment and foster timely Agency and State responses to violations of NPDES and pretreatment
requirements.
Determining Violations
As mentioned earlier, each NPDES permit contains specific terms and conditions which the industry or
POTW must follow. Adherence to these permit conditions is primarily tracked by two mechanisms:
Self-monitoring by the permittee. The permittee reports its self-monitoring data on a Discharge
Monitoring Report (DMR) which it submits to either the appropriate State agency or EPA regional
office.
Compliance inspections performed by the State or EPA which can include sampling at the
permittee's facility.
In addition, public complaints can trigger follow-up by the relevant enforcement agency to see whether or not
a violation has occurred.
The general types of violations possible under the NPDES program are:
Permit limit (effluent) violations - Failure to meet the specific limits of particular pollutants in the
discharge, or the character of the discharge from each outfall of a facility.
Schedule violations - The faculty's NPDES permit (or an EPA or State enforcement action) may
require it to meet a compliance schedule for the construction of a treatment or spill prevention
system, modification of a process, training of personnel, or development of a program to improve
discharge quality. Failure to achieve schedule milestones is a NPDES permit violation.
6-1
-------
Permit reporting violations - Failure to submit the required reports in a timely fashion; also failure
to submit complete and accurate reports.
Enforcement order violations - NPDES permit violations may result in a formal enforcement action
against the permitted facility. Violations of these formal (administrative or judicial) enforcement
actions are themselves, additional violations.
Other permit requirement violations, such as failure of any approved POTW to implement its
pretreatment program adequately or enforce industrial pretreatment requirements.
Data from DMRs are entered on to EPA's data base management system, known as the Permit
Compliance System (PCS). PCS tracks permit, compliance, and enforcement status of the 7,500 major
NPDES facilities. This system now enables its user States and EPA Regions to automatically list nearly all
major facilities not in compliance with their NPDES permits. EPA has established specific criteria in 40
CFR 123.45 to determine when the five general types of NPDES violations should be reported on a special
report, called the Quarterly Noncompliance Report (QNCR). The QNCR helps enforcement personnel
prioritize which permit violations should be acted on first.
In addition, the Agency has developed criteria for evaluating POTWs efforts to implement their local
pretreatment programs. Distributed in September 1987, these criteria, known as "Reportable
Noncompliance" (RNC), are used to review key local program functions. POTWs failing to achieve the
criteria are placed on the QNCR. The RNC criteria includes failure to issue permits, inspect facilities, and
enforce pretreatment in a timely fashion.
Determining Type of Action to be Taken
In response to these violations, the State (or Region) can take several different types of action. The
severity of the violation determines the enforcement agency's action. OWEP has developed a system, the
Enforcement Management System (EMS), to help NPDES States or Regions identify instances of
uoncompliance efficiently and take timely and appropriate action. Each NPDES State (or Region) uses EMS
or its facsimile to translate compliance information into enforcement actions. EMS incorporates the
following seven basic principles:
Maintenance of a source inventory that is complete and accurate
Handling and assessment of the flow of information available on a systematic and timely basis
Accomplishment of a pre-enforcement screening by reviewing the flow of information as soon as
possible after it is received
Performance of a more formal enforcement evaluation where appropriate, using systematic
evaluation screening criteria
Institution of a formal enforcement actipn find follow-up wherever necessary
Initiation of field investigations based on a systematic plan
6-2
-------
The use of internal management controls to provide adequate enforcement information to all levels
of the organization.
EPA's EMS also includes a response guide that matches types of violations to a narrow range of
appropriate enforcement responses.
Available Enforcement Actions
Enforcement actions available to the NFDES State or Region can range from simple informal actions
to formal Administrative Orders and civil and/or criminal judicial actions.
Administrative Actions
Administrative actions are taken at the Regional level by the Regional Water Management Divisions
and Regional attorneys. An informal administrative action consists of telephone calls, a letter, or issuing a
notice of violation, all of which simply communicates to the permittee that a violation was detected and
should be corrected. A formal Administrative Order may also be issued, which requires the permittee to
take specific action, including meeting compliance schedule milestones, ceasing and desisting from a
particular activity, and showing cause for a particular violation. Administrative penalties can also be assessed
by the Region. These require public notice and the opportunity for a hearing. Administrative penalties can
be of two types: Class I (up to $25,000) or Class II (up to $125,000).
Judicial Action
The next type of action which can be taken is either civil or criminal judicial action. The Region
typically forwards a recommendation to pursue judicial action to EPA's Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Monitoring (OECM) and OWEP to review the merits of the case. OECM then refers the case
to the Justice Department which actually files the action in the District Court where the violation occurred.
In certain cases, Regions may refer cases directly to the Justice Department with simultaneous review by
OECM and OWEP. Civil cases are tried on the basis of strict liability with fines up to $25,000 per day per
violation. In most cases, EPA attempts to settle before the case is brought to trial. The Regional Counsels
and Water Management Divisions, in conjunction with OECM and OWEP, handle the settlement process.
The final settlement must be consistent with the policy documents on settlement of judicial actions such as
the penalty policy, the model consent decree, etc.
ADMINISTRATION OF THE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM
The basic emphasis of OWEP activities is the development and implementation of policies and
procedures to identify noncompliance and return violators to compliance as expeditiously as possible.
OWEP, in conjunction with OECM, is responsible for establishing these policies and procedures and
overseeing their use by EPA Regions and NPDES States.
6-3
-------
Compliance Assessment Activities
Four of the basic activities related to compliance assessment are:
Implementation of EPA's Inspection Policy/Strategy
Management of PCS
Evaluation of QNCRs
Implementation of special initiatives, such as the National Municipal Policy (NMP).
Each of these activities is briefly described in the following sections.
Implement EPA's Inspection Policy/Strategy
Compliance inspections (including pretreatment inspections) are a vital tool in implementing the
NPDES program. There are nine different types of NPDES inspections that may be performed. Figure 6-1
highlights these nine inspections. Generally, inspections are conducted for many purposes:
To verify permittee compliance
To develop enforcement information
To respond to citizen complaints
To support permit development
To maintain a regulatory presence.
All major permittees are to be inspected at least annually. The type of inspection performed at these
facilities and the number and identity of additional minor permittees that are also inspected during that time
period are left to the discretion of the appropriate EPA Regional or State office. EPA has outlined the
process used to select facilities to be inspected on a routine basis in the policy entitled "Criteria for Neutral
Selection of NPDES Compliance Inspection Candidates."
In addition to the neutral selection criteria policy, the following sources should be consulted for more
information on EPA's compliance inspection program:
"NPDES Inspection Strategy and Guideline for Preparing Annual State/ EPA Compliance
Inspection Plans," April 1985
NPDES Complia,ny$ Inspection M^mi^ January 1988
NPDES Compliance Inspector^ Training Modules (in draft form).
6-4
-------
I
60 O
Ji &
o. 1
111
ffl 2 £
il
Is
.'3
HI
" f
c«
< -a Q
I
I
Q.«
-a -c >
> 0 5
u > Q
>»
B
Q
a
C-
.a co
!*>
0 S.
OX)
b <
5 g_,
2 S
,g 2
*
.5
2 5
8.8.
I" 2?
-PS E2
'
< 3
ex
CO
IB 5
B) « a
1
f »
3 .2 .«
1 is
Ed
a-
1/3
Ed
U
O
u
I
Ed
as
6-5
-------
Management of the Permit Compliance System
In order to track NPDES permitting and compliance information and to identify violations, OWEP
developed PCS, a computerized management information system. PCS performs a number of functions:
Tracks permit issuance, reissuance, and appeal activities
Screens compliance data for effluent, schedule, and reporting violations
Tracks enforcement responses
Automates QNCR preparation
Automates Agency management system reporting
Provides facility information
Facilitates inspection scheduling.
PCS contains basic facility information on all NPDES permits and contains additional extensive
information on the 7,200 major NPDES-permittees. To assist in data storage and retrieval, PCS organizes
permittee information into the general categories shown on Figure 6-2. The type of information in each
category is outlined below.
Permit Facility Data - General descriptive information on each permitted facility, including its name,
address, and permit number, location, Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code, and type of
ownership.
Compliance Schedule Data - Information on permit compliance schedule milestones and actual
accomplishment dates.
Compliance Schedule Violation Data - Information on compliance schedule violations, whether from
failure to meet a milestone date or failure to submit a required report.
Enforcement Action Data - Data on enforcement actions taken in response to violations of effluent
parameter limits or compliance schedule milestones, or for nonreceipt of DMRs, including the
events in violation and dates of occurrence, the type of enforcement action(s), and the dates they
were taken, the current status of each action.
Pipe Schedule Data - Detailed information describing each outfall within a permitted facility and the
discharge monitoring requirements associated with each, such as effluent waste type(s), treatment
type(s), and limit start and end dates (initial, interim, or final).
Parameter Limits Data - Detailed information specifying self-monitoring requirements associated
with each outfall within a permitted facility, such as monitoring location, parameter to be monitored,
required frequency of analysis, units in which the measurements are expressed, and quantity and
concentration limits for each parameter monitored.
Measurement Violations Data - Actual sampling data from DMRs, including identification of
violations of permit limits.
Inspection Data - Information describing inspections performed at a permitted facility, including
inspection data, type, inspector (State/EPA), and relevant comments.
Permit Event Data - Information tracking the events related to permit issuance from receipt of the
initial permit application through actual permit issuance and expiration.
6-6
-------
Cfl
-------
Evidentiary Hearipg Pafa - Data on evidentiary hearings contesting permit requirements.
Grant Data - Data on construction grants received by POTWs, such as grant number, grant status,
and State or Regional comments. This creates a link between PCS information and the
Construction Grants data base, the Grants Information Control System (GICS).
Information on how to use PCS and the reports it generates in a management context can be found in
tne Manager's Guide to PCS, which includes the PCS Policy Statement (October 1985). Technical
documentation of the system's operation and functions is available in the following documents:
PCS Gcnyafaed Retrieval
PCS Inquiry User's Guide
PCS Data Elements Directory
PCS Data Entry. Edit, and Update Manual.
Evaluation of QNCRs
The QNCR lists major facilities that are in significant noncompliance with their NPDES permits. The
report, which is prepared and submitted quarterly to OWEP, lists noncompliant major facilities, identifies the
violations causing noncompliance, and summarizes resulting enforcement actions. QNCRs are used by
OWEP, EPA Regions, and the States to track progress and assess the effectiveness of NPDES compliance
monitoring and enforcement activities. The QNCR is prepared by those States approved to administer the
NPDES program and by EPA Regions. The QNCR can be automatically generated by PCS for all
quantitative violations, provided the appropriate information is entered. For further information on
automating the QNCR, please review Guide to the Permit Compliance System Quarterly Noncompliance
Report (June 1988).
Implementation of the National Municipal Policy
NMP was adopted in January 1984. Although the Federal government had spent over $35 billion on
required treatment construction grants to cities by 1984, 1,500 major POTWs had not achieved required
treatment levels by that time. To deal with this situation, the NMP required each of these POTWs to submit
either a Composite Correction Plan (CCP) or Municipal Compliance Plan (MCP) which established a
construction schedule to achieve compliance on or before July 1, 1988. All NPDES States also developed
municipal enforcement policies to ensure that their enforcement activities were similar to EPA's.
Eighty-seven percent of the nation's 3,750 major NMP POTWs met the July 1, 1988 deadline. Of those
not achieving compliance, the vast majority either are on enforceable court schedules or are the subject of
Federal or State judicial action. Now that the deadline established has passed, EPA and States are following
through in conducting enforcement actions against POTWs yet to achieve required treatment.
6-8
-------
Enforcement Activities
The major responsibilities of OWEP related to enforcement include:
Provide enforcement case review and support
Develop and oversee implementation of EPA's penalty policies
Review citizen suits (including notices and proposed settlements)
Manage the NPDES enforcement program and State oversight
Develop enforcement criteria and enforce pretreatment requirements against POTWs.
These activities are highlighted below.
Enforcement Case Review and Support
In order to properly discharge the responsibility for the management of the National Water
Enforcement Program, OWEP reviews all proposed civil enforcement actions and provides comments and
recommendations to OECM prior to the referral of civil actions to the Department of Justice.
The review includes:
Basic technical review of the litigation report and supporting documents to ensure the technical
adequacy of the claims to be made against the proposed defendant
Evaluation of the litigation report to ensure that the proposed action is consistent with the goals of
the water enforcement program and with the broad guidelines set forth in the guidance documents
and policy directives under which OWEP operates
Basic evaluation of the technical sufficiency of the proposed injunctive relief and proposed penalty
and a determination of the need for additional technical support by the Region, Headquarters, or by
an outside expert.
OWEP reviews all new case settlements as well as associated modifications, terminations, and
withdrawals. OWEP participates jointly with the Region and OECM in the development of the injunctive
relief and civil penalty to be embodied in a settlement agreement or judgment. OWEP reviews all proposed
and final settlement agreements to determine that the relief agreed to by the defendant will ensure full
compliance with the permit and is consistent with National policy and guidance.
Development and Implementation of EPA's Penalty Policies
The Agency's authority to seek and assess civil and criminal penalties was established in the Clean
Water Act. In order "to promote a more consistent agency wide approach to the assessment of civil penalties
while allowing substantial flexibility for individual cases within certain guidelines," OWEP developed the
Clean Water Act penalty policy. This policy directs the Regions to use a formula that calculates the
economic benefit of noncompliance, factors in a "gravity" (seriousness) component, and adjusts for ability to
6-9
-------
litigation, and other factors. To assist in this calculation, the Agency has developed a computer
software program called "BEN" that calculates the economic benefit a violating facility receives in delaying
For further information on water penalty policies, please review:
"Clean Water Act Penalty Policy for Civil Settlement Negotiations," February 1986
BEN User's Manual revised May 1987
"Guidance on Choosing Among Clean Water Act Administrative, Civil and Criminal Enforcement
Remedies," August 1987
"Addendum to the Clean Water Act Civil Penalty Policy for Administrative Penalty," August 1987.
Review of Citizen Suits
The Clean Water Act states that citizens who wish to independently enforce the Clean Water Act
requirements in Federal court must file notice of intent to sue with the EPA Administrator 60 days prior to
filing a complaint. OWEP and OECM review each of these notices to determine: 1) who filed the action;
2) what the alleged noncompliance was; and 3) what penalties are being asked. In addition, EPA evaluates
these notices to determine whether to file such a suit itself. If a citizen complaint has already been filed,
EPA decides whether to formerly join the action. Finally, EPA reviews all proposed settlements to ensure
their appropriateness.
Management of the NPDES Enforcement Program and State Oversight
OWEP expects all NPDES States to develop written enforcement procedures consistent with the seven
EMS principles listed previously. Specifically, EMS established National review criteria to screen compliance
data and a response guide which matches types of violations with a narrow range of appropriate Agency
enforcement responses. In addition, EMS advocates that field inspections and enforcement follow-up
activities be conducted in accordance with a systematic plan that considers such relevant factors as geography,
compliance history, and time since the last site visit.
Development of Enforcement Criteria and Enforcement of Pretreatment Requirements
Against POTWs
The decentralized approach of the National Pretreatment Program requires EPA and municipalities to
work together in a pretreatment implementation partnership. Traditionally, POTWs have been service-
oriented and few have extensive experience or expertise in enforcement.
6-10
-------
OWE? developed and distributed its implementation guidance for pretreatment POTWs entitled
Pretrea{mep^ C.QIHPliiitf'Cff Mfff>itff"T'8 9nd Enforcement Guf»janyg (Juty 1986). The guidance discusses in
detail the following topics:
Industrial user monitoring frequencies
Inspecting and sampling techniques
Reviewing self-monitoring data
Establishing local enforcement priorities
Reporting program performance to Approval Authorities.
Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement (PCME) guidance also recommends definitions for
"significant industrial users" and "significant noncompliance." These definitions are intended to promote
National consistency in local enforcement activities. To ensure that the PCME principles are understood by
local officials, OWEP has developed a PCME seminar on compliance monitoring, reporting, and
enforcement. In addition to PCME, OWEP has developed a computer software package which POTWs can
use to track industrial user compliance and determine whether any facilities may be in significant
noncompliance.
Local pretreatment implementation is required as a condition of the POTWs NPDES permit. When a
POTW fails to adequately implement its program, EPA pursues formal enforcement of these conditions
similar to other NPDES violations. OWEP has specific procedures for reviewing POTW program
performance and for determining whether the programs are deficient.
For additional information on this area, please review:
"Guidance for Bringing Enforcement Actions Against POTWs for Failure to Implement
Pretreatment Programs," August 1988.
"Penalty Calculations for POTW Failure to Implement an Approved Pretreatment Program,"
December 1988.
e for Reporting fln<3 F-vflluating POTW Noncompliance with Pretreatment Implementation
Requirements. September 1987.
Pretreatment Compliance Inspection and Audit Manual for Approval Authorities. July 1986.
Whenever EPA has observed industrial users in significant noncompliance with pretreatment standards
or requirements, the Agency has exercised its enforcement authority directly against the industrial user. This
has resulted in the pursuit of both administrative and judicial actions. However, since virtually all of
pretreatment implementation occurs at the local level, EPA has little information concerning the compliance
status of industrial users. Therefore, the Agency has undertaken to remedy this data deficiency by requiring
all POTWs administering programs to transmit more user-specific data to EPA. The October 17, 1988,
PIRT revision to 40 CFR Part 403 expanded reporting duties of both industrial users and approved POTWs.
6-11
-------
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS USED IN THIS MANUAL
AO - Administrative Order
BATEA - Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
BCT - Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology
BMPs - Best Management Practices
BOD - Biochemical Oxygen Demand
BPJ - Best Professional Judgment
BPT - Best Practicable Control Technology
CCP - Composite Correction Plan
CFR - Code of Federal Regulations
COE - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CPR - Consolidated Permit Regulations
CSO - Combined Sewer Overflow
CWA - Clean Water Act
DMR - Discharge Monitoring Report
DOJ - Department of Justice
EMS - Enforcement Management System
EPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FWPCA - Federal Water Pollution Control Act
GICS - Grant Information and Control System
gpd - Gallons Per Day
ITD - Industrial Technology Division
MCP - Municipal Compliance Plan
MGD - Million Gallons Per Day
NMP - National Municipal Policy
NPDES - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRDC - Natural Resources Defense Counsel
NSPS - New Source Performance Standards
OECM - Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring
OGC - Office of General Counsel
OWEP - Office of Water Enforcement and Permits
OWRS - Office of Water Regulations and Standards
PASS - Pretreatment Audit Summary System
PCB - Polychlorinated Biphynols
PCI - Pretreatment Compliance Inspection
PCME - Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement
PCS - Permit Compliance System
A-l
-------
PIRT - Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force
POTW - Publicly Owned Treatment Works
PPETS - Pretreatment Permits and Enforcement Tracking System
PQR - Permit Quality Review
PSD - Prevention of Significant Deterioration
QA/QC - Quality Assurance/Quality Control
QNCR - Quarterly Noncompliance Report
RCRA - Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RNC - Reportable Noncompliance
SIC - Standard Industrial Classification
SNC - Significant Noncompliance
SPMS - Strategic Planning and Management System
TSS - Total Suspended Solids
TTO - Total Toxic Organics
UIC - Underground Injection Control
WQA - Water Quality Act
WQS - Water Quality Standards
WWTP - Wastewater Treatment Plant
A-2
-------
APPENDIX B
CITATIONS TO NPDES, PRETREATMENT, AND SLUDGE REGULATIONS
NPDES REGULATIONS
40 CFR Part 122 Basic program requirements
40 CFR Part 123 State program requirements
40 CFR Part 124 Procedures for decision making
40 CFR Part 125 Criteria and standards (for determining permit conditions)
PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS
40 CFR Parts 401-471 Categorical pretreatment standards
40 CFR Part 403 General pretreatment regulations for existing and new sources of pollution;
regulations to implement the requirements of the Domestic Sewage Study
(proposed)
SLUDGE REGULATIONS
40 CFR Part 61 Sewage sludge incineration
40 CFR Part 257 Landfilling and land application of sludge
40 CFR Part 501 Permitting procedures and State programs
40 CFR Part 503 Technical use and disposal standards (proposed)
40 CFR Part 258 Solid waste disposal facility criteria (proposed)
RELATED WATER REGULATIONS
40 CFR Part 116 Designation of hazardous substances
40 CFR Part 117 Determination of reportable quantities for hazardous substances
40 CFR Part 121 State certification of activities requiring a Federal license or permit
40 CFR Part 129 Toxic pollutant effluent standards
40 CFR Part 130 Water quality planning and management
40 CFR Part 131 Water quality standards
40 CFR Part 133 Secondary treatment regulation
40 CFR Part 135 Prior notice of citizen suits
40 CFR Part 136 Guidelines establishing test procedures for the analysis of pollutants
B-l
------- |