5559
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20-160 '
SEP 1 1973
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
OFFICE OF ENrORCL.MEilT
Addressees (Attached)
Jeffrey G. Miller,. Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Water Enforcement (EN-335)
Swep T. Davis, Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Water Planning and Standards (WH-551)
Stephen Plehn, Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Solid Waste (WH-562) '
SUBJECT: Request for Comments on "NPDES Permits for Solid Waste
Disposal Facilities in Waters of the United States"
Attached is a draft (dated August 23, '1978) Policy Guidance
Memorandum on the above captioned matter. We would appreciate your
written comments on the draft memorandum and ask that you. provide any
comments by S6£tc;".Brn45-; 1978.
Please send comments to:
Tom Tomasello
Permits Division, Office of Water Enforcement (EN-336)
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Jeffrey G. Miller
*! Stephen Plehn
Attachment
-------
Addressees:
Directors of Approved NPDES
Permit Programs
Enforcement Division Directors,
Regions I - X
Permit Branch Chiefs,
Regions I - X
Alan Eckert, OGC
Lee DeHihns, OGC
LiDby Dollard, National Solid Waste
Management Association
Steve Schroeder, Natural Resources
Defense Council
William Hedeman, U. S. Army Corps
of Engineers
Curtis Clark, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers
Dennis Huebner, Region I
Russel1 Wilder, Region I
A. Miller, Region II
Michael Debonis, Region II.
C. Howard, Region 111
William Schremp, Region III
J. Humphries, Region III
Randy Pompom'o, Region III
M. Polensky, Region III
George Penc, Region III
E. T. Heinen, Region IV
Karl Klepitsch, Region Y
E.. Shannon, Region V .
Peter Dunsavage, Region VI
Bill Hathaway, Region VI
f-icrris Tucker, Region VII
Lawrence Gazda, Region VIII
Dale Vondenahl, Region VIII
Charles Bourns, Region IX
Tobia Hegaahl, Region X
Ronald Lee, Region X
-------
MEMORANDUM .
TO: Regional Administrators
NPDES State Directors . -
AUG 2
FROM: Deputy Assistant Administrator for .Water
Enforcement (EN-335) .
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste (WH-562)
Deputy Assistant Administrator for'Water Planning
and Standards (WH-551)
SUBJECT: NPDES Permits for Solid Waste Disposal Facilities
in Waters of the United States - POLICY GUIDANCE
MEMORANDUM ,
I. INTRODUCTION
Questions have been asked regarding the applicability of the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") program
to discharges of solid wastes into waters of the United States,
particularly wetlands. In response to requests from EPA Regions
* L
and potential permittees for guidance, this memorandum provides
policy on ,the applicability of the NPDES program to these types
of discharges and thecriteria, and procedures' for. the issuance of'
such permits. Although the discharge of any solid waste into
waters of the United States requires an NPDES permit, this
guidance is limited to solid waste disposal facilities located in
waters of the U. S. which receive wastes from sources such as
trucks, barges, or other transportation vehicles. The guidance
applies principally to those water'areas most .easily converted to
» . .
solid waste disposal facilities, such as wetlands and tidal areas
including unvegetated coastal mud flats. .
The thrust of the policy expressed in this guidance is that
/~,......I -. . .
the discharge of solid wastes into water is subject to the NPDES
requirements'of section 402 .of the Clean Water Act. ("CV.:A") and
-------
... AUG.2 3 137* ... .
should not be permitted where there are practicable alternatives
which: 1) dp not involve a discharge into water; or 2) could be
conducted in a manner less damaging to the affected aquatic
ecosystem. Appendix "A" provides the definition of certain
terms used in this memorandum. . . .
This policy is consistent with the principles contained in
EPA1s Wetlands Policy (38 Fed. Reg. 10834, May 2, 1973), Executive
Order 11990 providing for the protection of wetlands (42 .Fed.
Reg. 26901, May 24, 1977), and EPA's proposed classification
criteria for solid waste disposal facilities under section 4004
of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and section 405 of
the Clean Water Act (43 Fed. Reg., 4953, February '6, 1978}..-
II. NPDES APPLICABILITY
There appears to be overlapping authorities under sections
402 and 404 of the Gt'A to control the discharge of solid waste.
EPA and approved NPDES States have authority to issue NPDES
permits under section 402, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
and approved 404 States have authority to issue permits to
control .solid waste disposal under section 404. EPA has.on
several occasions recognized the authority to regulate the
discharge of solid waste under the NPDES program.I/ Corps
I/ Appendix "B" contains a brief discussion of EPA and Corps'
~~ jurisdiction to control the discharge of solid waste under
sections 402 and 404.
-------
. . . . AUG 2 3 1ST?
reculations, however, exclude from the defnition of fill
material "any pollutant discharged into the water primarily to.
dispose of waste", explaining that such discharges are to be
regulated through NPDES permits. It is the Corps' position !
that the placement of solid waste in waters has as a, primary
purpose, the disposal of waste and thus is subject only to
NPDES. EPA will initiate discussions with the Corps.' to modify
their position so that, where solid waste is disposed at a site
resulting in the filling of an area of the waters of the. United
States, a Corps' 404 permit as well as an N.PDES permit will be
required for the.entire discharge. In other words such a
discharge would have a dual purpose '(disposal and fill) requiring
both an NPDES, and 404 permit. Until' this issue is resolved,
EPA and approved NPDES.States have the authority and responsi-
bility to control the discharge of solid waste under section
402 of the CViA. °
A. Who Must Apply? '. .
Under the definition of "point source" solid waste
collection and transport vehicles, which discharge of solid
waste into waters might be considered "dischargers" subject to
NPDES requirements. Logically, however, the solid waste
disposal facility (see Appendix "A" definitions) not the
collection and tranport vehicles should be required to comply
with the- NPDES requirements. Thus, the owner or-operator of s.
-------
,<
' AUG 2 3 1978
new or existing solid waste facility must apply for an NPDES
permit. New facilities must apply for and be issued an NPDES
permit before receiving any solid waste for disposal into
waters of the United States.
B. How To Apply? .
*
Owners and operators of solid wastes facilities shall
file applications for NPDES permits with the appropriate EPA
Regional Office or the approved NPDES State. Applicants should
use the relevant portions of NPDES permit application Short Form
B (agriculture). Under the authority of 40 CFR .§§124 . 23- and'.'
125.13 the following additional information should be provided
with the application in order that the discharge may be completely
and accurately evaluated: :
1. . a factual statement of .whether the facility is a new
or existing facility;
2.. a description of. the applicability of .any State, .
local, or regional solid waste or water quality
management plans, including any plans approved
under section 4007 of the Resource Conservation and
' Recovery Act (RCRA) or section 208 of the CV7A, to .
the facility and its consistency with these.plans;
3. copies of all applicable State and local permits
and licenses obtained for the facility, a list of
those required but not obtained (including the current
status of the permit "application), 'and.a statement-
that no other such oermitr: or licenses .?. re re
-------
4. a description of ' the types and estimated quantities
of waste known to have been received by the facility
in the past, presently being received in the case
of existing facilities, and wastes anticipated to
be received during the term of the permit bhis .
description shall include the frequency and duration
of the discharge. Particular reference shall be
made to any toxic pollutants identified by EPA
under section 307 (a)(l)of the CWA, any hazardous
substances identified under section 311 .of the CWA,
and any wastes- considered hazardous under Subtitle C
of. the RCRA; .
5. a brief description of those specific areas of the
facility and adjacent and nearby waters where the flow
and circulation of waters of the United Statesmay.be
impaired or their .reach reduced (including any areas
to be dewatered) during the term of.the permit.
6. a description of any ad ve rse. environmental, or '. "..
health effects which the owner or operator has
* .
.reason to know are or will be related to the .
operation of the facility, including those based on
.any physical, chemical or biological data and
information available (including fish kills), etc.;
7. a description of technologies and management
practices which the applicant proposes to employ to
minimize adverse impacts on the physical, chemical,
-------
; AUG 23 19'3
and biological integrity of waters adjacent to. and
nearby the facility, during operation of the facility
and similar practices which will be implemented to
minimize these impacts upon "close-down" of the
' .
faciity;
8. for new facilities, an alternatives study which
investigates the availability of practicable alternative
disposal sites (including those which would not
involve a discharge into water) and alternative .
methods of disposal.(including, "improved tehnol'og ical '
controls over the generation and migration of leachate);
9. for new facilities, the permit issuers may re.cuire the '.
applicant to perform algal or biological assay tests
on adjacent and nearby waters to assist- in establishing
permit terms and conditions; and . . -
10. a "close-down" date if appropriate, indicating how
long the facility will receive solid waste. .
* - -
III. Permit Issuance and Denial
A. Mew Facilities . . .' ' : '
Only under extraordinary circumstances should an NPDES
permit be issued authorizing a new discharge of solid waste
into waters of the United States. Thus permits for
-------
A I/I;- P -i f07o .
new facilities may be issued only upon such a showing. A
finding that extraordinary circumstances exists can be made by
a NPDES permitting authority only upon determination that: 1)
there are no practicable alternative sites which would not
»
involve a discharge into water; and 2) where there are no -
available alternative sites that the facility will employ
all practicable measures and management practices to protect
and minimize potential harm to the affected aquatic ecosystem.
These determinations .must be based.upon the results of alterna-
tives studies required by the permit issuing authority in the
application or the permit as provided in. sections II, .IV
and V of the Memorandum'.' .
Since effluent limitations guidelines controlling the
discharge of solid waste have not been issued under sections 301
and. 304 of the CV.'A, the decision whether to issue of deny a
permit and the permit requirements imposed must be decided on. a
case-by-case basis under the authority of section 402(a)(l).
In making these decisions the permit issuer must consider
the appropriate factors listed in section 304(b)(1)(B). One of
,
these factors is "other factors as ... demmed appropriate."'
In the case of solid waste facilities the alternatives study is
an essential element in any permit issuance decision and is an
appropriate factor warranting consideration under section
304(b)(1)(B). Thus, the permit issuer must consider the '
-------
. . AUG 2:3 i
alternatives study in assessing the technology applicable to
the discharge. If reasonable alternative sites exist which
would not result in a discharge into waters of the U.S. a
zero discharge limitation would apply and the application for a
permit for the new facility must be denied. If, however, there
are no alternativ^ sites available with a zero discharge
potential and a permit is issued, it should be issued for the
site with the least potential for adverse environmental impact
as determined by the alternative studies.
Solid waste is not.susceptible to the same kinds of
., '-- . .
treatment technology traditionally applicat-io-nto industrial
effluent waste streams. We are not dealing with .a waste stream
that can be treated to reduce the amount of pollution entering
waters of the U.S. A decision to allow a discharge of solid.
waste would have an irreversible adverse effect on waters
of the U.S. i.e., the elimination of these water. Apparently
the only technology available to control the impact-of the
discharge of solid waste (i.e., the elimination of areas of
waters of the U.S.). is to prevent the discharge or to reduce .
its quantity. The decision whether to allow the discharge
depends pn the availability of feasible alternatives which is
dete.rmined through the alternatives study. The determination
of zero discharge for a solid waste facility is similar to the
zero discharge requirements imposed on industry (i.e. where
total recycle of effluent is the technology applied).
B. Existing Facilities .
Interim and final NPDES permits may be issued to existing
facilities as-follows: ' .
-------
(1) Interim permits shall.require an alternatives study
A. .
and shall be issued to existing facilities where' the discharge
of solid waste at the facility has not completely or- substantially
* - . .
converted waters of the U.S. within-the disposal site into a
*
dry area. The permit shall authorize the discharge only into
those areas already converted or substantially converted into
dry areas and shall not authorize any further encroachment into
waters of the U.S. The interim permit shall expire 180 days
' i
after submission of the final alternatives study cs required in
the interim permit. This interim permit mechanism allows
existing facilities to continue to discharge solid waste
pending the results of the alternatives-study;
{2} Final permits may be issued to existing facilities:
o without requiring an alternatives study where.
the discharge of solid waste.at the facility
has completely or substantially converted
waters of the U.S. .into, a dry -area. 2_'/The final
2/ These areas which are waters of the U.S. and have been
converted into dry areas remain waters of the U.S.
subject to the CWA. Dischargers discharging into these
areas must apply for an NPDES permit. Under . un-usual
circumstances (i.e., where these .areas are filled .after
the date of this memorandum without a permit) restoration
of the area may be re.luirec. .
-------
»\
permit shall not authorize any discharge of ^ 2 3 1973
solid waste into waters of the U.S. other than
into those which have already been converted or.
substantially converted into a dry area.
o at the expiration of an interim permit whejre ,
the results of the alternatives study indicates
that there are no practicable alternative
discharge sites. .
Final pernits for.the continued discharge at existing .
facilities where water areas of the U.S. have.not been substan-
tially filled shall be denied if the alternatives study' required
in the interim permit demonstrates the ex.i stence-. of . an alternative.
site. The authority and rationale to deny issuance of.a final
permit based on the alternatives study is the.same as that: set
out for "new facilities" above.
Final permits (for both new/existing facilities) shall
expire five years from issuance or on the "close-down"- date
reported in the application, whichever is earliest. However,
permits of even shorter duration may be issued on the basis of
the alternatives study if the study indicates that the facility
may be phased out before the "close-down" date. The permit
issuer may establish an expiration date extending beyond
the "close-down" date as appropriate to impose monitoring
and inspection requirements at the .facility to ensure that
leachate or other pollutants will not enter waters of the
U.S.following close-down.
-------
o u fr-Q M
** *** *V ul 4J
".^^
. ^UG 2 ? 1070
Appendix "C" provides a schemative flow diagram of the*"' .
above permit issuance and denial discussion. ,
IV. Permit Terms and Conditions
While the procedures for processing solid waste facility
permits will not vary appreciably from other NPDES permits,
their content might be substantially different.^/ This is
due to the fact that the appropriate, permit controls are not
.traditional "end-of-pipe" effluent limitations; instead, the
.appropriate controls are specific management practices imposed
under section 402(a)(l) of the CWA which are designed to reduce
adverse impacts upon the adjacent and nearby aquatic ecosystem
if the discharge is authorized.
The utilization of such management practices when.effluent
]imitations are infeasible has recently been sanctioned by the
District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals. [NRDC v. Costle
F 2d , 10 ERC 2025 (D.C. Cir. 1977)]. Moreover, there is
authority under sections 304(e) and 402(a)(l) of the CwA to
impose BMP's where the discharge of'so3id waste'may contribute
significant amounts of toxic or hazardous pollutants as defined
under section 307(a)(l) or 311 of the CVJA.
3_/ However, the traditional NPDES approach of specifying
end-of-pipe treatment is still appropriate in certain
cases for example where leachate is channelized and.
collected and ultimately discharged.
-------
AUG 2J5 .IS'TS"'
Because of the nature of these management practices, EPA
permit writers should work closely with the Office of Solid
Waste as well as Regional 404 permit reviewers in devising
permit terms and conditions, particularly those designed to
%
ensure adequate control and treatment of leachate. Similarly,
permit writers in approved States should contact appropriate
State or Federal agencies involved in solid waste management or
the regulation of discharges of dredged or fill material.
Although specific permit conditions will vary depending
upon the characteristics and location of the facility, permits
for solid waste facilities must incorporate the following:
1. for all permits:
a. specific boundary limits on the area into which
the discharge is authorized; the amount of solid
waste which c^n be discharged; and permissible
elevations of the disposal area (including the use cf
compaction). Conditions requiring the construction of
dikes, levtes and other' techniques,where required, to
. minimize incursions into waters of the United States.
(It is important to note that section 404 permits are
required for the construction of these dikes, levees, etc.)
b. requirements for appropriate control technologies
and management practices which apply during operation
. and upon "close-down" of the facility which will, to
-------
r.
i' i -
^y%/%r a?
AU.G 23 1373
the maximum extent practicable, minimize potential
adverse impacts upon adjacent or nearby waters,
particularly those impacts resulting from leachate
generation and migration. The required control
«
technologies and management practices may include
constructing drainage control structures., maintainance
of adequate soil cover, minimization of the active
working face of the facility, prevention of contact of
discharged waste with ground water, means necessary to
prevent toxic and hazardous substances from entering
the environment outside of the disposal site, 'employment
of impermeable barriers or collection ditches and
treatment of collected leachate;
c. terms and. conditions necessary to ensure compliance
with any appropriate requirements of sections 307
(toxic pollutants) 311 (hazardous substances), and 405 -"
(sewage sludge) of the CVJA;
d. provisions for adequate monitoring record-
. keeping, and reporting on the wastes being discharged
including the amount of waste discharged;
.e. to the extent that the disposal area falls .
within the waters defined in section 403 of
the CV;A , compliance with guidelines issued under
Section 403(c) of the CWA; and
-------
1-', -
* ;": _.-_..
f. where appropriate, a requirement of periodic " ''
bioassay and/or algal 'assay tests on the solid
waste and leachate (where collected and treated) and
on the receiving waters to assist in determining
whether the management practices and conditions
specified in the permit remain adequate to minimize
*
adverse water quality effects. Sampling from wells
may be required to detect ground w.ater. contamination
particularly where this contamination may effect
surface waters.
2. for interim permits:' . .
a. a condition that the applicant will undertake a
study of practicable alternative disposal sites .
(including those which would not involve a discharge
into water) and alternative methods of disposal
(including improved technological controls over the
generation and migration of leachate), which will form
the basis for the issuance of any NPDES permit after
the expiration of the interim permit.
b. a compliance schedule for preparation of. an
. alternatives study including: a) a date for . '.
submission of a draft alternatives study, which
should be as soon as practicable., but generally not
later than one year from the date of issuance of
the interim permit; and b) a date for submission of
the final alternatives study, which should allow up
to six months to revise the study in response to
comments from the permit issuing authority.
-------
: AUG 23 1973
c. a condition that the interim permit will not
extend more than 180 days after the date established
in the compliance schedule for the submission of the
final alternatives study, and in no case later' than
July 1, 1981.
3. for final permits:
a reasonable compliance schedule towards implementa-
tion of the best management practices and control
requirements required in the permit.
'v- Alternatives Study
The alternatives study in the permit application for new
facilities and in interim permits for existing facilities is
essential to fulfilling the objective of eliminating the
disposal of solid waste in waters. In addition to describing
alternative sites and. methods of disposal, the study must: 1)
assess the effects on water quality of each alternative; 2)
assess the technical and economic feasibility of each alternative;
3) compare the relative water quality impact and feasibility
of the al te-ma t ives; and 4) determine which feasible alternative
(alone or in combination) will most effectively minimize
anticipated impacts upon waters of the U.S.; and 5) for existing
facilities issued interim permits, consider the impact that
solid waste disposal has had on waters of the U. S. within the
existng disposal site. Determinations of the economic feasibility
of alternatives shall be based on the total cost of solid waste
management (including the cost of solid waste collection and
transportation), not merely on the costs associated with
cisoosal. . . .
-------
16 'AUG.2 3 1978
The study must be a realistic appraisal of alternatives.
For example, where a significant portion of an entire region is
composed of wetlands, such as southern Louisiana, the alternatives
study should focus on the relative merits of alternative sites
and methods of disposal in water, with a view toward determining:
the least damaging alternative in terms of water quality impact.
Also, the study shall not be limited to areas under the present
ownership of the applicant or the permittee but include all
'reasonable alternative areas.
Generally, the study should be made on a permit-by-permit
basis. However, in unusual areas where there may be many permittees
and/or permit applicants in a geographic .area the permit issuing
authority may authorize the preparation of an "areawide alternatives
study". This study, which may be prepared by an appropriate
regional planning commission, must cover the act ivi tie's .of
permittees and permit applicants in a designated geographic area,
with the express agreement of those permittees and applicants and
the concurrence of the permit issuing authority in the area so
desianated.
Jeffrey G. Miller . Stephen Piehn
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Deputy Assistant Administrator
Office of Water Enforcement Office of Solid Waste
Swep T. Davis
Deoutv Assistant Administrator
^ »
Office of Water, Planning and Standards
-------
APPENDIX "S" A,,
AUG 2 3 1378
Both EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have recognized
the authority to regulate discharges of solid waste into waters
of the United States under section 402 of the Clean Water Act.
A February 9, 1977, letter from EPA's General Counsel noted
that such discharges were unlawful unless authorized by an
NPDES permit. A March 7, 1977, letter from the Deputy Director
of the Corps' Civil Works Division agreed that the discharge of
solid waste into water of the United States, including wetlands,
' is subject to the Clean Water Act. The letter also stated that
while an NPDES permit would be required for s'uch a discharge a
section 404 permit would also be required if it is necessary to
construct a levee or other containment structure to restrain
the wastes from entering surrounding aquatic areas. The letter
further declared that the Corps would not issue a 404 permit
for such a levee or containment structure.until the applicable
N?D£S permit was issued.
Based on these letters the Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Water Enforcement issued a guidance memorandum on July
11, 1977 indicating that the disposal of solid waste such as
garbage'into wetlands or other waters of the United States
is an unlawful discharge of pollutants unless permitted under
section 402 or the Clean Water Act.
Corps regulations issued on July 19, 1977, eliminated from
the definition of fill material subject to section 404 permit
-------
requirements those "pollutant(s) discharged into the water
*
primarily to dispose of waste," explaining that such pollutants
were to be regulated through NPDES permits (33 CFR 323.2(m)J.
The preamble accomoanying the. Corps' regulations noted that-'Che
:-'":'^-'-
disposal of waste materials, such as sludge, garbage, trash, '
and debris in water was better controlled through NPDES permits,
even though the final result of the discharge might be a
filling of an area of the waters of the United States (42 Fed.
Reg. 37130, July 19, 1977).
Most recently, on February 6, 1978, EPA proposed regula-
tions specifying minimum criteria for the classification of
solid waste disposal facilities under sections 1008(a)(3) and
'4004 (a) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and
section 405(c) of the Clean Water Act. Section 257.3-1(2) cf
these regulations would classify solid waste facilities in
.wetlands as "open dumps" unless an NPDES permit was obtained
(43 Fed. Reg, 4953, February 6, 1978). These regulations would
also establish a strong presumption against the issuance of an
NPDES permit unless: 1) the discharge is justified in light of
other practicable alternatives; and 2) the permit assures that
the facility -will utilize all practicable technologies and/or
best management practices to minimize adverse effects on the
aquatic ecosystem.
-------
memorandum; (2) a facility for which the owner or
operator cannot demonstrate to the satisfaction of
the NPDES permitting authority that a substantial
commitment has been made to solid waste disposal
before the date of this memorandum or (3) any
expansion of an existing facility after the date
of issuance of this memorandum into waters of the
U.S. where these waters have not been converted
or substantially converted into dry land as part of
the operation of the existing facility.
(d) "Solid waste" means any garbage, trash, sludge from
waste treatment plants, water supply treatment
plants, or air pollution control facilities, and
other discarded material, including solid, liquid,
semisolid, or contained gaseous material resulting
from industrial, commercial, mining or agricultural
operations, or other community activities which
constitutes a discharge of pollutants that would not
be adequately controlled through conventional NPDES
"end-of-pipe" treatment technology.
(e) "Waters of the United States" includes, but is not
limited to:
(1) The territorial seas;
-------
(2) All waters which are presently used, or
were used in the past, or may be susceptible to
use in interstate or foreign commerce, including
all waters which are subject to the ebb and
*
flow of the tide, intermittent streams, and'
adjacent wetlands.
(3) Tributaries of navigable waters of the United
States, including adjacent wetlands;
(4) Interstate waters, including adjacent wetlands;
and
(5) All other waters of the United States such as
intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, mudflats,
sancflats and wetlands, the use, degradation
or destruction of which would effect or
could affect interstate commerce including, but
not limited to:
(i) Intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and.
wetlands which are or could be used by
interstate travelers for recreational or
other purposes; and
(ii) Intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and
wetlands from which fish or shellfish
are or could be taken and sold in interstate
commero.-; and
-------
(iii) Intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and
wetlands which are or could be utilized
for industrial purposes by industries in
«
interstate commerce; and
(6) All impoundments of water otherwise defined as
waters of the United States under this definition.
(f) "Wetlands" means those areas that are inundated or
saturated by surface or ground waters at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and under.
normal circumstances do or would support a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated
or seasonally saturated soil, ccr.ci tions. Wetlands
generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar
areas such as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows,
river overflows, mudflats, and natural ponds.
-------
Al'PF.NDiX "<;
PEIIMIT DECISION MAKlliC PROCESS
Lr
.-I
|
NEW FACILITY
(Tlie Applicant must
(provide an alternatives
(study as part of its
(permit application
1
(If the Alternatives |
(Study demonstrates |
(that; j
1
|A1ternat ive
(Sites arc
' (available
(the permit
(application
(shall be
(denied
(Alternative
(Sites are not
(available the
(permit may be
(issued with
(appropriate
(conditions
(IF Tin: i)i.r>ci!A!!i;i: OR |
(PROPOSED DISCHARGE j
(IS INTO A: (
1 1_
| EXI STING FACILITY
I WHICH:
Jllan mibs t:mt lal ly or (
(Completely converted |
(water of lh«! U.S. |
[into dry _a reas |
I
I
1
(lias not substantially |
(or completely converted (
(waters of the U.S. into |
(dry areas |
I
I
(Iseue a final permit with
(appropriate conditions and
(not require an alternatives
(study. The permit shall not
(authorize any discharge into
(waters of the U.S. not
(already completely or aub-
Istantlally converted
(lusuu an interim permit
(requiring, in addition
(to other applicable
(requirements, an alterna-
(tiven study based on a
(compliance schedule in
(the permit
If the alternatives study
(demonstrates that:
(Alternative |
(Sites are [
(available |
(the final j
(permit f)hall|
I he- denied |
1
(Alternative
(Si teu are not
(available a
(final permit
(may be issued
(with
|/i|i|) rep r 1 H C e
JkjiiiiLLLLL! il!)
------- |