EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OF SECTION 208 PROGRAM FOR
DESIGNATED AREAS
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION
CONTROL ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1972
3J
V
'O
LU
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460
OCTOBER 1974
-------
FOREWORD
This Executive Summary is intended to provide a brief review of major
elements of the 208 program. It should not be viewed as a substitute
for more detailed publications on the program distributed by the Agency.
The primary objective of this summary is to inform the reader regarding
the major program elements.
To that end, this summary consists of four parts. Part I, Program
Overview, provides a brief discussion of the program's goal, its applica-
bility to specific problems and areas, and its major features. Part II,
Issues, briefly discusses the major issues that have arisen concerning
the program. Refinements to Agency policy on these issues will be made
as the program further develops. Part III, Overview of Planning Guide!ines:
provides a brief discussion of major features of the Draft Guidelines
for Areawide Waste Treatment Management. These guidelines were recently
published by EPA to assist designated local planning agencies in developing
-an areawide plan and implementation program. This discussion of the
guidelines should give the reader insight into the nature of areawide
planning and management under the 208 program. Part IV is the Conclusion.
-------
I. Program Overview
Goal. Areawide waste treatment management planning is designed to
attain water quality goals of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972. A primary goal of the Act is to achieve by 1983
a level of water quality that will support aquatic life and recreation
in and on the Nation's waters. Areawide planning and management efforts
under Section 208 of the Act will focus on sources of pollution which
threaten achievement of this 1983 goal.
Program Applicability. Areawide planning and management for designated
areas is intended to address in an integrated manner difficult urban/
industrial point source pollution problems, severe nonpoint source
pollution problems, and associated management problems of an area. Such
planning and management is to be utilized within designated areas where
base level technological solutions to pollution problems cannot achieve
water quality goals, or where such solutions fail to be the most cost-
effective solutions to the problems. The technological remedies referred
to here are waste water treatment plants and related facilities. The
Act makes other provisions, e.g. Facilities Planning under Section 201,
for localities where these kinds of remedies are sufficient to solve
pollution problems.
In determining whether areawide planning and management mechanisms
are appropriate for an area in order to address water quality problems
and achieve the above 1983 goal of the Act, decision-makers should
consider the following questions:
- Does the area have difficult urban/industrial pollution problems?
(point source problem)
- Does the area have severe pollution problems emanating from diffuse
sources, e.g. highway runoff? (nonpoint source problem)
- Does the area have a severe groundwater problem resulting from
pollution generated in the area?
If an area has any of the problems listed above, consideration
should be given to the following questions:
- Do current plans and proposals address each relevant problem?
- Are^there institutional constraints prohibiting effective solution
of the problems?
- Can each municipality acting alone solve the pollution problems?
If decision-makers conclude that their area has these problems and
lacks effective solutions through existing or proposed programs, then an
areawide planning and management approach should be considered. Section 208
of the'Act provides the funds and the mechanisms for this approach.
-------
Program Features. In September 1973, the United States Environmental
Protection Agency published Planning Area and Agency Designation Regula-
tions in the Federal Register (40 CFR Part 126). These regulations set
forth criteria which planning areas and agencies would have to satisfy
to be eligible for a 208 designation. In May of 1974, the Agency published
Interim Grant Regulations (40 CFR Part 35, Subpart F) which establish
procedures for the preparation and approval of grant applications, and
describe required plan contents and the process of plan submittal and
review. Also in May of 1974, the Agency distributed Draft Guidelines
for Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning. The guidelines are
for use by planning agencies and other organizations involved in the 208
planning process.
1. Designation Factors. Pursuant to the Act and the Planning Area and
Agency Designation Regulations, Section 208 areas and agencies are to be
designated by the governor of a state or, in some instances, by local
elected officials of the area. In intrastate areas, the governor has
three options: he may choose, after consultation with local officials,
to designate, nondesignate, or remain silent. E.P.A. has encouraged
governors to either designate or nondesignate. If he chooses to remain
silent in regard to an area, local elected officials of the area may
designate their area and seek approval directly from E.P.A. Although
there is no appeal from nondesignation by a governor, nondesignation
does not preclude later designation of the area by the governor. In
interstate areas, the governor does not have the option of nondesignation.
After appropriate local consultation, he must either designate or remain
silent. If he chooses the latter course, local officials can seek
designation approval as part of the interstate planning area.
In order to be designated, an area must meet the criteria specified
in the Area and Agency Designation Regulations. In keeping with these
regulations, a preference will be given to areas of urban/industrial
concentration with substantial water quality problems. This preference,
however, does not preclude non-urban/industrial areas from being designated
under the Act. If an area is nonurban but has a substantial water
quality problem which could best be addressed by a local agency, the
area can be designated. A substantial water quality problem, in this
regard, would be such that a substantial percentage of stream segments
in the area are water quality limited with many point and nonpoint
sources of pollution. Alternatively, if the area is not an urban/industrial
concentration, but one in which high quality waters exist and are threatened
by development, the area can also be designated as a Section 208 area.
However, provision for non-degradation of the waters in the area must
explicitly and without qualification be included in the state's water quality
standards, and such non-degradation of the area's water must be adopted
as the 208 planning goal.
In addition to the above criteria, local governments within the 208
planning area must either have in operation a coordinated waste treatment
system or show their intent, through adopted resolutions of agreement,
to join together to take part in the 208 planning process in order to
develop a water quality management plan which will result in a coordinated
waste treatment management system for the area.
-------
2. Water Quality Management Plan. The Act and Interim Grant Regulations
prescribe that designated planning agencies are to develop a water
quality management plan for: (1) municipal and industrial point source
waste systems including storm and combined sewer discharges, (2) pollution
emanating from diffuse sources, (3) protection of ground water, and (4)
pollution resulting from disposal of residual wastes. The plan is to be
cost-effective (minimum resource, social and environmental cost) and
implementable. The plan must consider non-structural techniques for
control and abatement of pollution, including control of the use of land
where applicable. The planning horizon for these plans is twenty years;
however, plans must be dynamic and capable of meeting near term goals
and objectives as well.
3. Planning Process Framework. The Draft Guidelines for Areawide Waste
Treatment Management Planning describe a planning process which may be
utilized in preparing areawide water quality management plans. The
planning process utilized by planning agencies should be designed to
enable the systematic examination of a variety of technical and management
alternatives for accomplishing water quality goals.
The basic planning features of the planning process described in
the guidelines are:
A. Identification of Problems. Pollution problems should be
identified in terms of their relative impact on water quality. Existing
institutional problems impeding solutions of water quality problems
should also be identified.
B. Identification of Constraints. Technical and management constraints
should be identified.
C. Identification of Possible Solutions to Problems. All reasonable
management and regulatory control methods should be identified.
D. Development of Alternative Plans. Alternative technical and
regulatory control methods for municipal and industrial wastes, storm-
water control, non-point source control, and growth and development
should be combined into areawide plans. Comparable alternative options
for the management of these plans should also be identified.
E. Analysis of Alternative Plans. The alternatives should be
evaluated in terms of minimizing overall costs, maintaining environmental,
social, and economic values, and assuring adequate management authority,
financial capability and institutional feasibility.
F- Selection of Areawide Plan. The selection should be based upon
systematic comparison of the alternatives.
G. Periodic Updating of the Plan. A specific procedure should be
defined for monitoring plan effects and developing annual revisions to
the plan.
-------
Local planning agencies may use discretion in employing any logical
planning process, as long as that process addresses the major issues of
areawide waste management and produces an areawide plan, the contents of
which are set forth below.
4. Plan Contents. The required contents of areawide water quality
management plans as set forth in the grant regulations and planning
guidelines include the following:
A. Identification of anticipated municipal and industrial treatment
works construction over a 20 year period.
B. Definition of the waste water systems for the area including:
system configurations, location and capacities of all facilities, treat-
ment levels and types, and disposal of residual waste.
C. Identification of required urban stormwater runoff control
systems.
D. Establishment of construction priorities over five and twenty
year periods.
E. Establishment of a regulatory program to: (1) provide for
waste treatment management on an areawide basis and for identification,
evaluation, and control or treatment of all point and nonpoint pollution
sources; (2) regulate the location, modification, and construction of
waste-discharging facilities; and (3) assure that industrial or com-
mercial wastes discharged into publicly owned treatment works meet
applicable pretreatment requirements.
F. Identification of agencies necessary to construct, operate, and
maintain facilities required by the plan and otherwise carry out the
plan.
G. Identification of nonpoint sources of pollution including those
related to agriculture, silviculture, mining, construction, and certain
forms of salt water intrusion, and procedures and methods (including
land use provisions) to control those sources to the extent feasible.
H. Processes to control the disposition of residual waste and land
disposal of pollutants to protect ground and surface water quality.
I.* Selection of a management agency(s) and institutional arrangements
to implement the plan, and identification of the major management alterna-
tives (including enforcement, financing, land use and other regulatory
measures and associated management authorities and practices).
J. A schedule for implementing all elements of the plan, including
identification of the monetary costs and economic, social and environmental
impact of implementation.
-------
K. Required certifications relating to consistency with other
plans and to public participation in the planning process and plan
adoption.
L. Recommendations of appropriate local governing bodies as to
state certification and EPA approval of the plan.
5. Financial Assistance. Financial assistance is provided to designated
planning agencies for a period of up to 24 months to develop an initial
plan for the area. For obligations made during FY 1974 and FY 1975, the
Federal share will be 100 percent of the eligible costs of the project.
6. Plan Submittal. After review and approval by the governor of the
state, areawide planning agencies are to submit the initial plan to the
Environmental Protection Agency within twenty-four months after award of
a planning grant. At the time of plan submission, one or more areawide
waste treatment management agencies must be designated to implement the
plan and to receive Federal construction grants under Title II of the
Act.
7. Coordination With Other Planning Activities. Areawide waste treatment
management planning is to be coordinated with other provisions of the
Act such as facilities planning, basin planning, permits, and State
environmental program provisions. Areawide planning and management
activities are also to be coordinated with other planning programs in
the area that impact upon or that are impacted by water quality. Of
particular interest are Corps of Engineers Urban Studies, Coastal Zone
Management Plans, air, solid waste, water supply, and other resource
management programs of the area.
8. Public Participation. Given the scope and detail of areawide waste
treatment management planning, an active program of public participation
is to be initiated in each designated area for the purpose of encouraging
citizens to participate in such activities as the following:
- designation of planning areas and agencies
- development of the areawide planning process
- defining goals
- establishing priorities
- understanding land use - water quality relationships
- selection and implementation of the final areawide waste treatment
management plan
The views of community residents regarding areawide planning and
management issues will be of critical importance in formulating alternative
technical and management plans, and in implementing any selected plan.
-------
II. Issues
Many issues have arisen concerning various aspects of this program.
Major issues that have been addressed include the following.
Institutional Arrangements. The issue has been raised of what the
impact of areawide waste treatment management planning would be on
traditional state and local institutional relationships. Two major
concerns are most often raised in this regard. The first is whether or
not traditional powers of either state or local governments will be
weakened through a shift in authority between the levels of government
as a result of Section 208 requirements. The second major concern is
whether Section 208 of the Act would necessitate the creation of a new
intermediate level of government that would radically change traditional
relationships.
The Environmental Protection Agency does not view Section 208 of
the Act as the mechanism to reorganize state and local government. The
Agency believes that one important consequence of areawide waste treatment
planning and management will be increased cooperation between state and
local governments, and among local governments, on water quality concerns.
Each level of government has a vital role to fulfill in 208 planning and
management in order to achieve the 1983 goal of the Act. For example,
data from the state basin planning program as well as state authority
through the permit program will provide inputs and a framework for local
208 agencies conducting areawide planning and management. The planning
process and the areawide water quality management plan developed by the
local agencies will utilize both state and local institutional and
financial arrangements in meeting requirements of the Act. Radical
changes in traditional powers and relationships are not required.
Local institutional arrangements .stimulated by areawide planning
and management should be such that the most cost-effective solution to
areawide water quality problems will be implemented. The arrangements
should be feasible and practical extensions of existing institutional
situations. Although the Act requires a single planning agency for the
planning area, that designated agency must include elected representatives
of the area. The management agency(s) and institutional structure that
will be charged with implementing the plan must be politically feasible.
Given the great diversity in local institutions around the country, the
implementation of the 208 plan may involve several levels of government
and a variety of existing or newly created agencies and intergovernmental
arrangements.
Land Use. What is the relationship of land use to Section 208? Land
use consideration for areawide waste treatment management planning
should identify: (1) relationships between land use and water quality
and (2) land use controls which local governments and the management
agency(s) can utilize as an aid in achieving water quality goals.
-------
Implementing Section 208 of the Act requires a regulatory program to
regulate the location of all facilities that have an impact on water
quality and to control the discharge of all point and nonpoint sources
of pollution. The term facilities includes any controllable source of
pollutants, the regulation of which contributes to attaining water
quality standards. Land use control is fundamental to this regulatory
program. For example, land use controls can be utilized as a cost-
effective means of reducing investment in point and nonpoint source
controls. Thus, land use planning and controls may be viewed as inte-
gral parts of areawide planning and management.
Land use planning and controls are traditionally the responsibility
of local units of government. Planning and management activities related
to land use that are carried out under Section 208 are to use existing
land use plans and measures whenever possible. In some cases it will be
necessary to update existing plans to reflect and help attain water
quality objectives. It is possible that some jurisdictions within the
208 area will not have land use plans and/or controls. In this case,
the 208 agency should work with the appropriate jurisdiction to gather
enough information about the area so that current and future development
patterns and policies can be identified and, if necessary, updated to
incorporate water quality objectives.
Development Policy. What is the relationship of development policy to
Section 208? Areawide planning and management does not imply a growth
ceiling. Growth and development policy is a local decision. However,
the development patterns stemming from these policies must be consistent
with water quality goals and requirements. Thus, it may be necessary to
consider alternative development patterns which may lend themselves to a
more cost-effective water quality management plan.
Relationship of Areawide and Facilities Planning. Considerable confusion
seems to exist with regard to the relationship of areawide and facilities
planning activities within designated areas. The general division of
responsibilities between these two programs is as follows:
- The selection of wastewater systems and service areas for the
total area, location and capacities of all facilities, treatment
levels and the preliminary identification of treatment types, and
an overall plan for disposal of residual wastes will be included
in the areawide planning.
- The preliminary designs and studies related to the approved plan
'including sewer evaluation surveys, detailed surface and sub-
surface investigations of sites of individual facilities, and
preliminary design and detailed cost-effectiveness studies
including the environmental assessment of individual facilities
will be accomplished under facilities plans under Step 1 grants.
-------
At the discretion of the Regional Office, some modification of this
division of program responsibilities may be warranted on a case by case
basis. It is recognized that facilities planning activities will likely
be underway at the time areawide planning begins. Furthermore, new
facilities planning starts may be scheduled during the areawide planning
period. Those ongoing and new facilities planning activities should
continue as planned to support the timely construction of wastewater
treatment works. Obviously, those areawide and facilities planning
activities should be closely coordinated to avoid unnecessary frag-
mentation and duplication of effort. The designated planning agency
must exert leadership in such coordination.
208 Planning in Areas Not Designated. What is the state's responsibility
in areas not designated? EPA policy is still being defined regarding
this issue. The Act is clear that in areas not designated where 208
type planning is necessary to meet water quality standards, the state
must act as the planning agency for the area. States cannot receive 208
funds to conduct such planning. Funding may be available through the
State Program Grants authorized under Section 106 of the Act. It is the
Agency's general policy position that this planning should be an element
of the basin planning process. It must be consistent with the regulations
and guidelines applicable to this process, but must also reflect the
requirements governing 208 planning in designated areas when water
quality problems are complex. The state can conceivably subcontract
planning responsibilities to sub-state and local units of governments.
Specific questions still to be clarified include: (1) funding
support, (2) the extent of land use considerations, (3) planning for
interstate areas not designated, and (4) institutional and political
considerations. Guidance on these matters will be available in the
near future.
-------
III. Overview of Planning Guidelines
Draft Guidelines for Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning
have recently been issued by EPA for assistance to 208 planning agencies.
Some program features discussed in Part I of this executive summary are
presented in detail in these guidelines. Major subjects addressed in
the guidelines include the areawide planning process, technical planning,
point and nonpoint source sub-plans, management planning, combined plan
evaluation and selection, citizen participation, and plan submittal and
approval. These subjects are briefly discussed below.
Planning Process. The purpose of the areawide planning process is to
formulate an implementable areawide water quality management plan. The
planning process must integrate both technical needs for pollution
control and management arrangements capable of implementing the controls.
Activities undertaken in an areawide waste treatment management planning
process would include: basic data gathering and analysis, i.e., water
quality data; projections of future population, employment, and land use
activities; a-^1 and use analysis to delineate land use and water quality
relationships^ development of waste load allocations for alternative
plans consistent with water quality standards; development of point
source and nonpoint source subplans; management analysis for the area
and development of alternative management plans consistent with technical
plans; combining alternative plans and selecting an areawide water
quality management plan.
The flow chart (p. 14) displays a simplified version of the basic
planning process presented in the guidelines. Areawide planning agencies
may use discretion in employing any logical planning process, as long as
that process addresses major issues of areawide waste treatment management
and produces an areawide plan the content of which is set forth in the
Interim Grant Regulations.
Technical Planning. Technical planning for areawide waste treatment
management is concerned with identifying the priority water quality
problems of the area, recognizing any constraints in dealing with the
problems, and developing alternative strategies for pollution control.
The control strategies may be a combination of controls on municipal
waste water systems, industrial effluents, nonpoint sources, and land
use and growth where feasible. The framework under which technical
planning is carried out consists primarily of the point source sub-plan
and nonpoint source sub-plan elements of the areawide plan.
Key Sub-Plans. The key sub-plans which are fundamental building blocks
of the areawide plan are the point source control plans and nonpoint
source control plans mentioned above.
1. The point source control plan should provide a systematic
evaluation and selection of alternative pollution control
strategies for all point sources of pollution in the area.
The guidelines describe detailed planning considerations
-------
that should be addressed in establishing alternative
sub-plans for control of point sources of pollution. The
point sources considered are discharges from municipal
treatment plants, combined sewer overflows, separate storm
sewer discharges, and industrial waste effluents. Disposal
of residual wastes, particularly wastewater sludge, and
waste water reuse considerations are also discussed.
In development of the point source control sub-plan, and
in evaluating alternative point source sub-plans, balanced
consideration of measures other than the traditional capital
intensive approaches is to be emphasized. Consideration of
alternatives should encompass all applicable structural and
management measures for preventing, abating, reducing, storing,
treating, separating, recycling, reclaiming, and disposing of
municipal and industrial waste waters and storm water discharges.
2. The nonpoint source control plan should identify major
nonpoint sources of pollution, evaluate their impact on water
quality, and delineate measures for their control. Although
the Act does not specifically define nonpoint sources of
pollution, they are, by inference, sources of diffuse runoff,
seepage and percolation contributing to the degradation of
the quality of surface waters and groundwater. Major sources of
nonpoint pollution in most urban areas are runoff, construction
activity, hydrographic modification, and land and subsurface
disposal of residual waste. Other nonpoint sources may result
from agriculture, mining, silviculture, and salt water intrusion.
Management Planning. Management planning should be conducted concurrently
with technical planning. All components of the areawide plan are meant to
be implemented and therefore depend upon the development of an effective
management program for their implementation. The Act requires that authority
to implement the areawide plan be vested in a designated agency or agencies
within the 208 area. The purpose of management planning is to select a
management agency(s) and to develop appropriate institutional arrangements
through which the plan can be implemented. To insure plan implementation,
the management agency(s) and supporting institutional arrangements selected
must be capable of fulfilling the responsibilities delineated in the Act.
The criteria that should be used to determine whether agencies and arrange-
ments can properly carry out responsibilities are: adequate legal authority,
adequate financial capability, practicality, coordinative capacity, and
public accountability.
A management analysis should be undertaken as a first step in manage-
ment planning to evaluate the existing capability within the area to meet
management requirements of the Act, and to develop an understanding of what
is needed to satisfy these requirements.
10
-------
Upon completion of the management analysis, alternative management
plans are to be developed reflecting the results of the analysis. The
management plans should be developed consistent with the criteria previously
mentioned for management agencies and institutional arrangements as well
as with the alternative technical plans.
Combined Plan Evaluation and Selection. The technical and management
planning components are to be conducted in such fashion as to result in
a series of alternative technical plans for which an alternative manage-
ment plan has been developed to implement the technical plan. The
technical and management plans are combined to form alternative areawide
water quality management plans.
Sufficient detail concerning the schedule of actions to be completed
under each alternative should be provided to enable accurate evaluation
of the plan in terms of meeting 1983 water quality goals.
To enable comparison of alternative plans and selection of an area-
wide plan, the following information on effects of alternative plans
should be assembled:
1. Contribution to Water Quality and Other Related Water Management
Goals of the Area
2. Technical Reliability
3. Monetary Costs
4. Environmental Effects
5. Economic and Social Effects
6. Implementation Feasibility
7. Public Acceptability
After systematic comparison of alternatives and required public
participation, a final areawide water quality management plan is to be
selected which is cost-effective and implementable.
Citizen Participation. The guidelines present mechanisms and suggest a
model to involve citizens in the development, revision, and enforcement
of any regulation, standard, effluent limitation, plan or program regard-
ing Section 208 of the Act.
Plan Submittal Review and Approval. Each designated 208 planning agency
must submit its areawide water quality management plan, including recom-
mendations for management agencies, to the appropriate EPA Regional
Administrator within 24 months after the award of a planning grant. The
plan must be submitted to EPA through the governor of the state. Included
in the state review and certification of the plan should be gubernatorial
implementation recommendations acknowledging that the certified 208 plan
will be an operational part of the state's program for water pollution
control, i.e., plan contents will be reflected in permits, construction
grants program, etc. If there are unresolved differences between state
and local officials at the time state comments are forwarded to EPA, the
Regional Administrator of EPA will resolve the differences.
11
-------
The submittal, review and approval steps are the following:
. Local Review and Recommendation
. State Review and Certification of Approval
. EPA Review and Approval
IV. Conclusion
This summary has briefly discussed the program's goal, applicability,
and major features. It has provided the reader with a response to some
of the major issues concerning the program, as well as an overview of
recently distributed areawide planning guidelines.
Inquiries concerning this program should be addressed to the Regional
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in your region.
12
-------
PLANNING PROCESS
Executive Summary
Areawide Waste Treatment
Management Planning
Basic Data Inputs:
Water Quality Goals & Standards
Critical Water Quality Conditions
Dischargers
NPDES Permits Info
JL
Projections:
Population, Employment, Land Use,
Waste Loads
Land Use Analysis:
Delineate a Land Use Plan to
Accommodate Anticipated Growth
Consistent with Water Quality
Waste Load Allocation
for Alternative Areawide Plans
Consistent with Meeting Water
Quality Standards
,,Point Source Sub-Plan
[^Consistent with Wast
Load Allocations
Non-Point Source Sub-Plans
Consistent with Waste Load
lAllocations
~]
Management Analysis:
1. Experience and Potential for
Areawide Management
2. Existing and Required Legal
Authori ty
3. Existing and Required Institutional
Arrangements
4. Existing and Required Financial
Arrangements
, * I
JAlternative Management Plansp
1
Combined
Alternative
Areawi de
Plans
Compare
Alternatives
Select
Final Plan
and
Implementation
Schedule
------- |