Loading (50 kb)...'

National
United States Regulations
40 CFR PART 124—PROCEDURES FOR DECISIONMAKING




Title 40: Protection of Environment


PART 125—CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., unless otherwise noted.

Source: 44 FR 32948, June 7, 1979, unless otherwise noted.

Subpart A—Criteria and Standards for Imposing Technology-Based Treatment Requirements Under Sections 301(b) and 402 of the Act
top
§ 125.1 Purpose and scope.
top
This subpart establishes criteria and standards for the imposition of technology-based treatment requirements in permits under section 301(b) of the Act, including the application of EPA promulgated effluent limitations and case-by-case determinations of effluent limitations under section 402(a)(1) of the Act.

§ 125.2 Definitions.
top
For the purposes of this part, any reference to the Act shall mean the Clean Water Act of 1977 (CWA). Unless otherwise noted, the definitions in parts 122, 123 and 124 apply to this part.

[45 FR 33512, May 19, 1980]

§ 125.3 Technology-based treatment requirements in permits.
top
(a) General. Technology-based treatment requirements under section 301(b) of the Act represent the minimum level of control that must be imposed in a permit issued under section 402 of the Act. (See §§122.41, 122.42 and 122.44 for a discussion of additional or more stringent effluent limitations and conditions.) Permits shall contain the following technology-based treatment requirements in accordance with the following statutory deadlines;

(1) For POTW's, effluent limitations based upon:

(i) Secondary treatment—from date of permit issuance; and

(ii) The best practicable waste treatment technology—not later than July 1, 1983; and

(2) For dischargers other than POTWs except as provided in §122.29(d), effluent limitations requiring:

(i) The best practicable control technology currently available (BPT)—

(A) For effluent limitations promulgated under Section 304(b) after January 1, 1982 and requiring a level of control substantially greater or based on fundamentally different control technology than under permits for an industrial category issued before such date, compliance as expeditiously as practicable but in no case later than three years after the date such limitations are promulgated under section 304(b) and in no case later than March 31, 1989;

(B) For effluent limitations established on a case-by-case basis based on Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) under Section 402(a)(1)(B) of the Act in a permit issued after February 4, 1987, compliance as expeditiously as practicable but in no case later than three years after the date such limitations are established and in no case later than March 31, 1989;

(C) For all other BPT effluent limitations compliance is required from the date of permit issuance.

(ii) For conventional pollutants, the best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT)—

(A) For effluent limitations promulgated under section 304(b), as expeditiously as practicable but in no case later than three years after the date such limitations are promulgated under section 304(b), and in no case later than March 31, 1989.

(B) For effluent limitations established on a case-by-case (BPJ) basis under section 402(a)(1)(B) of the Act in a permit issued after February 4, 1987, compliance as expeditiously as practicable but in no case later than three years after the date such limitations are established and in no case later than March 31, 1989;

(iii) For all toxic pollutants referred to in Committee Print No. 95–30, House Committee on Public Works and Transportation, the best available technology economically achievable (BAT)—

(A) For effluent limitations established under section 304(b), as expeditiously as practicable but in no case later than three years after the date such limitations are promulgated under section 304(b), and in no case later than March 31, 1989.

(B) For permits issued on a case-by-case (BPJ) basis under section 402(a)(1)(B) of the Act after February 4, 1987 establishing BAT effluent limitations, compliance is required as expeditiously as practicable but in no case later than three years after the date such limitations are promulgated under section 304(b), and in no case later than March 31, 1989.

(iv) For all toxic pollutants other than those listed in Committee Print No. 95–30, effluent limitations based on BAT—

(A) For effluent limitations promulgated under section 304(b) compliance is required as expeditiously as practicable, but in no case later than three years after the date such limitations are promulgated under section 304(b) and in no case later than March 31, 1989.

(B) For permits issued on a case-by-case (BPJ) basis under Section 402(a)(1)(B) of the Act after February 4, 1987 establishing BAT effluent limitations, compliance is required as expeditiously as practicable but in no case later than 3 years after the date such limitations are established and in no case later than March 31, 1989.

(v) For all pollutants which are neither toxic nor conventional pollutants, effluent limitations based on BAT—

(A) For effluent limitations promulgated under section 304(b), compliance is required as expeditiously as practicable but in no case later than 3 years after the date such limitations are established and in no case later than March 31, 1989.

(B) For permits issued on a case-by-case (BPJ) basis under section 402(a)(1)(B) of the Act after February 4, 1987 establishing BAT effluent limitations compliance is required as expeditiously as practicable but in no case later than three years after the date such limitations are established and in no case later than March 31, 1989.

(b) Statutory variances and extensions. (1) The following variances from technology-based treatment requirements are authorized by the Act and may be applied for under §122.21;

(i) For POTW's, a section 301(h) marine discharge variance from secondary treatment (subpart G);

(ii)For dischargers other than POTW's;

(A) A section 301(c) economic variance from BAT (subpart E);

(B) A section 301(g) water quality related variance from BAT (subpart F); and

(C) A section 316(a) thermal variance from BPT, BCT and BAT (subpart H).

(2) The following extensions of deadlines for compliance with technology-based treatment requirements are authorized by the Act and may be applied for under §124.53:

(i) For POTW's a section 301(i) extension of the secondary treatment deadline (subpart J);

(ii) For dischargers other than POTW's:

(A) A section 301(i) extension of the BPT deadline (subpart J); and

(B) A section 301(k) extension of the BAT deadline (subpart C).

(c) Methods of imposing technology-based treatment requirements in permits. Technology-based treatment requirements may be imposed through one of the following three methods:

(1) Application of EPA-promulgated effluent limitations developed under section 304 of the Act to dischargers by category or subcategory. These effluent limitations are not applicable to the extent that they have been remanded or withdrawn. However, in the case of a court remand, determinations underlying effluent limitations shall be binding in permit issuance proceedings where those determinations are not required to be reexamined by a court remanding the regulations. In addition, dischargers may seek fundamentally different factors variances from these effluent limitations under §122.21 and subpart D of this part.

(2) On a case-by-case basis under section 402(a)(1) of the Act, to the extent that EPA-promulgated effluent limitations are inapplicable. The permit writer shall apply the appropriate factors listed in §125.3(d) and shall consider:

(i) The appropriate technology for the category or class of point sources of which the applicant is a member, based upon all available information; and

(ii) Any unique factors relating to the applicant.


[Comment: These factors must be considered in all cases, regardless of whether the permit is being issued by EPA or an approved State.]


(3) Through a combination of the methods in paragraphs (d) (1) and (2) of this section. Where promulgated effluent limitations guidelines only apply to certain aspects of the discharger's operation, or to certain pollutants, other aspects or activities are subject to regulation on a case-by-case basis in order to carry out the provisions of the Act.

(4) Limitations developed under paragraph (d)(2) of this section may be expressed, where appropriate, in terms of toxicity (e.g., “the LC50 for fat head minnow of the effluent from outfall 001 shall be greater than 25%”). Provided, That is shown that the limits reflect the appropriate requirements (for example, technology-based or water-quality-based standards) of the Act.

(d) In setting case-by-case limitations pursuant to §125.3(c), the permit writer must consider the following factors:

(1) For BPT requirements: (i) The total cost of application of technology in relation to the effluent reduction benefits to be achieved from such application;

(ii) The age of equipment and facilities involved;

(iii) The process employed;

(iv) The engineering aspects of the application of various types of control techniques;

(v) Process changes; and

(vi) Non-water quality environmental impact (including energy requirements).

(2) For BCT requirements: (i) The reasonableness of the relationship between the costs of attaining a reduction in effluent and the effluent reduction benefits derived;

(ii) The comparison of the cost and level of reduction of such pollutants from the discharge from publicly owned treatment works to the cost and level of reduction of such pollutants from a class or category of industrial sources;

(iii) The age of equipment and facilities involved;

(iv) The process employed;

(v) The engineering aspects of the application of various types of control techniques;

(vi) Process changes; and

(vii) Non-water quality environmental impact (including energy requirements).

(3) For BAT requirements: (i) The age of equipment and facilities involved;

(ii) The process employed;

(iii) The engineering aspects of the application of various types of control techniques;

(iv) Process changes;

(v) The cost of achieving such effluent reduction; and

(vi) Non-water quality environmental impact (including energy requirements).

(e) Technology-based treatment requirements are applied prior to or at the point of discharge.

(f) Technology-based treatment requirements cannot be satisfied through the use of “non-treatment” techniques such as flow augmentation and in-stream mechanical aerators. However, these techniques may be considered as a method of achieving water quality standards on a case-by-case basis when:

(1) The technology-based treatment requirements applicable to the discharge are not sufficient to achieve the standards;

(2) The discharger agrees to waive any opportunity to request a variance under section 301 (c), (g) or (h) of the Act; and

(3) The discharger demonstrates that such a technique is the preferred environmental and economic method to achieve the standards after consideration of alternatives such as advanced waste treatment, recycle and reuse, land disposal, changes in operating methods, and other available methods.

(g) Technology-based effluent limitations shall be established under this subpart for solids, sludges, filter backwash, and other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control of wastewaters in the same manner as for other pollutants.

(h)(1) The Director may set a permit limit for a conventional pollutant at a level more stringent than the best conventional pollution control technology (BCT), or a limit for a nonconventional pollutant which shall not be subject to modification under section 301 (c) or (g) of the Act where:

(i) Effluent limitations guidelines specify the pollutant as an indicator for a toxic pollutant, or

(ii)(A) The limitation reflects BAT-level control of discharges of one or more toxic pollutants which are present in the waste stream, and a specific BAT limitation upon the toxic pollutant(s) is not feasible for economic or technical reasons;

(B) The permit identifies which toxic pollutants are intended to be controlled by use of the limitation; and

(C) The fact sheet required by §124.56 sets forth the basis for the limitation, including a finding that compliance with the limitation will result in BAT-level control of the toxic pollutant discharges identified in paragraph (h)(1)(ii)(B) of this section, and a finding that it would be economically or technically infeasible to directly limit the toxic pollutant(s).

(2) The Director may set a permit limit for a conventional pollutant at a level more stringent than BCT when:

(i) Effluent limitations guidelines specify the pollutant as an indicator for a hazardous substance, or

(ii)(A) The limitation reflects BAT-level control of discharges (or an appropriate level determined under section 301(c) or (g) of the Act) of one or more hazardous substance(s) which are present in the waste stream, and a specific BAT (or other appropriate) limitation upon the hazardous substance(s) is not feasible for economic or technical reasons;

(B) The permit identifies which hazardous substances are intended to be controlled by use of the limitation; and

(C) The fact sheet required by §124.56 sets forth the basis for the limitation, including a finding that compliance with the limitations will result in BAT-level (or other appropriate level) control of the hazardous substances discharges identified in paragraph (h)(2)(ii)(B) of this section, and a finding that it would be economically or technically infeasible to directly limit the hazardous substance(s).

(iii) Hazardous substances which are also toxic pollutants are subject to paragraph (h)(1) of this section.

(3) The Director may not set a more stringent limit under the preceding paragraphs if the method of treatment required to comply with the limit differs from that which would be required if the toxic pollutant(s) or hazardous substance(s) controlled by the limit were limited directly.

(4) Toxic pollutants identified under paragraph (h)(1) of this section remain subject to the requirements of §122.42(a)(1) (notification of increased discharges of toxic pollutants above levels reported in the application form).

(Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Clean Air Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912, 6925, 6927, 6974)

[44 FR 32948, June 7, 1979, as amended at 45 FR 33512, May 19, 1980; 48 FR 14293, Apr. 1, 1983; 49 FR 38052, Sept. 26, 1984; 50 FR 6941, Feb. 19, 1985; 54 FR 257, Jan. 4, 1989]

Subpart B—Criteria for Issuance of Permits to Aquaculture Projects
top
§ 125.10 Purpose and scope.
top
(a) These regulations establish guidelines under sections 318 and 402 of the Act for approval of any discharge of pollutants associated with an aquaculture project.

(b) The regulations authorize, on a selective basis, controlled discharges which would otherwise be unlawful under the Act in order to determine the feasibility of using pollutants to grow aquatic organisms which can be harvested and used beneficially. EPA policy is to encourage such projects, while at the same time protecting other beneficial uses of the waters.

(c) Permits issued for discharges into aquaculture projects under this subpart are NPDES permits and are subject to the applicable requirements of parts 122, 123 and 124. Any permit shall include such conditions (including monitoring and reporting requirements) as are necessary to comply with those parts. Technology-based effluent limitations need not be applied to discharges into the approved project except with respect to toxic pollutants.

§ 125.11 Criteria.
top
(a) No NPDES permit shall be issued to an aquaculture project unless:

(1) The Director determines that the aquaculture project:

(i) Is intended by the project operator to produce a crop which has significant direct or indirect commercial value (or is intended to be operated for research into possible production of such a crop); and

(ii) Does not occupy a designated project area which is larger than can be economically operated for the crop under cultivation or than is necessary for research purposes.

(2) The applicant has demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the Director, that the use of the pollutant to be discharged to the aquaculture project will result in an increased harvest of organisms under culture over what would naturally occur in the area;

(3) The applicant has demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the Director, that if the species to be cultivated in the aquaculture project is not indigenous to the immediate geographical area, there will be minimal adverse effects on the flora and fauna indigenous to the area, and the total commercial value of the introduced species is at least equal to that of the displaced or affected indigenous flora and fauna;

(4) The Director determines that the crop will not have a significant potential for human health hazards resulting from its consumption;

(5) The Director determines that migration of pollutants from the designated project area to water outside of the aquaculture project will not cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards or a violation of the applicable standards and limitations applicable to the supplier of the pollutant that would govern if the aquaculture project were itself a point source. The approval of an aquaculture project shall not result in the enlargement of a pre-existing mixing zone area beyond what had been designated by the State for the original discharge.

(b) No permit shall be issued for any aquaculture project in conflict with a plan or an amendment to a plan approved under section 208(b) of the Act.

(c) No permit shall be issued for any aquaculture project located in the territorial sea, the waters of the contiguous zone, or the oceans, except in conformity with guidelines issued under section 403(c) of the Act.

(d) Designated project areas shall not include a portion of a body of water large enough to expose a substantial portion of the indigenous biota to the conditions within the designated project area. For example, the designated project area shall not include the entire width of a watercourse, since all organisms indigenous to that watercourse might be subjected to discharges of pollutants that would, except for the provisions of section 318 of the Act, violate section 301 of the Act.

(e) Any modifications caused by the construction or creation of a reef, barrier or containment structure shall not unduly alter the tidal regimen of an estuary or interfere with migrations of unconfined aquatic species.


[Comment: Any modifications described in this paragraph which result in the discharge of dredged or fill material into navigable waters may be subject to the permit requirements of section 404 of the Act.]


(f) Any pollutants not required by or beneficial to the aquaculture crop shall not exceed applicable standards and limitations when entering the designated project area.

Subpart C [Reserved]
top
Subpart D—Criteria and Standards for Determining Fundamentally Different Factors Under Sections 301(b)(1)(A), 301(b)(2) (A) and (E) of the Act
top
§ 125.30 Purpose and scope.
top
(a) This subpart establishes the criteria and standards to be used in determining whether effluent limitations alternative to those required by promulgated EPA effluent limitations guidelines under sections 301 and 304 of the Act (hereinafter referred to as “national limits”) should be imposed on a discharger because factors relating to the discharger's facilities, equipment, processes or other factors related to the discharger are fundamentally different from the factors considered by EPA in development of the national limits. This subpart applies to all national limitations promulgated under sections 301 and 304 of the Act, except for the BPT limits contained in 40 CFR 423.12 (steam electric generating point source category).

(b) In establishing national limits, EPA takes into account all the information it can collect, develop and solicit regarding the factors listed in sections 304(b) and 304(g) of the Act. In some cases, however, data which could affect these national limits as they apply to a particular discharge may not be available or may not be considered during their development. As a result, it may be necessary on a case-by-case basis to adjust the national limits, and make them either more or less stringent as they apply to certain dischargers within an industrial category or subcategory. This will only be done if data specific to that discharger indicates it presents factors fundamentally different from those considered by EPA in developing the limit at issue. Any interested person believing that factors relating to a discharger's facilities, equipment, processes or other facilities related to the discharger are fundamentally different from the factors considered during development of the national limits may request a fundamentally different factors variance under §122.21(l)(1). In addition, such a variance may be proposed by the Director in the draft permit.

(Secs. 301, 304, 306, 307, 308, and 501 of the Clean Water Act (the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Pub. L. 92–500 as amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977, Pub. L. 95–217 (the “Act”); Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Clean Air Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912, 6925, 6927, 6974)

[44 FR 32948, June 7, 1979, as amended at 45 FR 33512, May 19, 1980; 46 FR 9460, Jan. 28, 1981; 47 FR 52309, Nov. 19, 1982; 48 FR 14293, Apr. 1, 1983]

§ 125.31 Criteria.
top
(a) A request for the establishment of effluent limitations under this subpart (fundamentally different factors variance) shall be approved only if:

(1) There is an applicable national limit which is applied in the permit and specifically controls the pollutant for which alternative effluent limitations or standards have been requested; and

(2) Factors relating to the discharge controlled by the permit are fundamentally different from those considered by EPA in establishing the national limits; and

(3) The request for alternative effluent limitations or standards is made in accordance with the procedural requirements of part 124.

(b) A request for the establishment of effluent limitations less stringent than those required by national limits guidelines shall be approved only if:

(1) The alternative effluent limitation or standard requested is no less stringent than justified by the fundamental difference; and

(2) The alternative effluent limitation or standard will ensure compliance with sections 208(e) and 301(b)(1)(C) of the Act; and

(3) Compliance with the national limits (either by using the technologies upon which the national limits are based or by other control alternatives) would result in:

(i) A removal cost wholly out of proportion to the removal cost considered during development of the national limits; or

(ii) A non-water quality environmental impact (including energy requirements) fundamentally more adverse than the impact considered during development of the national limits.

(c) A request for alternative limits more stringent than required by national limits shall be approved only if:

(1) The alternative effluent limitation or standard requested is no more stringent than justified by the fundamental difference; and

(2) Compliance with the alternative effluent limitation or standard would not result in:

(i) A removal cost wholly out of proportion to the removal cost considered during development of the national limits; or

(ii) A non-water quality environmental impact (including energy requirements) fundamentally more adverse than the impact considered during development of the national limits.

(d) Factors which may be considered fundamentally different are:

(1) The nature or quality of pollutants contained in the raw waste load of the applicant's process wastewater;


[Comment: (1) In determining whether factors concerning the discharger are fundamentally different, EPA will consider, where relevant, the applicable development document for the national limits, associated technical and economic data collected for use in developing each respective national limit, records of legal proceedings, and written and printed documentation including records of communication, etc., relevant to the development of respective national limits which are kept on public file by EPA.

(2) Waste stream(s) associated with a discharger's process wastewater which were not considered in the development of the national limits will not ordinarily be treated as fundamentally different under paragraph (a) of this section. Instead, national limits should be applied to the other streams, and the unique stream(s) should be subject to limitations based on section 402(a)(1) of the Act. See §125.2(c)(2).]


(2) The volume of the discharger's process wastewater and effluent discharged;

(3) Non-water quality environmental impact of control and treatment of the discharger's raw waste load;

(4) Energy requirements of the application of control and treatment technology;

(5) Age, size, land availability, and configuration as they relate to the discharger's equipment or facilities; processes employed; process changes; and engineering aspects of the application of control technology;

(6) Cost of compliance with required control technololgy.

(e) A variance request or portion of such a request under this section shall not be granted on any of the following grounds:

(1) The infeasibility of installing the required waste treatment equipment within the time the Act allows.


[Comment: Under this section a variance request may be approved if it is based on factors which relate to the discharger's ability ultimately to achieve national limits but not if it is based on factors which merely affect the discharger's ability to meet the statutory deadlines of sections 301 and 307 of the Act such as labor difficulties, construction schedules, or unavailability of equipment.]


(2) The assertion that the national limits cannot be achieved with the appropriate waste treatment facilities installed, if such assertion is not based on factor(s) listed in paragraph (d) of this section;


[Comment: Review of the Administrator's action in promulgating national limits is available only through the judicial review procedures set forth in section 509(b) of the Act.]


(3) The discharger's ability to pay for the required waste treatment; or

(4) The impact of a discharge on local receiving water quality.

(f) Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair the right of any State or locality under section 510 of the Act to impose more stringent limitations than those required by Federal law.

§ 125.32 Method of application.
top
(a) A written request for a variance under this subpart D shall be submitted in duplicate to the Director in accordance with §§122.21(m)(1) and 124.3 of this chapter.

(b) The burden is on the person requesting the variance to explain that:

(1) Factor(s) listed in §125.31(b) regarding the discharger's facility are fundamentally different from the factors EPA considered in establishing the national limits. The requester should refer to all relevant material and information, such as the published guideline regulations development document, all associated technical and economic data collected for use in developing each national limit, all records of legal proceedings, and all written and printed documentation including records of communication, etc., relevant to the regulations which are kept on public file by the EPA;

(2) The alternative limitations requested are justified by the fundamental difference alleged in paragraph (b)(1) of this section; and

(3) The appropriate requirements of §125.31 have been met.

[44 FR 32948, June 7, 1979, as amended at 65 FR 30913, May 15, 2000]

Subpart E—Criteria for Granting Economic Variances From Best Available Technology Economically Achievable Under Section 301(c) of the Act [Reserved]
top
Subpart F—Criteria for Granting Water Quality Related Variances Under Section 301(g) of the Act [Reserved]
top
Subpart G—Criteria for Modifying the Secondary Treatment Requirements Under Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act
top
Authority: Clean Water Act, as amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., unless otherwise noted.

Source: 59 FR 40658, Aug. 9, 1994, unless otherwise noted.

§ 125.56 Scope and purpose.
top
This subpart establishes the criteria to be applied by EPA in acting on section 301(h) requests for modifications to the secondary treatment requirements. It also establishes special permit conditions which must be included in any permit incorporating a section 301(h) modification of the secondary treatment requirements (“section 301(h) modified permit”).

§ 125.57 Law governing issuance of a section 301(h) modified permit.
top
(a) Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act provides that:


Administrator, with the concurrence of the State, may issue a permit under section 402 which modifies the requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(B) of this section with respect to the discharge of any pollutant from a publicly owned treatment works into marine waters, if the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Administrator that—

(1) There is an applicable water quality standard specific to the pollutant for which the modification is requested, which has been identified under section 304(a)(6) of this Act;

(2) The discharge of pollutants in accordance with such modified requirements will not interfere, alone or in combination with pollutants from other sources, with the attainment or maintenance of that water quality which assures protection of public water supplies and protection and propagation of a balanced indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and wildlife, and allows recreational activities, in and on the water;

(3) The applicant has established a system for monitoring the impact of such discharge on a representative sample of aquatic biota, to the extent practicable, and the scope of such monitoring is limited to include only those scientific investigations which are necessary to study the effects of the proposed discharge;

(4) Such modified requirements will not result in any additional requirements on any other point or nonpoint source;

(5) All applicable pretreatment requirements for sources introducing waste into such treatment works will be enforced;

(6) In the case of any treatment works serving a population of 50,000 or more, with respect to any toxic pollutant introduced into such works by an industrial discharger for which pollutant there is no applicable pretreatment requirement in effect, sources introducing waste into such works are in compliance with all applicable pretreatment requirements, the applicant will enforce such requirements, and the applicant has in effect a pretreatment program which, in combination with the treatment of discharges from such works, removes the same amount of such pollutant as would be removed if such works were to apply secondary treatment to discharges and if such works had no pretreatment program with respect to such pollutant;

(7) To the extent practicable, the applicant has established a schedule of activities designed to eliminate the entrance of toxic pollutants from nonindustrial sources into such treatment works;

(8) There will be no new or substantially increased discharges from the point source of the pollutant to which the modification applies above that volume of discharge specified in the permit;

(9) The applicant at the time such modification becomes effective will be discharging effluent which has received at least primary or equivalent treatment and which meets the criteria established under section 304(a)(1) of this Act after initial mixing in the waters surrounding or adjacent to the point at which such effluent is discharged.

For the purposes of this section, the phrase “the discharge of any pollutant into marine waters” refers to a discharge into deep waters of the territorial sea or the waters of the contiguous zone, or into saline estuarine waters where there is strong tidal movement and other hydrological and geological characteristics which the Administrator determines necessary to allow compliance with paragraph (2) of this section, and section 101(a)(2) of this Act. For the purposes of paragraph (9), “primary or equivalent treatment” means treatment by screening, sedimentation, and skimming adequate to remove at least 30 percent of the biological oxygen demanding material and of the suspended solids in the treatment works influent, and disinfection, where appropriate. A municipality which applies secondary treatment shall be eligible to receive a permit pursuant to this subsection which modifies the requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(B) of this section with respect to the discharge of any pollutant from any treatment works owned by such municipality into marine waters. No permit issued under this subsection shall authorize the discharge of sewage sludge into marine waters. In order for a permit to be issued under this subsection for the discharge of a pollutant into marine waters, such marine waters must exhibit characteristics assuring that water providing dilution does not contain significant amounts of previously discharged effluent from such treatment works. No permit issued under this subsection shall authorize the discharge of any pollutant into saline estuarine waters which at the time of application do not support a balanced indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and wildlife, or allow recreation in and on the waters or which exhibit ambient water quality below applicable water quality standards adopted for the protection of public water supplies, shellfish, fish, and wildlife or recreational activities or such other standards necessary to assure support and protection of such uses. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall apply without regard to the presence or absence of a causal relationship between such characteristics and the applicant's current or proposed discharge. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this subsection, no permit may be issued under this subsection for discharge of a pollutant into the New York Bight Apex consisting of the ocean waters of the Atlantic Ocean westward of 73 degrees 30 minutes west longitude and northward of 40 degrees 10 minutes north latitude.


(b) Section 301(j)(1) of the Clean Water Act provides that:


Any application filed under this section for a modification of the provisions of—

(A) subsection (b)(1)(B) under subsection (h) of this section shall be filed not later than the 365th day which begins after the date of enactment of the Municipal Wastewater Treatment Construction Grant Amendments of 1981, except that a publicly owned treatment works which prior to December 31, 1982, had a contractual arrangement to use a portion of the capacity of an ocean outfall operated by another publicly owned treatment works which has applied for or received modification under subsection (h) may apply for a modification of subsection (h) in its own right not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of the Water Quality Act of 1987.


(c) Section 22(e) of the Municipal Wastewater Treatment Construction Grant Amendments of 1981, Public Law 97–117, provides that:


The amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act except that no applicant, other than the city of Avalon, California, who applies after the date of enactment of this Act for a permit pursuant to subsection (h) of section 301 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act which modifies the requirements of subsection (b)(1)(B) of section 301 of such Act shall receive such permit during the one-year period which begins on the date of enactment of this Act.


(d) Section 303(b)(2) of the Water Quality Act, Public Law 100–4, provides that:


Section 301(h)(3) shall only apply to modifications and renewals of modifications which are tentatively or finally approved after the date of the enactment of this Act.


(e) Section 303(g) of the Water Quality Act provides that:


The amendments made to sections 301(h) and (h)(2), as well as provisions of (h)(6) and (h)(9), shall not apply to an application for a permit under section 301(h) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act which has been tentatively or finally approved by the Administrator before the date of the enactment of this Act; except that such amendments shall apply to all renewals of such permits after such date of enactment.


§ 125.58 Definitions.
top
For the purpose of this subpart:

(a) Administrator means the EPA Administrator or a person designated by the EPA Administrator.

(b) Altered discharge means any discharge other than a current discharge or improved discharge, as defined in this regulation.

(c) Applicant means an applicant for a new or renewed section 301(h) modified permit. Large applicants have populations contributing to their POTWs equal to or more than 50,000 people or average dry weather flows of 5.0 million gallons per day (mgd) or more; small applicants have contributing populations of less than 50,000 people and average dry weather flows of less than 5.0 mgd. For the purposes of this definition the contributing population and flows shall be based on projections for the end of the five-year permit term. Average dry weather flows shall be the average daily total discharge flows for the maximum month of the dry weather season.

(d) Application means a final application previously submitted in accordance with the June 15, 1979, section 301(h) regulations (44 FR 34784); an application submitted between December 29, 1981, and December 29, 1982; or a section 301(h) renewal application submitted in accordance with these regulations. It does not include a preliminary application submitted in accordance with the June 15, 1979, section 301(h) regulations.

(e) Application questionnaire means EPA's “Applicant Questionnaire for Modification of Secondary Treatment Requirements,” published as an appendix to this subpart.

(f) Balanced indigenous population means an ecological community which:

(1) Exhibits characteristics similar to those of nearby, healthy communities existing under comparable but unpolluted environmental conditions; or

(2) May reasonably be expected to become re-established in the polluted water body segment from adjacent waters if sources of pollution were removed.

(g) Categorical pretreatment standard means a standard promulgated by EPA under 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N.

(h) Current discharge means the volume, composition, and location of an applicant's discharge at the time of permit application.

(i) Improved discharge means the volume, composition, and location of an applicant's discharge following:

(1) Construction of planned outfall improvements, including, without limitation, outfall relocation, outfall repair, or diffuser modification; or

(2) Construction of planned treatment system improvements to treatment levels or discharge characteristics; or

(3) Implementation of a planned program to improve operation and maintenance of an existing treatment system or to eliminate or control the introduction of pollutants into the applicant's treatment works.

(j) Industrial discharger or industrial source means any source of nondomestic pollutants regulated under section 307(b) or (c) of the Clean Water Act which discharges into a POTW.

(k) Modified discharge means the volume, composition, and location of the discharge proposed by the applicant for which a modification under section 301(h) of the Act is requested. A modified discharge may be a current discharge, improved discharge, or altered discharge.

(l) New York Bight Apex means the ocean waters of the Atlantic Ocean westward of 73 degrees 30 minutes west longitude and northward of 40 degrees 10 minutes north latitude.

(m) Nonindustrial source means any source of pollutants which is not an industrial source.

(n) Ocean waters means those coastal waters landward of the baseline of the territorial seas, the deep waters of the territorial seas, or the waters of the contiguous zone. The term “ocean waters” excludes saline estuarine waters.

(o) Permittee means an NPDES permittee with an effective section 301(h) modified permit.

(p) Pesticides means demeton, guthion, malathion, mirex, methoxychlor, and parathion.

(q) Pretreatment means the reduction of the amount of pollutants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of the nature of pollutant properties in wastewater prior to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise introducing such pollutants into a POTW. The reduction or alteration may be obtained by physical, chemical, or biological processes, process changes, or by other means, except as prohibited by 40 CFR part 403.

(r) Primary or equivalent treatment for the purposes of this subpart means treatment by screening, sedimentation, and skimming adequate to remove at least 30 percent of the biochemical oxygen demanding material and of the suspended solids in the treatment works influent, and disinfection, where appropriate.

(s) Public water supplies means water distributed from a public water system.

(t) Public water system means a system for the provision to the public of piped water for human consumption, if such system has at least fifteen (15) service connections or regularly serves at least twenty-five (25) individuals. This term includes: (1) Any collection, treatment, storage, and distribution facilities under the control of the operator of the system and used primarily in connection with the system, and (2) Any collection or pretreatment storage facilities not under the control of the operator of the system which are used primarily in connection with the system.

(u) Publicly owned treatment works or POTW means a treatment works, as defined in section 212(2) of the Act, which is owned by a State, municipality, or intermunicipal or interstate agency.

(v) Saline estuarine waters means those semi-enclosed coastal waters which have a free connection to the territorial sea, undergo net seaward exchange with ocean waters, and have salinities comparable to those of the ocean. Generally, these waters are near the mouth of estuaries and have cross-sectional annual mean salinities greater than twenty-five (25) parts per thousand.

(w) Secondary removal equivalency means that the amount of a toxic pollutant removed by the combination of the applicant's own treatment of its influent and pretreatment by its industrial users is equal to or greater than the amount of the toxic pollutant that would be removed if the applicant were to apply secondary treatment to its discharge where the discharge has not undergone pretreatment by the applicant's industrial users.

(x) Secondary treatment means the term as defined in 40 CFR part 133.

(y) Shellfish, fish, and wildlife means any biological population or community that might be adversely affected by the applicant's modified discharge.

(z) Stressed waters means those ocean waters for which an applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Administrator, that the absence of a balanced indigenous population is caused solely by human perturbations other than the applicant's modified discharge.

(aa) Toxic pollutants means those substances listed in 40 CFR 401.15.

(bb) Water quality criteria means scientific data and guidance developed and periodically updated by EPA under section 304(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, which are applicable to marine waters.

(cc) Water quality standards means applicable water quality standards which have been approved, left in effect, or promulgated under section 303 of the Clean Water Act.

(dd) Zone of initial dilution (ZID) means the region of initial mixing surrounding or adjacent to the end of the outfall pipe or diffuser ports, provided that the ZID may not be larger than allowed by mixing zone restrictions in applicable water quality standards.

§ 125.59 General.
top
(a) Basis for application. An application under this subpart shall be based on a current, improved, or altered discharge into ocean waters or saline estuarine waters.

(b) Prohibitions. No section 301(h) modified permit shall be issued:

(1) Where such issuance would not assure compliance with all applicable requirements of this subpart and part 122;

(2) For the discharge of sewage sludge;

(3) Where such issuance would conflict with applicable provisions of State, local, or other Federal laws or Executive Orders. This includes compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.; the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; and Title III of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.;

(4) Where the discharge of any pollutant enters into saline estuarine waters which at the time of application do not support a balanced indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and wildlife, or allow recreation in and on the waters or which exhibit ambient water quality below applicable water quality standards adopted for the protection of public water supplies, shellfish, fish, and wildlife or recreational activities or such other standards necessary to assure support and protection of such uses. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall apply without regard to the presence or absence of a causal relationship between such characteristics and the applicant's current or proposed discharge; or

(5) Where the discharge of any pollutant is into the New York Bight Apex.

(c) Applications. Each applicant for a modified permit under this subpart shall submit an application to EPA signed in compliance with 40 CFR part 122, subpart B, which shall contain:

(1) A signed, completed NPDES Application Standard form A, parts I, II, III;

(2) A completed Application Questionnaire;

(3) The certification in accordance with 40 CFR 122.22(d);

(4) In addition to the requirements of §125.59(c) (1) through (3), applicants for permit renewal shall support continuation of the modification by supplying to EPA the results of studies and monitoring performed in accordance with §125.63 during the life of the permit. Upon a demonstration meeting the statutory criteria and requirements of this subpart, the permit may be renewed under the applicable procedures of 40 CFR part 124.

(d) Revisions to applications. (1) POTWs which submitted applications in accordance with the June 15, 1979, regulations (44 FR 34784) may revise their applications one time following a tentative decision to propose changes to treatment levels and/or outfall and diffuser location and design in accordance with §125.59(f)(2)(i); and

(2) Other applicants may revise their applications one time following a tentative decision to propose changes to treatment levels and/or outfall and diffuser location and design in accordance with §125.59(f)(2)(i). Revisions by such applicants which propose downgrading treatment levels and/or outfall and diffuser location and design must be justified on the basis of substantial changes in circumstances beyond the applicant's control since the time of application submission.

(3) Applicants authorized or requested to submit additional information under §125.59(g) may submit a revised application in accordance with §125.59(f)(2)(ii) where such additional information supports changes in proposed treatment levels and/or outfall location and diffuser design. The opportunity for such revision shall be in addition to the one-time revision allowed under §125.59(d) (1) and (2).

(4) POTWs which revise their applications must:

(i) Modify their NPDES form and Application Questionnaire as needed to ensure that the information filed with their application is correct and complete;

(ii) Provide additional analysis and data as needed to demonstrate compliance with this subpart;

(iii) Obtain new State determinations under §§125.61(b)(2) and 125.64(b); and

(iv) Provide the certification described in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.

(5) Applications for permit renewal may not be revised.

(e) Submittal of additional information to demonstrate compliance with §§125.60 and 125.65. (1) On or before the deadline established in paragraph (f)(3) of this section, applicants shall submit a letter of intent to demonstrate compliance with §§125.60 and 125.65. The letter of intent is subject to approval by the Administrator based on the requirements of this paragraph and paragraph (f)(3) of this section. The letter of intent shall consist of the following:

(i) For compliance with §125.60: (A) A description of the proposed treatment system which upgrades treatment to satisfy the requirements of §125.60.

(B) A project plan, including a schedule for data collection and for achieving compliance with §125.60. The project plan shall include dates for design and construction of necessary facilities, submittal of influent/effluent data, and submittal of any other information necessary to demonstrate compliance with §125.60. The Administrator will review the project plan and may require revisions prior to authorizing submission of the additional information.

(ii) For compliance with §125.65: (A) A determination of what approach will be used to achieve compliance with §125.65.

(B) A project plan for achieving compliance. The project plan shall include any necessary data collection activities, submittal of additional information, and/or development of appropriate pretreatment limits to demonstrate compliance with §125.65. The Administrator will review the project plan and may require revisions prior to submission of the additional information. (continued)